Alcohol-related behaviours and the risk of causing road accidents: a study of drivers after licence disqualification

■ INTRODUCTION

Drink-driving remains a significant contributor to road accidents globally with serious consequences for public health and road safety [1-3]. A meta-analysis conducted by Kassym et al. [2] found that 16.6% of drivers injured in traffic accidents worldwide were under the influence of alcohol. The highest rates were recorded in Asia (30.6%) and the lowest in the Middle East, North Africa and Greater Arabia region (5.5%) [2]. This data points to the considerable health, social and economic costs associated with driving under the influence of alcohol.
Alcohol impairs motor skills, perception, coordination and reaction times, thereby significantly increasing the risk of traffic accidents [4-6]. Studies by Christoforou et al. [7] showed that young drivers under the influence of alcohol exhibit significantly delayed reaction times compared to sober individuals. This is particularly pronounced among younger, impulsive drivers, who tend to react either too abruptly or too slowly [8].
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) [9], alcohol is responsible for approximately 31% of all fatal road accidents in the United States.
In Poland in 2023, drivers under the influence of alcohol were responsible for 189 fatal road accidents (12.9% of all fatal crashes caused by drivers), in which there were 212 fatalities (13.1% of all deaths in accidents caused by drivers). Additionally, drivers under the influence of other psychoactive substances caused 39 accidents resulting in 54 deaths [10]. Although the total number of road accidents in Poland has been decreasing, intoxicated drivers continue to pose a serious threat. As a result, new legal measures are being introduced to reduce drink-driving incidents.
Since 14 March 2024, new legislation in Poland has mandated the confiscation of vehicles from drivers caught driving under the influence. According to the new regulations, a driver with a blood- alcohol concentration (BAC) of at least 1.5‰ automatically forfeits their vehicle. In cases where a driver causes an accident, vehicle confiscation may be enforced with a BAC as low as 0.5‰ [11]. Despite such strict measures, a considerable number of drivers continue to drink and drive.
Under Polish law, individuals who drive under the influence (BAC above 0.5‰) or after consuming alcohol (BAC between 0.2-0.5‰) are required to undergo medical and psychological evaluations and to attend an alcohol prevention re-education course [12]. These medical and psychological assessments aim not only to screen individuals who may pose a threat on the road but also to educate them about the risks of alcohol use and the health and life consequences of driving under the influence. The re-education course aims not merely to punish but to foster understanding of the dangers of drink-driving and to promote responsible behaviour and decision-making. Research shows that educational programmes and psychological interventions can significantly reduce the risk of recidivism and emergency room visits related to mental health issues and substance use [13]. McGovern et al. [13], in a systematic review of 58 empirical studies, found that psychosocial and educational interventions targeting families affected by substance use significantly improved psychological wellbeing and family functioning. Behavioural programmes implemented jointly with the substance user and relatives reduced interpersonal violence and increased relationship satisfaction and stability. Individually focused therapeutic components also produced psychological benefits for adult family members.
Demographic and behavioural variables, such as age, gender, socioeconomic status, and drinking patterns, are often considered in studies examining the relationship between alcohol and accident risk [13, 14]. Polish research has also confirmed the strong association between alcohol use and road fatalities. Lasota et al. [15] conducted a retrospective analysis of 321 fatal pedestrian accidents in the Warsaw region. Alcohol was detected in over 51% of victims, with a mean blood–alcohol concentration of 2.05‰ (range: 0.2-4.4‰). Male pedestrians under the influence of alcohol were over five times more likely to die in crashes than sober women, particularly in rural areas, where most fatalities occurred at the crash site. These findings underline the critical role of alcohol as a major risk factor for fatal traffic accidents in Poland.
