The failure of feedback on alcohol impairment to reduce impaired driving.

Sisson et al. (1993) set up shop in three taverns. They gave drinkers small cards that showed how fast to sip. They also told each person their blood-alcohol level before leaving.

The team posted weekly charts at the door. The charts showed how many bar guests still drove while impaired. Police kept normal patrols for the first month.

The feedback package did nothing. Drinkers kept driving drunk at the same rate.

Only when police added extra roadside checks did impaired trips drop, and only while the checks lasted.

Fournier et al. (2004) ran a similar setup at college parties but added a cash prize for staying under .05 BAC. Legal intoxication fell by more than half. The cash, not the feedback, seems to be the active part.

Houten et al. (1983) and Volkmar et al. (1985) cut speeding with posted feedback signs. Their signs worked; the tavern posters did not. Speeding signs targeted a wide road audience, while the bar posters spoke to drinkers already set on leaving.

Boudreau et al. (2015) explain why: feedback must act like immediate reinforcement or punishment. Weak, delayed posters do not meet that bar.

If you run community programs for adults who use alcohol, do not rely on BAC education or public charts alone. Pair feedback with real incentives or swift enforcement. Without one of those, expect no change in risky driving.