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.
Studies & Reports Sections
Studies and reports are assigned to a Section that best describes the type of report. Click on a section title below to see a short description.
I. Driver Education & Training Studies
II. Driver Licensing Screening Studies
III. Studies on Improvement and Control of Deviant Drivers
IV. Basic Research & Methodological Studies: Driver Performance, Accident Etiology, Prediction Models, and Actuarial Applications
V. Driver Licensing / Control Systems & Safety Management Studies
VI. Studies on Special Driver Populations
VII. Miscellaneous Studies & Reports
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.
| Report ID | Date Published | Title | Section | Links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 62.2 | 1978/ 12 |
An Evaluation of the California Drive Test in Theme and Variation. Volume II: Final ReportTo determine if a longer, more "comprehensive" drive test, or the standard drive test with parallel parking and a higher fail rate, would improve the subsequent driving records of previously unlicensed applicants. |
II | |
| 62.1 | 1978/ 08 |
An Evaluation of the California Drive Test in Theme and Variation. Volume I: Treatment Development and Preliminary EvaluationTo develop two modifications of the standard California drive test--the first to make the test more difficult, the second to make the test more comprehensive and more difficult. In addition, the relationships between scores on the standard and new, more comprehensive, test and biographical and driver record data were to be obtained. |
II | |
| 62 | 1978/ 08 |
An Evaluation of the California Drive Test in Theme and Variation. Volume I: Treatment Development and Preliminary EvaluationTo develop two modifications of the standard California drive test--the first to make the test more difficult, the second to make the test more comprehensive and more difficult. In addition, the relationships between scores on the standard and new, more comprehensive, test and biographical and driver record data were to be obtained. |
II | |
| 83 | 1982/ 09 |
An Evaluation of the Alcohol Reexamination Program for Drivers with Two Major Traffic ConvictionsTo evaluate the traffic safety impact of a reexamination designed to detect and treat drunk driving among drivers with two "major violations" who have escaped license sanctions and other countermeasures. Major violations comprise the more serious traffic violations including reckless driving, hit-and-run, and driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI). |
III | |
| 180 | 1998/ 12 |
An Evaluation of the General Deterrent Effect of Vehicle Impoundment onSuspended and Revoked Drivers in CaliforniaWhile license suspension/revocation have been shown to be effective, it is also known that most suspended/revoked(S/R) drivers violate their S/R order and continue to drive, accruing traffic convictions and becoming involved incrashes. In an attempt to strengthen license actions and to better control S/R and unlicensed drivers, Californiaenacted two laws effective January 1995 which provide for the impoundment/forfeiture of vehicles driven by S/Rand unlicensed drivers. The current study evaluates the general deterrent impact of vehicle impoundment on thecrash rates for the general population of S/R drivers in California, regardless of whether they have been apprehendedand punished for driving-while-suspended.Crash rates for S/R drivers, as well as a control group of non-S/R drivers, were examined over a 5-year periodconsisting of 3 years prior to the implementation of vehicle impoundment/forfeiture and 2 years subsequent.Interrupted time series statistical models used to analyze the data showed that while there was a statisticallysignificant drop in crashes for S/R drivers at the point at which the laws became effective, there was also a significantdrop for control drivers, who shouldn't be affected by the laws since they are not S/R. Additional analyses whichjointly estimated crashes for both S/R and control groups revealed that the drop in crashes for S/R drivers was nolonger statistically significant once the crash rate for control drivers was statistically accounted for. Thus, this studyfailed to find compelling evidence of a general deterrent impact of vehicle impoundment/forfeiture in California. |
III | |
| 45 | 1974/ 05 |
An Evaluation of Some Additional Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Warning LettersTo determine the effectiveness of two types of warning letters and an informational pamphlet in reducing the subsequent collision and conviction records of pre-negligent drivers. An additional study objective was to determine the effectiveness of a follow-up reinforcement letter sent to collision- and conviction-free drivers. These hypotheses were suggested by an earlier warning letter study (McBride & Peck, Report #30). This study was designed to attempt replication of the previous results. |
III | |
| 70 | 1979/ 07 |
An Evaluation of Probation-by-Mail as an Alternative to Mandatory Hearing Attendance for Negligent OperatorsTo evaluate the feasibility and traffic safety implications of placing negligent operators on probation by letter without the subjects being scheduled for a hearing. |
III | |
| 235 | 2012/ 01 |
An Evaluation of Factors Associated with Variation in DUI Conviction Rates Among California CountiesAlthough California’s statewide driving-under-the-influence of alcohol and/or drugs (DUI) conviction rate has improved over time from 64% in 1989 to 79% in 2006, the DUI conviction rates vary considerably among counties. The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with differences among California county DUI conviction rates averaged from 2000-2006. The three approaches to obtain information were: (a) surveys sent to California judges, prosecuting attorneys, public and private defense attorneys, and court administrators; (b) face-to-face interviews conducted with California judges, prosecuting attorneys, and public and private defense attorneys; and (c) analyses of various county-level demographic and socioeconomic factors, DUI arrest and conviction process measures, and crash/recidivism variables. It was found that counties with higher DUI arrest rates tend to have lower DUI conviction rates. Counties with high DUI conviction rates tend to convict at lower BAC levels and have higher percentage usage of blood BAC tests. Counties also varied in their alcohol-reckless conviction rates as well as the BAC levels considered appropriate for negotiating alcohol-reckless plea bargains. While the 7-year (2000-2006) statewide average percentage of DUI arrestees convicted of alcohol-reckless driving was 8.1%, county percentages ranged from 0% to 22.6%. Higher prosecution caseload as measured by county violent crime rates isassociated with lower DUI conviction rates, while shorter lengths of time from arrest to conviction are associated with higher DUI conviction rates. Varying prosecution policies were strongly identified by survey respondents as influencing variation in county DUI conviction rates. Convicting for drug-only DUI was considered to be very difficult due to the lack of scientifically based per se levels of drug impairment. Recommendations are made based on these findings. |
III | |
| 40 | 1973/ 03 |
An Evaluation of California’s Oral Licensing ExaminationTo analyze the cost and effect of orally examining illiterate applicants. |
II | |
| 51 | 1976/ 03 |
An Evaluation of California’s Drivers Licensing ExaminationTo assess the ability of the written knowledge test and the drive test to screen out accident-prone drivers; to provide descriptive data on the licensing process, with particular interest in the performance of older drivers. |
II |