CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 41Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Decision Making and Impulsivity in Young Adult Cannabis Users

Open access
O'Donnell, Brian F., Skosnik, Patrick D., Hetrick, William P., Fridberg, Daniel J.·2021·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.679904PMC PMC8280309
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Aims: Chronic cannabis users show impairments on laboratory measures of decision making which reflect risk factors for initiation and continued use of cannabis. However, the differential sensitivity of these tasks to cannabis use has not been established. Moreover, studies to date have often lacked assessment of psychiatric histories and use of other illicit substances, both of which may influence decision making outcomes. The current study aimed to address these limitations by (1) including multiple types of decision making tasks, (2) implementing the Probabilistic Reversal Learning Task, a measure of decision making under uncertainty, for the first time in cannabis users, (3) including young adult cannabis users with no other psychiatric disorders, and (4) conducting urinalysis to exclude users of other illicit drugs. Methods: Thirty-three current cannabis users without comorbid psychiatric disorders and 35 cannabis non-users completed behavioral measures of decision-making (Iowa Gambling Task), reward discounting (Delay Discounting Task), choice-outcome learning (the Probabilistic Reversal Learning Task) and a questionnaire assessment of impulsivity (Barratt Impulsiveness Scale). Results: Relative to non-users, cannabis users demonstrated greater preference for immediate vs. delayed rewards on the Delay Discounting Task, made fewer advantageous decisions on the Iowa Gambling Task, and endorsed greater impulsivity on the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale scales. Cannabis users and non-users showed comparable performance on the Probabilistic Reversal Learning Task. Frequency of past-month cannabis use and total years of use did not predict decision making or impulsivity. Conclusions: Young adult cannabis users demonstrated higher discounting rates and impairments in learning cost-benefit contingencies, while reversal learning was unaffected. Self-reported impulsivity was elevated as well. None of these measures correlated with current or lifetime estimates of cannabis use, arguing against a dose-relationship. Interventions that target improvement in affected components of decision making may be helpful in reducing cannabis use and relapse.

Overview

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.679904

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

  • Similar items querying estimates of lifetime number of cannabis use occasions, lifetime number of joints, and lifetime number of cannabis use days have been used to estimate lifetime cannabis consumption in young adult samples.

    “Similar items querying estimates of lifetime number of cannabis use occasions (O'Donnell et al., 2021), lifetime number of joints (Gonzalez et al., 2012; Verdejo-Garcia et al., 2013), and lifetime number of cannabis use days (Pacheco-Colón et al., 2019) have been used to estimate lifetime cannabis consumption in young adult samples.”

    From Cannabis Use and Academic Performance in College Students: The Role of Procrastination (2024) · cites this paper as O'Donnell et al., 2021

    The Methods section (Clinical Interviews and Drug Use Assessment; page not available) describes a questionnaire used to estimate lifetime cannabis consumption in a sample aged 18–35. It says lifetime consumption was estimated as a number of joints, with participants reporting consumption per drug-use occasion; it does not say they estimated the lifetime number of use occasions. The other measures in the citing sentence are attributed to different sources. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 69

