Elena Mikulskaya1,2, Frances Heritage Martin3. 1. School of Psychology, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, NSW, 2258, Australia. 2. TIEI, Russian Federation, Tula University, Tula, Russia. 3. School of Psychology, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah, NSW, 2258, Australia. Frances.Martin@newcastle.edu.au.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Cannabis use impairs visual attention; however, it is unclear whether cannabis use also impairs low level visual processing or whether low level visual deficits can be related to lower dopaminergic functioning found in cannabis users. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether spatiotemporal contrast sensitivity and motion discrimination under normal and low luminance conditions differ in cannabis users and non-users. METHODS: Control (n = 20) and cannabis (n = 21) participants completed a visual acuity test, a saliva test and self-report measures. Spatial and temporal contrast thresholds, motion coherence thresholds for translational and radial motion and the spontaneous eye blink rate were then collected. RESULTS: Cannabis users showed decreased spatial contrast sensitivity under low luminance conditions and increased motion coherence thresholds under all luminance levels tested compared to non-users. No differences in temporal contrast sensitivity were found between the groups. Frequency of cannabis use correlated significantly and negatively with contrast sensitivity, both spatial and temporal, in the cannabis group and higher motion coherence thresholds for radial motion were also associated with more frequent cannabis use in this group. The eye blink rate was significantly lower in cannabis users compared to non-users. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that cannabis use is associated with deficits in low level visual processing. Such deficits are suggested to relate to lower dopamine, in a similar manner as in clinical populations. The implications for driving safety under reduced visibility (e.g. night) in abstaining cannabis users are discussed.
RATIONALE: Cannabis use impairs visual attention; however, it is unclear whether cannabis use also impairs low level visual processing or whether low level visual deficits can be related to lower dopaminergic functioning found in cannabis users. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether spatiotemporal contrast sensitivity and motion discrimination under normal and low luminance conditions differ in cannabis users and non-users. METHODS: Control (n = 20) and cannabis (n = 21) participants completed a visual acuity test, a saliva test and self-report measures. Spatial and temporal contrast thresholds, motion coherence thresholds for translational and radial motion and the spontaneous eye blink rate were then collected. RESULTS: Cannabis users showed decreased spatial contrast sensitivity under low luminance conditions and increased motion coherence thresholds under all luminance levels tested compared to non-users. No differences in temporal contrast sensitivity were found between the groups. Frequency of cannabis use correlated significantly and negatively with contrast sensitivity, both spatial and temporal, in the cannabis group and higher motion coherence thresholds for radial motion were also associated with more frequent cannabis use in this group. The eye blink rate was significantly lower in cannabis users compared to non-users. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that cannabis use is associated with deficits in low level visual processing. Such deficits are suggested to relate to lower dopamine, in a similar manner as in clinical populations. The implications for driving safety under reduced visibility (e.g. night) in abstaining cannabis users are discussed.
Authors: Nora D Volkow; Gene-Jack Wang; Frank Telang; Joanna S Fowler; David Alexoff; Jean Logan; Millard Jayne; Christopher Wong; Dardo Tomasi Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-07-14 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Madeline H Meier; Avshalom Caspi; Antony Ambler; HonaLee Harrington; Renate Houts; Richard S E Keefe; Kay McDonald; Aimee Ward; Richie Poulton; Terrie E Moffitt Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-08-27 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: E van de Giessen; J J Weinstein; C M Cassidy; M Haney; Z Dong; R Ghazzaoui; N Ojeil; L S Kegeles; X Xu; N P Vadhan; N D Volkow; M Slifstein; A Abi-Dargham Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2016-03-22 Impact factor: 15.992
Authors: Hollis C Karoly; Michael A Milburn; Ashley Brooks-Russell; Mary Brown; Jessica Streufert; Angela D Bryan; Nicholas P Lovrich; William DeJong; L Cinnamon Bidwell Journal: Cannabis Cannabinoid Res Date: 2020-09-10
Authors: Sonia Ortiz-Peregrina; Carolina Ortiz; José J Castro-Torres; José R Jiménez; Rosario G Anera Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-03 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Tory R Spindle; Erin L Martin; Megan Grabenauer; Thomas Woodward; Michael A Milburn; Ryan Vandrey Journal: J Psychopharmacol Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 4.562