Similarly, studies conducted in Wuhan, Central China, have shown that individuals who drink regularly or engage in binge drinking are more likely to be injured in traffic accidents involving other intoxicated drivers [14]. Qian et al. [14] also found that impulsivity, male gender, and low risk perception significantly predicted alcohol consumption among young adults, suggesting a strong behavioural and social component in risky drinking patterns.
According to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2020, 59.1% of those who consume harmful levels of alcohol are aged 15-39 and 76.9% are male [16]. Young people’s approach to alcohol consumption represents a major public health issue requiring preventive interventions to promote healthy behaviours and raise awareness of the risks associated with excessive drinking. Recent studies show that driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs severely impairs psychomotor performance, increasing the likelihood of accidents approximately fivefold among young drivers aged 18-25 [16, 17]. According to Vankov and Schroeter [17], who examined 329 young Australian drivers, previous DUI (driving under the influence) behaviour, impulsivity, and peer norms were the strongest predictors of future intentions to drive under the influence, highlighting the behavioural and social mechanisms underlying risky driving in this age group [18]. These findings are consistent with broader psychological models emphasising the role of impulsivity and social influence in risky behaviour. Young drivers often underestimate the potential consequences of impaired driving and overestimate their ability to control vehicle handling after alcohol consumption. Understanding these mechanisms is crucial for developing targeted preventive and re-education programmes that address not only knowledge deficits but also behavioural and motivational aspects of driving under the influence.
Intoxicated drivers are also more likely than sober drivers to speed (68% vs. 32%), fail to use seatbelts (69% vs. 30%), or drive without a valid licence (26% vs. 1%), as demonstrated in a Norwegian study analysing fatal crashes from 2005-2015 [19]. Research conducted among Korean college students found that women who consumed alcohol in the past year drank on average 11.5% less than men, although they experienced 11.8% more negative consequences of drinking [20]. Ribeiro et al. [21] found that the habit of drinking and driving is more common among men than women. Ribeiro et al. [21] analysed data from over 140,000 participants in the Brazilian National Health Survey (2013 and 2019) and found habitual drinking and driving was significantly more common among men than women (27.4% vs. 11.9% in 2013 and 20.5% vs. 7.2% in 2019). Although the overall prevalence of drink-driving declined over the six-year period, this behaviour remained a significant predictor of road traffic accidents in both genders.
Alarming results from Bragazzi et al. [22] revealed that professional truck drivers show a high prevalence of risky alcohol use worldwide, with 19% meeting criteria for binge drinking, 9.4% reporting daily alcohol consumption, and nearly 23% showing signs of alcohol misuse based on AUDIT or CAGE scores. These findings underline the need for targeted prevention and occupational health programmes addressing alcohol use in the transport sector.
The results of numerous studies underscore the importance of including demographic and behavioural factors in research on alcohol-related road accidents and implementing effective preventive measures for road users. Educational and preventive campaigns have proven effective in reducing alcohol-related road accidents [23-25]. For instance, a study by Fisa et al. [24] found that such campaigns reduced road accidents by 9-10%. According to Yadav and Kobayashi [23], mass media campaigns aimed at reducing alcohol-impaired driving contributed to a 9-15% decrease in alcohol- related road crashes, particularly when combined with law enforcement activities. Campaigns using emotionally engaging messages were found to be the most effective in influencing drivers’ behaviour. In Poland, nationwide road safety campaigns such as Have you been drinking? Don’t drive! (Piłeś? Nie jedź!), coordinated by the National Road Safety Council and Keep a Sober Mind (Zachowaj Trzeźwy Umysł), implemented in cooperation with local municipalities and schools, have been conducted for many years. These campaigns primarily target young male and professional drivers, combining emotional mass media messages with educational initiatives. Their long-term continuation, together with stricter enforcement, may explain the steady decline in alcohol-related road accidents observed over the past decade [9, 26].