  1. Agosti, 2002, Rates of psychiatric comorbidity among U.S. residents with lifetime cannabis dependence, Am. J. Drug Alcohol. Abuse, 28, 643, 10.1081/ADA-120015873 · DOI
  2. Aston, 2016, Interrelationships between marijuana demand and discounting of delayed rewards: convergence in behavioral economic methods, Drug Alcohol Depend., 169, 141, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.10.014 · DOI
  3. Barnhart, 2017, Assessing impulsivity: relationships between behavioral and self-report measures in individuals with and without self-reported ADHD, Pers. Individ. Diff., 106, 41, 10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.034 · DOI
  4. Bechara, 1994, Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex, Cognition, 50, 7, 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90018-3 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Bickel, 2019, Excessive discounting of delayed reinforcers as a trans-disease process: update on the state of the science, Curr. Opin. Psychol., 30, 59, 10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.01.005 · DOI
  6. Bickel, 2014, Computerized working-memory training as a candidate adjunctive treatment for addiction, Alcohol Res. Curr. Rev., 36, 123
  7. Bogdan, 2016, Genetic and environmental factors associated with cannabis involvement, Curr. Addict. Rep., 3, 199, 10.1007/s40429-016-0103-1 · DOI
  8. Boggs, 2012, Rimonabant for neurocognition in schizophrenia: a 16-week double blind randomized placebo controlled trial, Schizophr. Res., 134, 207, 10.1016/j.schres.2011.11.009 · DOI
  9. Busemeyer, 2002, A contribution of cognitive decision models to clinical assessment: decomposing performance on the Bechara gambling task, Psychol. Assess, 14, 253, 10.1037//1040-3590.14.3.253 · DOI
  10. Casey, 2020, Effects of frequent marijuana use on risky decision-making in young adult college students, Addict. Behav. Rep., 11, 100253, 10.1016/j.abrep.2020.100253 · DOI
  11. Chamberlain, 2019, Efficacy of pharmacological interventions in targeting decision-making impairments across substance and behavioral addictions, Neuropsychol. Rev., 29, 93, 10.1007/s11065-019-09400-z · DOI
  12. Clark, 2004, The neuropsychology of ventral prefrontal cortex: decision-making and reversal learning, Brain Cogn., 55, 41, 10.1016/s0278-2626(03)00284-7 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Cools, 2002, Defining the neural mechanisms of probabilistic reversal learning using event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging, J. Neurosci., 22, 4563, 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-11-04563.2002 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Creswell, 2019, Multidimensional assessment of impulsivity-related measures in relation to externalizing behaviors, Psychol. Med., 49, 1678, 10.1017/S0033291718002295 · DOI
  15. Curran, 2016, Keep off the grass? Cannabis, cognition and addiction, Nat. Rev. Neurosci., 17, 293, 10.1038/nrn.2016.28 · DOI
  16. Delibas, 2018, Impulsivity, sensation seeking, and decision-making in long-term abstinent cannabis dependent patients, Noro Psikiyatr Ars, 55, 315, 10.29399/npa.19304 · DOI
  17. Dougherty, 2013, Impulsivity, attention, memory, and decision-making among adolescent marijuana users, Psychopharmacology, 226, 307, 10.1007/s00213-012-2908-5 · DOI
  18. Duckworth, 2011, A meta-analysis of the convergent validity of self-control measures, J. Res. Pers., 45, 259, 10.1016/j.jrp.2011.02.004 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Egerton, 2005, Acute delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced deficits in reversal learning: neural correlates of affective inflexibility, Neuropsychopharmacology, 30, 1895, 10.1038/sj.npp.1300715 · DOI
  20. Eggan, 2007, Immunocytochemical distribution of the cannabinoid CB1 receptor in the primate neocortex: a regional and laminar analysis, Cereb. Cortex, 17, 175, 10.1093/cercor/bhj136 · DOI
  21. Ellingson, 2018, Methodological factors as a potential source of discordance between self-report and behavioral measures of impulsivity and related constructs, Addict. Behav., 84, 126, 10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.04.005 · DOI
  22. Ernst, 2005, Neurobiology of decision making: a selective review from a neurocognitive and clinical perspective, Biol. Psychiatry, 58, 597, 10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.06.004 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Fatima, 2019, Reward, control & decision-making in cannabis use disorder: insights from functional MRI, Br. J. Radiol., 92, 20190165, 10.1259/bjr.20190165 · DOI
