Cited by 387Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsSchizophrenia research and treatment

Specific attentional dysfunction in adults following early start of cannabis use

Ehrenreich, Hannelore, Kunert, Hanns J., Moeller, Manfred R., Poser, Wolfgang, Schilling, Lothar, Gigerenzer, Gerd, Hoehe, Margret R., Rinn, Thomas·1999·Psychopharmacology

Abstract

Rationale and objective The present study tested the hypothesis that chronic interference by cannabis with endogenous cannabinoid systems during peripubertal development causes specific and persistent brain alterations in humans. As an index of cannabinoid action, visual scanning, along with other attentional functions, was chosen. Visual scanning undergoes a major maturation process around age 12-15 years and, in addition, the visual system is known to react specifically and sensitively to cannabinoids. Methods From 250 individuals consuming cannabis regularly, 99 healthy pure cannabis users were selected. They were free of any other past or present drug abuse, or history of neuropsychiatric disease. After an interview, physical examination, analysis of routine laboratory parameters, plasma/urine analyses for drugs, and MMPI testing, users and respective controls were subjected to a computer-assisted attention test battery comprising visual scanning, alertness, divided attention, flexibility, and working memory. Results Of the potential predictors of test performance within the user group, including present age, age of onset of cannabis use, degree of acute intoxication (THC+THCOH plasma levels), and cumulative toxicity (estimated total life dose), an early age of onset turned out to be the only predictor, predicting impaired reaction times exclusively in visual scanning. Early-onset users (onset before age 16; n = 48) showed a significant impairment in reaction times in this function, whereas late-onset users (onset after age 16; n = 51) did not differ from controls (n = 49). Conclusions These data suggest that beginning cannabis use during early adolescence may lead to enduring effects on specific attentional functions in adulthood. Apparently, vulnerable periods during brain development exist that are subject to persistent alterations by interfering exogenous cannabinoids.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s002130050892

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Adolescent marijuana exposure results in acute and persistent impaired attentional capabilities.

    “Likewise, adolescent marijuana exposure results in acute (Jacobsen et al. 2004; Harvey et al. 2007) and persistent (Ehrenreich et al. 1999; Meier et al. 2012) impaired attentional capabilities.”

    From The long-term cognitive consequences of adolescent exposure to recreational drugs of abuse (2018) · cites this paper as Ehrenreich et al. 1999

    The Results and discussion (p. 6) associate cannabis use beginning by about age 16 with a persistent, specific visual-scanning impairment in adulthood; the abstract (p. 1) says early use may lead to enduring effects. This supports the persistent-attention portion for which Ehrenreich et al. is cited, but the claim states a causal result and describes attentional capabilities more broadly than the measured effect. The acute portion is attributed to other sources, not this one. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 27 · Cited by 387

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Halgren E, Marinkovic K (1995) Neurophysiological networks integrating human emotions. In: Gazzaniga MS (ed) The cognitive neurosciences. MIT, Cambridge, Mass., pp 1137-1151

Authors
Ehrenreich, H., Kunert, H. J., Moeller, M. R., Poser, W., Schilling, L., Gigerenzer, G., Hoehe, M. R., & Rinn, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Göttingen (DE)
  • Saarland University (DE)
  • University Medical Centre Mannheim (DE)
  • Max Planck Institute for Human Development (DE)
  • Max Delbrück Center (DE)
Venue
Psychopharmacology
Published
1999-03-04
Volume
142
Issue
3
Pages
295-301
ISSN
  • 0033-3158 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-2072
OpenAlex
W2153898074
Cited by
387
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 24
FWCI
2.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
cannabis use, age of onset, visual exploration, attentional dysfunction, endocannabinoid system, peripubertal development, brain development, reaction time, working memory, divided attention
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Attention, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Cannabinoids, Cannabis, Child, Female, Humans, Male, Reaction Time, Age of Onset

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review