Study aim

The aim of the study was to identify and analyse the relationship between demographic and behavioural variables, alcohol consumption patterns, and the risk of involvement in road accidents among drivers. Specifically, the study aimed to:
1. Compare the frequency of negative alcohol- related behaviours between drivers attending an alcohol prevention re-education course and those in the control group.
2. Assess the relationship between alcohol consumption and the number of road accidents.
3. Analyse the association between drinking behaviours and the number of traffic incidents.
4. Identify the impact of gender, age, educational level, driving distance and participation in a re-education course on the likelihood of causing an accident.

Hypotheses

1. There are statistically significant differences in the frequency of negative alcohol-related behaviours between drivers attending the re- education course (due to driving under the influence) and the control group. Participants of the re-education course report a higher number of such behaviours.
2. There is a significant relationship between alcohol consumption and the number of road accidents. Drivers who consume alcohol are more likely to be involved in accidents or collisions than sober drivers.
3. There is a significant relationship between demographic and behavioural variables and the likelihood of causing an accident or collision. Some of these variables increase, while others decrease that likelihood.

■ MATERIAL AND METHODS

Procedure and participants

The present study was conducted in Poland and involved drivers referred for psychological evaluation after licence disqualification due to alcohol-related offences. The research was carried out within the framework of obligatory re- education and diagnostic procedures regulated by Polish traffic and health legislation.
The study included a total of 249 participants between 18 and 65 years-of-age (M = 37.8, SD = 10.7). Two groups of participants took part in the research:
1. Those referred to an alcohol prevention re- education course and whose driving licences had been revoked due to driving under the influence of alcohol.
2. Licensed drivers – participants who underwent psychological evaluation for drivers during the same period.
As part of the re-education course, the sessions with a psychologist focused on psychoeducation related to alcohol use; participants were invited to take part in a voluntarily short survey via a Google Form. Each participant received a generated link to the form, which they could complete on their smartphone. Participation was anonymous and voluntary. Participants were informed about the purpose of the study and their right to withdraw at any time.
The applied procedure enables replication of the study using the same research tool (MPA-13) and similar sampling criteria. The same procedure was applied to individuals who attended psychological evaluations related to professional driving during the same period.
Participant characteristics, including gender, education level and other variables are presented in Table I.

Research instruments

The Alcohol Problems Map (MPA-13) developed by Horoszkiewicz and Cibor is a diagnostic tool designed to assess a wide range of problems related to alcohol misuse [27]. It is based on the emotional self-regulation theory [28-30], which posits that individuals possess internal emotional standards that guide their desired emotional states and norms for emotional expression in specific contexts. According to this theory, people use various strategies to manage emotions like attention shifting, reappraisal, emotional suppression or altering the level of emotional arousal. The MPA-13 makes it possible to understand the extent to which different areas of life are affected by alcohol-related problems and the domains that may require therapeutic intervention.
The tool consists of 13 statements referring to various emotion regulation strategies like forgetting one’s worries after drinking alcohol or feeling more confident after alcohol consumption.
All 13 items are rated on a five-point Likert scale reflecting how often the behaviour occurred during the past year: 1 = never or almost never, 2 = rarely, 3 = sometimes, 4 = often, 5 = almost always or always.
The reliability indicators of the instrument, assessed in a sample of 197 drivers (M = 40.3, SD = 11.9) are very high (Cronbach’s α = 0.91, McDonald’s ω = 0.92, Guttman’s λ2 = 0.92). Factor analysis revealed a single factor explaining 36% of the variance. The tool demonstrates high sensitivity (89%) and specificity (86%), indicating its effectiveness in identifying individuals with signs of alcohol dependence while minimising false positives [26]. Detailed information regarding the tool’s structure and psychometric properties is included in the user manual of the Polipsychograf system, available upon request from Psychotronics, the manufacturer [27]. The full English and Polish version of the MPA-13 questionnaire are provided in Appendix.

