Steven E Meredith1, Mary M Sweeney2, Patrick S Johnson2, Matthew W Johnson2, Roland R Griffiths3. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.; Calhoun Cardiology Center, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine , Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.; Department of Neuroscience, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
Background: Energy drink use is associated with increased risk behavior among adolescents and college students. This study examined this relationship in a nationwide sample of young adults and also examined relations between energy drink use and delay discounting. Methods: Participants were 874 U.S. adults 18-28 years of age with past 30-day consumption of caffeine and alcohol. Participants completed an online survey of energy drink use, drug use, sexual activity, alcohol misuse (alcohol use disorders identification test [AUDIT]), sensation seeking (four-item Brief Sensation Seeking Scale [BSSS-4]), and delay discounting of monetary rewards and condom use. Results: Over one-third of participants (n = 303) reported consuming energy drinks at least once per week. Weekly energy drink users were more likely than less-than-weekly energy drink users to report a recent history of risk behaviors, including cigarette smoking (56% vs. 28%, p < 0.0001), illicit stimulant use (22% vs. 6%, p < 0.0001), and unprotected sex (63% vs. 45%, p < 0.0001). Covariate-adjusted analyses found that weekly energy drink users did not have significantly higher BSSS-4 scores (3.5 vs. 3.1, p = 0.098), but they had higher mean AUDIT scores (8.0 vs. 4.8, p < 0.0001), and they more steeply discounted delayed monetary rewards. Although weekly energy drink users did not show steeper discounting of delayed condom use, they showed a lower likelihood of using a condom when one was immediately available. Conclusions: This study extends findings that energy drink use is associated with risk behavior, and it is the first study to show that energy drink use is associated with monetary delay discounting.
Background: Energy drink use is associated with increased risk behavior among adolescents and college students. This study examined this relationship in a nationwide sample of young adults and also examined relations between energy drink use and delay discounting. Methods:Participants were 874 U.S. adults 18-28 years of age with past 30-day consumption of caffeine and alcohol. Participants completed an online survey of energy drink use, drug use, sexual activity, alcohol misuse (alcohol use disorders identification test [AUDIT]), sensation seeking (four-item Brief Sensation Seeking Scale [BSSS-4]), and delay discounting of monetary rewards and condom use. Results: Over one-third of participants (n = 303) reported consuming energy drinks at least once per week. Weekly energy drink users were more likely than less-than-weekly energy drink users to report a recent history of risk behaviors, including cigarette smoking (56% vs. 28%, p < 0.0001), illicit stimulant use (22% vs. 6%, p < 0.0001), and unprotected sex (63% vs. 45%, p < 0.0001). Covariate-adjusted analyses found that weekly energy drink users did not have significantly higher BSSS-4 scores (3.5 vs. 3.1, p = 0.098), but they had higher mean AUDIT scores (8.0 vs. 4.8, p < 0.0001), and they more steeply discounted delayed monetary rewards. Although weekly energy drink users did not show steeper discounting of delayed condom use, they showed a lower likelihood of using a condom when one was immediately available. Conclusions: This study extends findings that energy drink use is associated with risk behavior, and it is the first study to show that energy drink use is associated with monetary delay discounting.
Authors: Leonard H Epstein; Jerry B Richards; Frances G Saad; Rocco A Paluch; James N Roemmich; Caryn Lerman Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Amelia M Arria; Kimberly M Caldeira; Sarah J Kasperski; Kathryn B Vincent; Roland R Griffiths; Kevin E O'Grady Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2010-11-12 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Michael Amlung; Lauren R Few; Jonathan Howland; Damaris J Rohsenow; Jane Metrik; James MacKillop Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: David P Jarmolowicz; Warren K Bickel; Anne E Carter; Christopher T Franck; E Terry Mueller Journal: Behav Processes Date: 2012-09-13 Impact factor: 1.777
Authors: Evan S Herrmann; Dennis J Hand; Matthew W Johnson; Gary J Badger; Sarah H Heil Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-07-30 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Mary M Sweeney; Steven E Meredith; Daniel P Evatt; Roland R Griffiths Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2017-01-20 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Jana Holubcikova; Peter Kolarcik; Andrea Madarasova Geckova; Sijmen A Reijneveld; Jitse P van Dijk Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2017-02-22 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Mary M Sweeney; Meredith S Berry; Patrick S Johnson; Evan S Herrmann; Steven E Meredith; Matthew W Johnson Journal: Psychol Health Date: 2019-07-16
Authors: Matthew W Johnson; Justin C Strickland; Evan S Herrmann; Sean B Dolan; David J Cox; Meredith S Berry Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Nioud Mulugeta Gebru; Meher Kalkat; Justin C Strickland; Margaret Ansell; Robert F Leeman; Meredith S Berry Journal: Arch Sex Behav Date: 2022-07-15