  24. Fellows, 2005, Different underlying impairments in decision-making following ventromedial and dorsolateral frontal lobe damage in humans, Cereb Cortex, 15, 58, 10.1093/cercor/bhh108 · DOI
  25. First, 1997, Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders (SCID-II).
  26. First, 2002, Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders, Research Version, Patient Edition With Psychotic Screen (SCID-I/P W/ PSY SCREEN)
  27. Fridberg, 2010, Cognitive mechanisms underlying risky decision-making in chronic cannabis users, J. Math. Psychol., 54, 28, 10.1016/j.jmp.2009.10.002 · DOI
  28. Gladsjo, 1999, Use of oral reading to estimate premorbid intellectual and neuropsychological functioning, J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc., 5, 247, 10.1017/S1355617799533079 · DOI
  29. Green, 2004, A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards, Psychol. Bull., 130, 769, 10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.769 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Green, 2005, Temporal discounting when the choice is between two delayed rewards, J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn., 31, 1121, 10.1037/0278-7393.31.5.1121 · DOI
  31. Heinz, 2013, A comprehensive examination of delay discounting in a clinical sample of Cannabis-dependent military veterans making a self-guided quit attempt, Exp. Clin. Psychopharmacol., 21, 55, 10.1037/a0031192 · DOI
  32. Izquierdo, 2017, The neural basis of reversal learning: an updated perspective, Neuroscience, 345, 12, 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.03.021 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Izquierdo, 2012, Reversal learning as a measure of impulsive and compulsive behavior in addictions, Psychopharmacology, 219, 607, 10.1007/s00213-011-2579-7 · DOI
  34. Jarmolowicz, 2020, On the discounting of cannabis and money: sensitivity to magnitude vs. delay, Drug Alcohol Depend., 212, 107996, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.107996 · DOI
  35. Johnson, 2010, Delay discounting in current and former marijuana-dependent individuals, Exp. Clin. Psychopharmacol., 18, 99, 10.1037/a0018333 · DOI
  36. Kollins, 2003, Delay discounting is associated with substance use in college students, Addict. Behav., 28, 1167, 10.1016/S0306-4603(02)00220-4 · DOI
  37. Lamers, 2006, Cognitive function and mood in MDMA/THC users, THC users and non-drug using controls, J. Psychopharmacol., 20, 302, 10.1177/0269881106059495 · DOI
  38. Lee, 2015, A comparison of delay discounting in adolescents and adults in treatment for cannabis use disorders, Exp. Clin. Psychopharmacol., 23, 130, 10.1037/a0038792 · DOI
  39. Mazur, 1987, “An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement,”, 55
  40. Mejia-Cruz, 2016, Delay and probability discounting by drug-dependent cocaine and marijuana users, Psychopharmacology, 233, 2705, 10.1007/s00213-016-4316-8 · DOI
  41. Mischel, 1989, Delay of gratification in children, Science, 244, 933, 10.1126/science.2658056 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Mitchell, 2019, Linking delay discounting and substance use disorders: genotypes and phenotypes, Perspect. Behav. Sci., 42, 419, 10.1007/s40614-019-00218-x · DOI
  43. Pacheco-Colón, 2019, Decision-making as a latent construct and its measurement invariance in a large sample of adolescent cannabis users, J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc., 25, 661, 10.1017/S1355617719000341 · DOI
  44. Parsons, 2015, Endocannabinoid signalling in reward and addiction, Nat. Rev. Neurosci., 16, 579, 10.1038/nrn4004 · DOI
  45. Patton, 1995, Factor structure of the Barratt impulsiveness scale, J. Clin. Psychol., 51, 768, 10.1002/1097-4679(199511)51:6<768::AID-JCLP2270510607>3.0.CO;2-1 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Perkins, 2018, Pharmacotherapies for decreasing maladaptive choice in drug addiction: targeting the behavior and the drug, Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav., 164, 40, 10.1016/j.pbb.2017.06.015 · DOI
  47. Peters, 2013, Delay discounting in adults receiving treatment for marijuana dependence, Exp. Clin. Psychopharmacol., 21, 46, 10.1037/a0030943 · DOI
  48. Rachlin, 1991, Subjective probability and delay, J. Exp. Anal. Behav., 55, 233, 10.1901/jeab.1991.55-233 · DOI · Paper page
  49. Rahman, 2001, Decision making and neuropsychiatry, Trends Cogn. Sci., 5, 271, 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01650-8 · DOI
  50. 2019, Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United States: Results From the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health
  51. Skosnik, 2012, The effect of chronic cannabinoids on broadband EEG neural oscillations in humans, Neuropsychopharmacology, 37, 2184, 10.1038/npp.2012.65 · DOI