Demographic and behavioural variables

The study used both demographic and behavioural data. Demographic variables included age, gender, level of education, participation in the alcohol re-education course, involvement in traffic accidents, number of kilometres driven in the past year and type of driving licence. The variable “causing an accident” was coded as follows: 0 = the participant has never caused a road traffic accident; 1 = the participant has caused at least one accident. These indicators may influence a driver’s style and road safety.
Behavioural variables included driver behaviours assessed using the Alcohol Problems Map (MPA-13) [27]. These indicators are associated with alcohol-related issues that can significantly increase the likelihood of being involved in road traffic accidents.

Statistical analyses

To address the research questions, statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 29. Descriptive statistics were calculated for demographic and behavioural variables. The Shapiro-Wilk test was performed to verify the normality of the distribution of variables related to alcohol consumption and the number of alcohol-related traffic incidents. To test the hypotheses, linear regression and logistic regression analyses were carried out using the stepwise selection method.
The level of statistical significance was set at the classical threshold of α = 0.05, although p-values between 0.05 and 0.1 were interpreted as marginally significant (i.e. indicative of a statistical trend).

■ RESULTS

Descriptive statistics were first calculated for the behavioural variables related to alcohol consumption listed in the Alcohol Problems Map, including the Shapiro-Wilk test to verify the normality of their distribution.
As shown in Table II, the Shapiro-Wilk test indicated that the distribution of all examined variables significantly deviated from normality (p < 0.001). Therefore, non-parametric tests were selected for further analyses. Due to the results of Levene’s test, which revealed significant differences in variance for five items of the questionnaire (items 4, 7, 9, 11, and 12), and the overall skewness of the variable distributions, the Mann-Whitney U test was applied in all cases. This test is robust against violations of normality and heterogeneity of variance, making it a suitable tool for data analysis in this context [31].
To verify Hypothesis 1 concerning differences in the frequency of negative alcohol-related behaviours between drivers participating in a re-education course and those in the control group, an analysis of responses to items Q1 through Q13 and the total MPA-13 score was conducted. The aim was to assess whether participants of the alcohol re-education course reported higher frequencies of such behaviours compared to the control group. The results are presented in Table III.
Statistically significant differences were observed between participants of the re-education course and the control group in the following alcohol- related negative behaviours.
• Relief of unpleasant pain (Q2): re-education course participants (M = 1.58, SD = 0.86) more frequently reported using alcohol to relieve pain than the control group (M = 1.42, SD = 1.00) (p = 0.009, r = –0.17),
• Selling belongings to buy alcohol (Q7): re- education participants (M = 1.10, SD = 0.39) more often reported selling possessions to buy alcohol, compared to the control group where all participants gave identical answers (M = 1.00, SD = 0.00) (p = 0.012, r = –0.16),
• Drink-driving (Q10): participants of the re- education course (M = 1.92, SD = 0.74) were more likely to report drink-driving than the control group (M = 1.42, SD = 0.59) (p < 0.001, r = –0.37),
• Blackouts during drinking (Q11): participants of the re-education course (M = 1.73, SD = 0.99) less frequently reported alcohol- induced blackouts than the control group (M = 2.11, SD = 1.17) (p = 0.020, r = –0.15),
