Elizabeth R Aston1, Jane Metrik2, Michael Amlung3, Christopher W Kahler4, James MacKillop5. 1. Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI 02903, USA. Electronic address: Elizabeth_Aston@Brown.edu. 2. Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI 02903, USA; Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Providence, RI 02908, USA. 3. Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research, McMaster University/St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, ON L8N 3K7, Canada. 4. Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI 02903, USA. 5. Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI 02903, USA; Peter Boris Centre for Addictions Research, McMaster University/St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, ON L8N 3K7, Canada; Homewood Research Institute, Guelph, ON N1E 6K9, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Distinct behavioral economic domains, including high perceived drug value (demand) and delay discounting (DD), have been implicated in the initiation of drug use and the progression to dependence. However, it is unclear whether frequent marijuana users conform to a "reinforcer pathology" addiction model wherein marijuana demand and DD jointly increase risk for problematic marijuana use and cannabis dependence (CD). METHODS: Participants (n=88, 34% female, 14% cannabis dependent) completed a marijuana purchase task at baseline. A delay discounting task was completed following placebo marijuana cigarette (0% THC) administration during a separate experimental session. RESULTS: Marijuana demand and DD were quantified using area under the curve (AUC). In multiple regression models, demand uniquely predicted frequency of marijuana use while DD did not. In contrast, DD uniquely predicted CD symptom count while demand did not. There were no significant interactions between demand and DD in either model. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that frequent marijuana users exhibit key constituents of the reinforcer pathology model: high marijuana demand and steep discounting of delayed rewards. However, demand and DD appear to be independent rather than synergistic risk factors for elevated marijuana use and risk for progression to CD. Findings also provide support for using AUC as a singular marijuana demand metric, particularly when also examining other behavioral economic constructs that apply similar statistical approaches, such as DD, to support analytic methodological convergence. Copyright Â
BACKGROUND: Distinct behavioral economic domains, including high perceived drug value (demand) and delay discounting (DD), have been implicated in the initiation of drug use and the progression to dependence. However, it is unclear whether frequent marijuana users conform to a "reinforcer pathology" addiction model wherein marijuana demand and DD jointly increase risk for problematic marijuana use and cannabis dependence (CD). METHODS:Participants (n=88, 34% female, 14% cannabis dependent) completed a marijuana purchase task at baseline. A delay discounting task was completed following placebo marijuana cigarette (0% THC) administration during a separate experimental session. RESULTS:Marijuana demand and DD were quantified using area under the curve (AUC). In multiple regression models, demand uniquely predicted frequency of marijuana use while DD did not. In contrast, DD uniquely predicted CD symptom count while demand did not. There were no significant interactions between demand and DD in either model. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that frequent marijuana users exhibit key constituents of the reinforcer pathology model: high marijuana demand and steep discounting of delayed rewards. However, demand and DD appear to be independent rather than synergistic risk factors for elevated marijuana use and risk for progression to CD. Findings also provide support for using AUC as a singular marijuana demand metric, particularly when also examining other behavioral economic constructs that apply similar statistical approaches, such as DD, to support analytic methodological convergence. Copyright Â
Authors: James MacKillop; James G Murphy; Lara A Ray; Daniel T A Eisenberg; Stephen A Lisman; J Koji Lum; David S Wilson Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Jane Metrik; Christopher W Kahler; Brady Reynolds; John E McGeary; Peter M Monti; Margaret Haney; Harriet de Wit; Damaris J Rohsenow Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2012-05-16 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Michael J Sofis; Shea M Lemley; Alan J Budney; Catherine Stanger; David P Jarmolowicz Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Samuel F Acuff; Kathryn E Soltis; Ashley A Dennhardt; Kristoffer S Berlin; James G Murphy Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2018-06-04 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Tyler D Nighbor; Ivori Zvorsky; Allison N Kurti; Joan M Skelly; Warren K Bickel; Derek D Reed; Gideon P Naudé; Stephen T Higgins Journal: J Exp Anal Behav Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 2.468