酒駕重罰下，酒駕者拒酒測之影響分析—以中斷點迴歸設計為例

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：131

、訪客IP：3.15.5.183

姓名

林晏禎(Yan-Jhen Lin) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

產業經濟研究所

論文名稱

酒駕重罰下，酒駕者拒酒測之影響分析—以中斷點迴歸設計為例
(The research on the effects that drunk drivers refuse to take the breath test under the strictly drunk-driving legal punishment: An application of the regression discontinuity approach)

相關論文

★ 投資者之風險屬性與基金理財績效之實證研究	★ 企業經營績效的影響分析-以台灣醫療器材產業為例
★ 銀行財富管理業務手續費收入影響因素之實證研究	★ 母親的教育程度對兒童醫療利用行為之影響
★ 地區醫院的存亡與轉型	★ 教育對健康的影響—臺灣地區老人之實證研究
★ 醫院購置高科技醫療儀器與市場結構的關聯	★ 台灣地區醫院最適效率規模的估計-倖存者分析方法應用
★ 出口與生產力的關聯 —台灣電子業廠商之實證研究	★ 社會資本與家庭結構對健康及醫療資源利用之影響 —台灣地區老人之實證研究
★ 醫療利用可近性—台灣老人之實證研究	★ 父母健康知識與其子女健康狀況之關聯
★ 臺灣股市之效率檢定及多因素模型之探討—長期追蹤資料之計量分析	★ 醫療資源與國人健康的關聯
★ 青少年菸害的健康風險認知與吸菸行為的關聯─台灣地區的實證研究	★ 醫療資源可近性對個人醫療利用的影響 ――台灣地區的實證研究

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

本研究使用民國100年1月至108年12月各縣市警察機關取締酒駕、交通各項違規件數之資料進行實證分析，研究4次酒駕政策之行政罰（道路交通管理處罰條例第35條、道路交通安全規則第114條）與刑事罰（刑法第185-3）罰則的修定，是否使一地區之拒酒測率產生轉變。實證結果發現102年6月13日刑法185-3條與道路交通安全規則第114條之同步修訂，顯著的增加拒酒測率約4.7個百分點。而108年6月21日刑法第185-3之修訂（提高酒駕再犯之刑責）與108年7月1日道路交通管理處罰條例第35條（提高拒酒測罰鍰至18萬）之修訂，成功降低拒酒測率約3.3個百分點。

摘要(英)

This research examines the effects of the statutory changes of drunk driving administrative penalty（Article 35 of the Road Traffic Management and Penalty Act and Article 114 of Rules of Road Traffic Safety）and criminal penalty（Article 185-3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of China）on the breath test refusal rates. From early 2011 to the end of 2019, the authorities in Taiwan increased the fine, extended the license suspension period and jail time, etc., for drunk drivers. We find that the amendments to Article 185-3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of China and Article 114 of Rules of Road Traffic Safety in June 2013 significantly increased nearly 4.7% of the breath test refusal rates. Whereas the amendment to Article 185-3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of China in June 2019 and the amendments to Article 35 of the Road Traffic Management and Penalty Act in July 2019 significantly reduced nearly 3.3% of the breath test refusal rates.

關鍵字(中)

★ 道路交通安全處罰條例第 35 條
★ 道路交通安全規則第114條
★ 刑法第 185-3 條
★ 法律政策分析
★ 拒酒測

關鍵字(英)

★ Breath test refusal
★ Policy analysis
★ Article 35 of the Road Traffic Management and Penalty Act,
★ Article 114 of Rules of Road Traffic Safety
★ Article 185-3 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of China

論文目次

中文摘要： I
ABSTRACT II
目錄 IV
表目錄 VI
第一章緒論 1
第一節研究背景與動機 1
第二節研究目的 6
第二章文獻回顧 8
第一節酒精管制與酒駕政策 8
第二節酒駕政策的有效性與駕駛人拒酒測行為 9
第三節駕駛人特性與酒駕的關聯性 11
第四節小結 12
第三章研究方法 13
第一節中斷點迴歸設計 13
第二節實證模型建構 14
第四章資料來源與變數說明 17
第一節變數說明 17
第五章實證結果分析 26
第一節殘差值之迴歸不連續圖 26
第二節中斷點迴歸分析結果 28
第三節再檢視第3次與第4次酒駕相關修法之政策效果 29
第六章結論與研究限制 35
參考資料 36
附錄 40

