单独饮酒和与大麻结合时主观影响的解释和经验:混合方法方法。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-02 DOI:10.1037/pha0000685
Cassandra L Boness, Ashley N Linden-Carmichael
{"title":"单独饮酒和与大麻结合时主观影响的解释和经验:混合方法方法。","authors":"Cassandra L Boness, Ashley N Linden-Carmichael","doi":"10.1037/pha0000685","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Subjective effects generally describe the feelings one has when consuming substances. There are several tools available for measuring alcohol-related subjective effects but there are reasons to believe that effects are interpreted differently across participants. The assessment of alcohol-related subjective effects is further complicated by the fact that many people use other substances with alcohol, including cannabis. The present study used a mixed-methods approach to evaluate interpretations of 21 subjective effects used in common assessments among a college student sample (<i>N</i> = 99; primarily White [79%], Hispanic [60%] women [74%], 72% of which reported lifetime couse of alcohol and cannabis). We sought to (a) estimate the prevalence of each effect and the amount of alcohol/number of drinks (and, for those with simultaneous use, amount of cannabis/number of hits) required to experience each effect and (b) evaluate how participants interpreted each effect that they had ever experienced when drinking (for our sample who had used only alcohol) or when simultaneously using alcohol and cannabis (for our sample who had reported simultaneous use). Across both samples, we found that several effects were far more common than others and participants had varied interpretations of each subjective effect. Further, qualitative results demonstrated that participants interpreted some subjective effects in a way that differed from the original intention of the measure. Results suggest a degree of measurement error when using common subjective effects assessment tools. Findings lay the groundwork for standardized measures of subjective effects for simultaneous use and have implications for future real-world assessment and intervention work. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":12089,"journal":{"name":"Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"329-339"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11063124/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interpretations and experiences of subjective effects for alcohol alone and when combined with cannabis: A mixed-methods approach.\",\"authors\":\"Cassandra L Boness, Ashley N Linden-Carmichael\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pha0000685\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Subjective effects generally describe the feelings one has when consuming substances. There are several tools available for measuring alcohol-related subjective effects but there are reasons to believe that effects are interpreted differently across participants. The assessment of alcohol-related subjective effects is further complicated by the fact that many people use other substances with alcohol, including cannabis. The present study used a mixed-methods approach to evaluate interpretations of 21 subjective effects used in common assessments among a college student sample (<i>N</i> = 99; primarily White [79%], Hispanic [60%] women [74%], 72% of which reported lifetime couse of alcohol and cannabis). We sought to (a) estimate the prevalence of each effect and the amount of alcohol/number of drinks (and, for those with simultaneous use, amount of cannabis/number of hits) required to experience each effect and (b) evaluate how participants interpreted each effect that they had ever experienced when drinking (for our sample who had used only alcohol) or when simultaneously using alcohol and cannabis (for our sample who had reported simultaneous use). Across both samples, we found that several effects were far more common than others and participants had varied interpretations of each subjective effect. Further, qualitative results demonstrated that participants interpreted some subjective effects in a way that differed from the original intention of the measure. Results suggest a degree of measurement error when using common subjective effects assessment tools. Findings lay the groundwork for standardized measures of subjective effects for simultaneous use and have implications for future real-world assessment and intervention work. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12089,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"329-339\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11063124/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/pha0000685\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pha0000685","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

主观效应通常描述一个人在消费物质时的感受。有几种工具可用于测量酒精相关的主观影响,但有理由相信,参与者对影响的解释不同。由于许多人将包括大麻在内的其他物质与酒精一起使用,对酒精相关主观影响的评估更加复杂。本研究采用混合方法对大学生样本中常见评估中使用的21种主观影响的解释进行了评估(N=99;主要是白人[79%]、西班牙裔[60%]女性[74%],其中72%的人报告终生饮酒和吸食大麻)。我们试图(a)估计每种影响的流行率以及体验每种影响所需的酒精量/饮料数量(对于同时使用大麻的人,还包括大麻量/点击次数);(b)评估参与者如何解释他们在饮酒时(对于只使用过酒精的样本)或同时使用酒精和大麻(针对我们报告同时使用的样本)。在这两个样本中,我们发现几种效应比其他效应更常见,参与者对每种主观效应的解释也各不相同。此外,定性结果表明,参与者对一些主观效果的解释与该措施的初衷不同。结果表明,在使用常见的主观效果评估工具时存在一定程度的测量误差。研究结果为同时使用的主观效果的标准化测量奠定了基础,并对未来的现实世界评估和干预工作产生了影响。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Interpretations and experiences of subjective effects for alcohol alone and when combined with cannabis: A mixed-methods approach.

Subjective effects generally describe the feelings one has when consuming substances. There are several tools available for measuring alcohol-related subjective effects but there are reasons to believe that effects are interpreted differently across participants. The assessment of alcohol-related subjective effects is further complicated by the fact that many people use other substances with alcohol, including cannabis. The present study used a mixed-methods approach to evaluate interpretations of 21 subjective effects used in common assessments among a college student sample (N = 99; primarily White [79%], Hispanic [60%] women [74%], 72% of which reported lifetime couse of alcohol and cannabis). We sought to (a) estimate the prevalence of each effect and the amount of alcohol/number of drinks (and, for those with simultaneous use, amount of cannabis/number of hits) required to experience each effect and (b) evaluate how participants interpreted each effect that they had ever experienced when drinking (for our sample who had used only alcohol) or when simultaneously using alcohol and cannabis (for our sample who had reported simultaneous use). Across both samples, we found that several effects were far more common than others and participants had varied interpretations of each subjective effect. Further, qualitative results demonstrated that participants interpreted some subjective effects in a way that differed from the original intention of the measure. Results suggest a degree of measurement error when using common subjective effects assessment tools. Findings lay the groundwork for standardized measures of subjective effects for simultaneous use and have implications for future real-world assessment and intervention work. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
164
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology publishes advances in translational and interdisciplinary research on psychopharmacology, broadly defined, and/or substance abuse.
期刊最新文献
Acceptance versus distraction as coping strategies for acute pain and pain-induced alcohol urge and approach inclinations. Is a very brief web-based intervention with focus on protective behavioral strategies efficacious in reducing impaired control over alcohol in undergraduates? Opioid Protective Behavioral Strategies Scale (OPBSS): Development and psychometric evaluation. Residual and enduring effects of cannabis use on cognitive and psychomotor function: A study of adults during unrestricted cannabis use, short-term abstinence, and protracted abstinence. Undervaluing nondrug rewards or overvaluing cocaine? Cocaine demand relates to cocaine use severity more strongly than anhedonia in individuals with cocaine use disorder.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1