SOCIAL-STATUS AND DRUNK-DRIVING INTERVENTION

The decision to intervene to prevent an inebriated peer from driving drunk is examined in a survey administered to one lower division and two upper division university classes. Of the 303 students who had been in a situation in which someone was too drunk to drive, 65% reported having intervened. Differences in the likelihood of intervention are examined through a loglinear analysis of the age, race and sex of the respondent and the potential drunk driver. The decision to intervene is seen as a naturally occurring form of helping behavior. Two hypotheses derived from the literature on helping behavior are examined: (1) persions are more likely to intervene with persons of lower status in terms of age, race and sex than with persons of higher status and (2) persons are more likely to intervene with those who are similar to themselves in terms of age, race and sex than with those who are different. Analysis reveals that persons are much more likely to experience drunk-driving situations in which the potential driver is similar to them in terms of these social characteristics than situations in which the driver is different. However, neither status differences nor similarity affects the likelihood of intervention.