參考文獻

英文文獻
[1.] Arai, Y., and Ichimura, H. (2018), “Simultaneous selection of optimal bandwidths for the sharp regression discontinuity estimator”, Quantitative Economics, 9(1), 441–482.
[2.] Calonico, S., Cattaneo, M. D., and Titiunik, R. (2015), “Optimal data-driven regression discon- tinuity plots”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 110(512), 1753–1769.
[3.] Calonico, S., Matias D. Cattaneo, and Rocio Titiunik (2014d), “Robust nonparametric conﬁdence intervals for regression-discontinuity designs”, Econometrica, 82, 2295–2326.
[4.] Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction (2019), “Mandatory Alcohol Screening Canada [Policy Brief]”, Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction. https://www.ccsa.ca/sites/default/files/2019-04/CCSA-Mandatory-Alcohol-Screening-Policy-Brief-2019-en.pdf (accessed May, 5, 2022)
[5.] Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction (2020), “Mandatory Alcohol Screening Canada [Policy Brief]”, Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction. https://www.ccsa.ca/sites/default/files/2020-06/CCSA-Mandatory-Alcohol-Screening-Policy-Brief-2020-en.pdf
[6.] Cattaneo, M.D., Jansson, Michael and Ma, Xinwei. (2018), “Manipulation Testing Based on Density Discontinuity”, Stata Journal, 18, 234-261.
[7.] Chan, Y.S., Chen, C.S., Huang, L., Peng, Y.I. (2017), “Sanction changes and drunk-driving injuries/deaths in Taiwan”, Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 107,102-109.
[8.] Dunbar, J., Penttila, A., Pikkarainen, J. (1987), “Drinking and driving: Success of random breath testing in Finland. British Medical Journal”, 295, 101–103.
[9.] Hahn, J., Todd, P. and Klaauw, W. (2001), “Identification and Estimation of Treatment Effects with a Regression-Discontinuity Design”, Econometrica, 69(1), 201–209.
[10.] Henstridge, J., Homel, R., and Mackay, P. (1997), “The long-term effects of random breath testing in four Australian states: A time series analysis”, Canberra: Federal Office of Road Safety. https://nla.gov.au/nla.cat-vn1849726 (accessed May, 5, 2022)
[11.] Hingson R., Scotch N., Mangione T., Meyers, A., Glantz, L., Heeren, T., Lin, N., Mucatel, M. and Pierce, G. (1983), “Impact of legislation raising the legal drinking age in Massachusetts from 18 to 20”, Am J Public Health, 73, 163-169.
[12.] International Alliance for Responsible Drinking (2022), “Minimum legal age limits”, International Alliance for Responsible Drinking, http://iardwebprod.-azurewebsites.net/science-resources/detail/Minimum-Legal-Age-Limits
[13.] Jones, R. K., and Nichols, J. L. (2012), “Breath test refusals and their effect on DWI prosecution”, Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT HS 811 551.
[14.] Lee, D. S. (2008), “Randomized Experiments from Non-random Selection in U.S. House Elections”, Journal of Econometrics, 142(2), 675–97.
[15.] Lee, D. S. and Lemieux, T. (2010), “Regression Discontinuity Designs in Economics”, Journal of Economic Literature, 281-355.
[16.] McCartt, A. T. and Northrup, V.S. (2004), “Effects of Enhanced Sanctions for High-BAC DWI Offenders on Case Dispositions and Rates of Recidivism”, Traffic Injury Prevention, 5(3), 270-277.
[17.] Meesmann, U., Martensen, H. and Dupont, E. (2015), “Impact of alcohol checks and social norm on driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI)”, Accident Analysis and Prevention, 80, 251-261.
[18.] Namuswe, E. S., Coleman, H. L. and Berning, A. (2014), “Breath Test Refusal Rates in the United States – 2011 Update”, NHTSA’s Office of Behavioral Safety Research, DOT HS 811 881.
[19.] Road Safety Authority (2007), “Road safety strategy 2007–2012.”
www.rsa.ie/documents/road%20safety/rsa_strategy_eng_s.pdf.
[20.] Robert B. V., Tara K., Eduardo R., and Radha V, B. S. (2009), “Implied-Consent Laws: A Review of the Literature and Examination of Current Problems and Related Statutes”, Journal of Safety Research, 40, 77-83.
[21.] Saffer, H. (1997), “Alcohol Advertising and Motor Vehicle Fatalities”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(3), 431-442.
[22.] Saffer, H. and Grossman, M. (1987a), “Beer Taxes, the Legal Drinking Age, and Youth Motor Vehicle Fatalities”, Journal of Legal Studies 16, 351–374.
[23.] Saffer, H. and Grossman, M. (1987b), “Drinking Age Laws and Highway Mortality Rates: Cause and Effect”, Economic Inquiry, 403-407.
[24.] Thistlethwaite, D. L. and Campbell, D. T. (1960), “Regression-Discontinuity Analysis: an Alternative to the Ex Post Facto Experiment”, Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(6), 309–317.
[25.] Yörük, B. K. and Yörük, C. E. (2011), “the Impact of Minimum Legal Drinking Age Laws on Alcohol Consumption, Smoking, and Marijuana Use: Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Design Using Exact Date of Birth”, J Health Econ, 30(4),740-52.

中文文獻
[1.] 吳姿瑩(2015)，「酒駕重罰化對成年累犯之嚇阻效果」。國立臺北大學，犯罪學研究所碩士論文。
[2.] 李佩玲(2016)，「台灣酒駕政策與酒駕事故之關聯性研究」。國立中央大學，產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
[3.] 楊涵纖、鄭凱元、張新儀、陳娟瑜（2018），「台灣成年族群飲酒型態與事故傷害、酒駕之關係探討」。《台灣公共衛生雜誌》，第37卷3期，頁309-321。
[4.] 蔡偉德(2019)，「酒駕罰則是否有效抑制酒駕?中斷點迴歸設計的應用」。《經濟論文叢刊》，第47 卷，第1期，頁75-126。
[5.] 憲法法庭111年憲判字第1號“肇事駕駛人受強制抽血檢測酒精濃度案”
https://cons.judicial.gov.tw/docdata.aspx?fid=38&id=310024
參考網頁
[1.] 中華民國統計資訊網，主計總處統計專區。https://www1.stat.gov.tw/mp.asp?mp=3
[2.] 世界衛生組織，全球衛生觀察站數據存儲庫。https://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.A1148?lang=en

指導教授

蔡偉德(Wei-Der Tsai)

審核日期

2022-8-17

推文