• Being reprimanded at work for drinking (Q12): re-education participants (M = 1.08, SD = 0.41) were more frequently reprimanded at work for alcohol use than the control group, in which all participants gave the same answer (M = 1.00, SD = 0.00) (p = 0.017, r = –0.15).
No statistically significant differences were found for the remaining variables.
The overall MPA-13 score also did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.717, r = –0.02).
In summary, participants of the alcohol re- education course reported significantly higher rates of selected negative alcohol-related behaviours than the control group. In several instances, the differences reached the level of a statistical trend. However, for most variables, no significant differences were found. The strongest effect results were observed for drink-driving (Q10), pain relief through alcohol (Q2) and selling belongings to buy alcohol (Q7).
Table IV presents the dichotomised distribution of responses to all MPA-13 items (1 = never or almost never; 2-5 = any occurrence). This allows illustration of how small differences in mean values may reflect extreme behaviours of a small number of participants.
To verify Hypothesis 2, concerning the number of road traffic incidents in the context of alcohol consumption, responses to question Q13 (on a scale from 1 to 5) were categorised as follows:
• Response 1: no injury sustained while intoxicated,
• Responses 2-5: injury sustained while intoxicated.
Frequency analysis revealed that 83.5% of respondents reported no injury (response 1), whereas 16.5% reported sustaining physical injuries while under the influence of alcohol (responses 2-5).
Linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the effect of alcohol consumption on involvement in road accidents. The independent variables included two items from the questionnaire on alcohol use:
• Q5: Consumption of a large quantity of alcohol,
• Q6: Drinking alcohol for several consecutive days.
The dependent variable was derived from Q13: self-reported injury sustained while intoxicated, used as an indicator of road accident involvement.
Regression analysis was conducted for both models.
In Model 1, consumption of a large quantity of alcohol was positively correlated with sustaining injury while intoxicated with β = 0.183, t(247) = 5.46, p < 0.001. The regression model explained 10.4% of the variance (R² = 0.108, adjusted R² = 0.104), F(1, 247) = 29.82, p < 0.001 (see Table V).
In Model 2, drinking alcohol for several consecutive days was found to be positively correlated with sustaining injury while intoxicated with β = 0.124, t(247) = 2.88, p = 0.004. The regression analysis showed that the model explained 2.9% of the variance (R² = 0.032, adjusted R² = 0.029), F(1, 247) = 8.296, p = 0.004 (see Table VI).
A logistic regression analysis using the stepwise selection method was conducted to verify Hypothesis 3. Variables were entered into the model in seven consecutive steps. The hypothesis assumed that demographic and behavioural variables would show statistically significant associations with the likelihood of being the perpetrator of a traffic accident, with some variables increasing and others decreasing that probability. The analysis aimed to assess the impact of individual independent variables on the likelihood of causing an accident. The results of the logistic regression analysis are presented in Table VI.
The findings indicated that variables like causing an argument, being late or absent from work, with the number of kilometres driven having a significant positive effect on the likelihood of being responsible for an accident. Additionally, participation in the alcohol prevention re-education course significantly increased the probability of causing an accident, whereas receiving a reprimand at work decreased this probability. The log-likelihood of the model was 129.928, and the Nagelkerke R² coefficient was 0.406, indicating a moderate explanatory power of the model in accounting for the variability in accident perpetration.