  52. Skosnik, 2014, Disrupted gamma-band neural oscillations during coherent motion perception in heavy cannabis users, Neuropsychopharmacology, 39, 3087, 10.1038/npp.2014.166 · DOI
  53. Sofis, 2020, Greater delay discounting and cannabis coping motives are associated with more frequent cannabis use in a large sample of adult cannabis users, Drug Alcohol Depend, 207, 107820, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.107820 · DOI
  54. Stanford, 2009, Fifty years of the Barratt impulsiveness scale: an update and review, Pers. Individ. Diff., 47, 385, 10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.008 · DOI · Paper page
  55. Stea, 2011, Relations between delay discounting and low to moderate gambling, cannabis, and alcohol problems among university students, Behav, Proces., 88, 202, 10.1016/j.beproc.2011.09.002 · DOI
  56. Steingroever, 2015, Data from 617 healthy participants performing the iowa gambling task: a “many labs” collaboration, J. Open Psychol. Data, 3, 1, 10.5334/jopd.ak · DOI
  57. Strauss, 2006, A Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests.
  58. Strickland, 2017, Unique prediction of cannabis use severity and behaviors by delay discounting and behavioral economic demand, Behav. Proces., 140, 33, 10.1016/j.beproc.2017.03.017 · DOI
  59. Tuvblad, 2013, The genetic and environmental etiology of decision-making: a longitudinal twin study, J. Adoles., 36, 245, 10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.10.006 · DOI
  60. Vangsness, 2005, Impulsivity, negative expectancies, and marijuana use: a test of the acquired preparedness model, Addict. Behav., 30, 1071, 10.1016/j.addbeh.2004.11.003 · DOI
  61. Vassileva, 2019, Impulsivities and addictions: a multidimensional integrative framework informing assessment and interventions for substance use disorders, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci., 374, 20180137, 10.1098/rstb.2018.0137 · DOI
  62. Verdejo-Garcia, 2007, The differential relationship between cocaine use and marijuana use on decision-making performance over repeat testing with the Iowa Gambling Task, Drug Alcohol Depend., 90, 2, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2007.02.004 · DOI
  63. Verdejo-Garcia, 2013, COMT val158met and 5-HTTLPR genetic polymorphisms moderate executive control in cannabis users, Neuropsychopharmacology, 38, 1598, 10.1038/npp.2013.59 · DOI · Paper page
  64. Verdejo-García, 2008, Impulsivity as a vulnerability marker for substance-use disorders: review of findings from high-risk research, problem gamblers and genetic association studies, Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev., 32, 777, 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2007.11.003 · DOI
  65. Vink, 2007, Personality differences in monozygotic twins discordant for cannabis use, Addiction, 102, 1942, 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.02008.x · DOI
  66. Whitlow, 2004, Long-term heavy marijuana users make costly decisions on a gambling task, Drug Alcohol Depend., 76, 107, 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2004.04.009 · DOI
  67. Wright, 2013, ΔTetrahydrocannabinol impairs reversal learning but not extra-dimensional shifts in rhesus macaques, Neuroscience, 235, 51, 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2013.01.018 · DOI
  68. Yechiam, 2005, Using cognitive models to map relations between neuropsychological disorders and human decision-making deficits, Psychol. Sci., 16, 973, 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01646.x · DOI
  69. Zhu, 2018, A newly designed mobile-based computerized cognitive addiction therapy app for the improvement of cognition impairments and risk decision making in methamphetamine use disorder: randomized controlled trial, JMIR Mhealth Uhealth, 6, e10292, 10.2196/10292 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
O'Donnell, B. F., Skosnik, P. D., Hetrick, W. P., & Fridberg, D. J.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
Fridberg, Daniel J.
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2021-07-01
Volume
12
Pages
679904-679904
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2021.679904
PMC
PMC8280309
OpenAlex
W3186985472
Cited by
41
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10
FWCI
3.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
cannabis use, decision-making, impulsivity, young adults, delay discounting, Iowa Gambling Task, probabilistic reversal learning, reward discounting, Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, relapse prevention

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