Research Studies & Reports

DMV’s Research & Development Branch has been conducting research and producing studies and reports since the 1950s. Research & Development reports help DMV to measure the impact of new laws on making drivers safer. We also identify areas where we can improve our processes, explore new approaches to solving existing problems, and branch out into new opportunities to serve you better. 

Request printed copies of studies and reports by mail at:

Department of Motor Vehicles
Research and Development Branch
2415 1st Ave. Mail Station: F-126
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 914-8125

Please include the report number, the number of copies requested, and your name, address, and phone number.

393 Results

Report ID Date Published Title Section Links
16 1964/ 12

The Totally Deaf Driver in California, Part II

By: Ronald S. Coppin & Raymond C. Peck

To determine whether or not the driving records of deaf drivers differ from those of non-deaf drivers, and whether or not deafness or other factors are responsible for any differences found. Specifically, the study was designed to ascertain whether the deaf driver represents a special risk to public safety and, if so, to suggest any necessary licensing restrictions or unique training needs.

VI
170 1997/ 07

P&M Telephone Hearing Study

By: Len A. Marowitz

Driver Safety memo DS-92-96, dated June 29, 1992, has resulted in departmental reexaminations, hearings, and interviews, all formerly held in-person, to be held through a combination of in-person and telephone contacts. Telephone contacts are considered by some to be more cost effective than in-person contacts, but have been criticized as affording individuals the opportunity to hide serious impairments from visual observation. In-person contacts are still required in cases of mild dementia, and when individuals request them, so many such contacts still occur.

VI
245 2013/ 11

PILOT STUDY OF A “HOT LIST” FOR THE SPECIFIC ENFORCEMENT OF REPEAT DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OFFENDERS WITH SUSPENDED OR REVOKED LICENSES: PROCESS EVALUATION

By: Patrice Rogers

Repeat driving under the influence of alcohol or drug (DUI) offenders in California comprised 24.1% of all drivers involved in alcohol- or drug-related fatal crashes and 62.2% of those involved in alcohol- or drug-related injury crashes during 2010. Most DUI-prevention law enforcement operations (e.g., sobriety checkpoints) are intended to reduce DUI among the general driving population (i.e., general deterrence). Targeted enforcement efforts (i.e., specific deterrence) aimed at monitoring and ensuring DUI sanction and driver license action compliance among repeat DUI offenders has the potential to reduce their recidivism. The California Department of Motor Vehicles provided 15 law enforcement agencies with bimonthly “Hot Lists” of the driver license numbers of all suspended or revoked multiple DUI offenders for their use in conducting interventions for reducing driving and DUI recidivism among these offenders. This report summarizes the various enforcement processes and levels of commitment to using the lists, describes several barriers identified, and discusses problems in general associated with conducting targeted enforcement efforts. Hot List activities during the first year included 174 stops of offenders’ vehicles, 308 in-person checks of offenders’ compliances with probation requirements, 469 mailings of letters to offenders warning them not to drive, and 258 stakeouts of offenders at bars, residences, courts, or other locations. These activities resulted in 115 citations for driving on a suspended/revoked license, 129 vehicle impoundments, 23 DUI arrests, and 53 arrests for other reasons. The analysis identified barriers that contributed to limited use of the lists by some participating agencies—most resulting from funding constraints, officer training deficiencies, and the time and effort needed to verify requisite offender identities and residence addresses—and several tools and strategies that were developed by some agencies to more effectively use the Hot Lists. Recommendations are made for improving the dissemination and use of the Hot List, and for improving the reporting of Hot List-related activity

VI
78 1981/ 02

A Profile of Uninsured Motorists in California

By: Jensen Kuan & Raymond C. Peck

To determine the profile of an average driver suspended pursuant to California's financial responsibility laws.

VI
86 1983/ 02

The Accident Record of Drivers with Bioptic Telescopic Lenses.

By: Mary Janke & Gregory Kazarian

To determine whether the accident rate of drivers with bioptic telescopic lenses ("bioptic drivers") was great enough to warrant denying them a license to drive, as a 1982 American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators resolution recommended.

VI
NRN074 1980/ 06

Improved Motorcyclist Licensing and Testing Project

By: James W. Anderson, Jack Ford, & Raymond C. Peck

(1) To determine whether two improved motorcycle licensing programs were more effective in reducing accidents and convictions of novice motorcyclists than the standard program, (2) to determine whether applicant characteristics influenced the accident-reducing effectiveness of the licensing program, (3) to determine the predictive validity of the standard and improved knowledge and drive tests, and (4) to determine the effectiveness of remedial skills training.

VI
NRN083 1993/ 01

California DMV’s Driving Under the Influence R&D Program: Some Recent Findings and Activities

By: Raymond C. Peck

To convey information on findings from recent California DMV studies of DUI offenders.

VI
82 1986/ 01

Senior Driver Facts – Report 82

By: Ray E. Huston & Mary K. Janke

To provide a quick reference on the characteristics of senior drivers.

VI
81 1986/ 01

Teen Driver Facts – Report 81

By: Ray E. Huston

To provide a quick reference on the characteristics of teenage drivers.

VI
100 1985/ 10

Typological Analysis of California DUI Offenders and DUI Recidivism Correlates

By: Gary W. Arstein-Kerslake & Raymond C. Peck

To develop and cross-validate a statistical methodology for predicting DUI recidivism and DUI countermeasure-program compliance of convicted DUI offenders; to determine the extent to which meaningful subgroups of OUI offenders can be formed.

VI