■ DISCUSSION

The main objective of the study was to determine the relationships between demographic and behavioural variables, alcohol consumption and the risk of road accidents and collisions among drivers. In this context, three hypotheses were formulated and verified. All were positively verified.
Regarding Hypothesis 1, which assumed significant differences in the frequency of negative behaviours related to alcohol consumption between participants of a re-education course and the control group, the results confirmed this hypothesis in several key areas. Re-education course participants more frequently reported behaviours such as drinking alcohol to ease pain, selling items to obtain money for alcohol, drink-driving, experiencing memory blackout while drinking and being reprimanded at work for alcohol consumption. The strongest effect size was observed for driving after alcohol consumption, which is particularly alarming and highlights the critical importance of educational interventions in this area. These results emphasise the need for further educational and preventive actions targeted at drivers participating in re-education programmes. The identified differences suggest that current re-education programmes may be insufficient in reducing risky alcohol-related behaviours. Effective education should not only raise awareness of the consequences of irresponsible behaviour in traffic but also promote strategies for coping with stress and emotional difficulties without resorting to alcohol. Furthermore, programmes like this may be more successful if they were tailored to the individual needs of participants, considering different motivations for drinking and various coping strategies. Interventions should be multifaceted, including both education about the risks of alcohol misuse and psychological support aimed at behavioural change. Moreover, small but not insignificant proportion of participants of re-education programmes confirms clinical symptoms of alcohol abuse and therefore may require more advanced therapeutic interventions.
Subsequent analyses confirmed that drivers who consume alcohol are more likely to be involved in road accidents (Hypothesis 2). Behaviours of this kind pose a real risk to health (e.g. physical injuries while intoxicated) and life, which is consistent with previous studies indicating similar relationships [2, 3, 9]. Alcohol significantly affects cognitive and motor functions, leading to impaired coordination, delayed reaction time, diminished judgement and reduced concentration [4-7]. These changes increase the likelihood of making driving errors. Research has shown that alcohol impairs braking reaction time, vehicle control and the ability to maintain the proper lane position [6, 7]. Alcohol consumption is often associated with lowered inhibitions and a tendency to engage in risky and dangerous behaviours. Drivers under the influence may be more likely to exceed speed limits, drive aggressively, ignore traffic signals or overtake recklessly [18]. This means their capacity to make rational decisions and assess risk is considerably impaired. Consequently, the presence of alcohol in a driver’s bloodstream increases the risk of serious road incidents, which may result in injury or death. Excessive and prolonged alcohol consumption can also lead to long-term neurological consequences [32].
The authors’ professional experience suggests that a significant proportion of drivers whose licences have been revoked and who attend psychological assessments and re-education courses show low awareness of the real dangers of driving under the influence. Many tend to downplay the risk, believing they are safe because they did not drink much and feel okay. Dysfunctional assumptions like this may lead to the decision to drive despite being intoxicated thereby increasing the risk of accidents. Furthermore, people who drink alcohol regularly may have a reduced ability to assess their level of intoxication and the risk associated with driving while under the influence [32]. There is a clear correlation between high alcohol consumption and an increased risk of bodily injury. Both the present findings and those of numerous other studies [2-4, 13, 17-19, 21] indicate that the greater the amount of alcohol consumed, the higher the likelihood of road-related injuries.
Many drivers who operate a vehicle after drinking attempt to compensate for their condition by driving more cautiously. However, behaviour of this kind often fails to offset the cognitive and motor impairment caused by alcohol. According to Motschman et al. [33], a key factor influencing a driver’s decision to drive after drinking is the distance they plan to travel. Some may feel “too drunk” for a long trip but “sober enough” to cover a short distance, particularly as their blood alcohol level begins to fall [32].
The final hypothesis assumed the existence of significant statistical correlations between demographic and behavioural variables and the likelihood of causing dangerous road incidents (accidents or collisions). It was found that certain behavioural factors, like initiating arguments while under the influence, being late or absent from work due to alcohol and the number of kilometres driven in the past year, significantly increased the likelihood of being responsible for a road accident. Moreover, participation in an alcohol prevention re-education course and a lower number of alcohol-related reprimands at work also significantly increased the likelihood of being the cause of such incidents in the past. Numerous studies by other authors have shown that a greater number of kilometres driven is associated with a higher risk of accidents [33-35].
It is difficult to imagine a situation in which an employer ignores alcohol misuse among employees, especially in sectors like transport where safety is paramount [36, 37]. In transport companies, there is no room for leniency on alcohol- related issues. In some industries with labour shortages, there may be a higher chance of such problems being tolerated. However, ignoring the problem not only fails to resolve it but may exacerbate it, reinforcing dysfunctional behavioural patterns in employees who require intervention and professional support. In organisations where problematic behaviours are effectively monitored and corrected, employees tend to be more aware of the consequences of their actions, which may translate into a lower likelihood of causing injuries or dangerous road incidents [38, 39].
Many authors studying similar issues have shown that age, gender and education level [40-42] can significantly influence the risk of being responsible for traffic incidents. González-Sánchez et al. [41] noted that age and gender significantly affect the risk of injury in road accidents with men being at higher risk of serious or fatal injuries than women. Similar findings were presented by Lee et al. [42], who suggested that driver age and gender strongly affect accident severity, particularly among younger and older drivers. In addition to age and gender, Iamtrakul et al. [43] also emphasised that variables like education level, income, marital status, driving experience and prior accident involvement influence risk perception in traffic situations.

Limitations

This study has several important limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. First, although statistically significant differences were observed between the re-education group and the control group, their magnitude was very small. An inspection of the response distributions suggests no more than approximately 10% of individuals in the re-education group differed meaningfully from the control group. This indicates that the two groups were, in fact, largely similar, and that only a relatively small subset of higher-risk participants may require more intensive preventive or therapeutic interventions. This also highlights the distinction between statistical significance, which is sensitive to sample size, and practical significance, which in this case appears limited.
Second, the data were based on self-report, which may affect the accuracy of the responses. Participants attending re-education courses may have been motivated to present themselves in a more favourable light to improve their chances of regaining their driving licence. Social desirability bias of this kind could lead to underreporting of risky behaviours or alcohol-related problems.
Third, the study used convenience sampling. Both groups consisted of individuals referred for psychological evaluation or re-education procedures, which may limit the generalisability of the findings to the broader population of drivers. Future studies should consider the use of more diversified samples and longitudinal designs to better capture behavioural change over time.
Finally, the study did not account for additional psychological variables like personality traits, impulsivity, stress coping strategies or motivation to change, which may influence drinking behaviours and accident risk. Including variables like this in future research would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms underlying risky alcohol-related behaviours among drivers.

■ CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions can be drawn based on the conducted analyses:
1. Negative alcohol-related behaviours occur significantly more often among re-education course drivers than in the control group participants. These include using alcohol to relieve emotional pain, selling personal items to buy alcohol, drink-driving, and receiving formal warnings at work for drinking. However, memory blackouts were reported more frequently in the control group, which may reflect underreporting among re-education participants.
2. Patterns of alcohol consumption like binge drinking or drinking for several consecutive days, significantly increase the risk of sustaining injuries while under the influence.
3. Factors increasing the likelihood of causing a road accident include aggressive behaviour under the influence, absenteeism from work due to alcohol, participation in a re-education course and a higher annual mileage. Receiving a warning at work is associated with a lower risk of being responsible for a road incident.
In conclusion, educational programmes (e.g., re- education courses for drivers penalised for drink-driving) and psychological diagnostic assessments (evaluating risk-prone alcohol use, impulsivity and risk awareness) should be conducted more frequently in a more in-depth manner and tailored to the individual characteristics of drivers like motivation to change, patterns and history of alcohol use, age and life circumstances, in order to effectively reduce accident rates and improve road safety. Small but not insignificant proportion of participants of re-education programmes may require more advanced therapeutic interventions.
The findings of this study highlight the importance of integrating psychological assessment results into the design of driver re-education programmes. Interventions should focus not only on legal and behavioural aspects but also on modifying attitudes, impulsivity and emotional regulation. Combining diagnostic feedback with motivational interviewing and psychoeducation can enhance drivers’ self-awareness and readiness to change risk behaviours.
Moreover, closer collaboration between psychologists, traffic authorities and law enforcement institutions is required to ensure the continuity of preventive efforts after licence reinstatement. Future research should further explore predictors of relapse into risky driving, including personality traits, stress coping strategies and socio-environmental factors.

Conflict of interest/Konflikt interesów

None declared./Nie występuje.

Financial support/Finansowanie

None declared./Nie zadeklarowano.

Ethics/Etyka

The work described in this article has been carried out in accordance with the Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) on medical research involving human subjects, Uniform Requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals and the ethical principles defined in the Farmington Consensus of 1997.
Treści przedstawione w pracy są zgodne z zasadami Deklaracji Helsińskiej odnoszącymi się do badań z udziałem ludzi, ujednoliconymi wymaganiami dla czasopism biomedycznych oraz z zasadami etycznymi określonymi w Porozumieniu z Farmington w 1997 roku.

References/Piśmiennictwo