Emily Kan, Jordan Beardslee, and Elizabeth Cauffman are with the Department of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine. Paul J. Frick is with the Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, and the Department of Education and the Arts, Australian Catholic University, Fitzroy, Australia. Laurence Steinberg is with the Department of Psychology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, and the Department of Psychology, King Abdulaziz University, Jedda, Saudi Arabia.
Am J Public Health. 2020 Sep;110(9):1386-1392. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2020.305797. Epub 2020 Jul 16.
To determine the impact of California's recreational marijuana legalization on marijuana use among justice system-involved (JSI) adolescents and young adults, and to distinguish whether any changes resulted from legalization (passing the law) or from implementation of the law. We compared changes in JSI youths' marijuana use in 2 states: California (n = 504), where recreational marijuana use was recently legalized, and Pennsylvania (n = 478), where recreational use is still prohibited. Furthermore, we examined changes in marijuana use across 3 key time periods (October 2015-June 2018): before legalization, after legalization but before implementation, and after implementation. California JSI youths did not demonstrate a significant increase in marijuana use after legalization (b = -0.010; = .950) or implementation (b = -0.046; = .846). However, in Pennsylvania, rates of marijuana use increased significantly after legalization (b = 0.602; = .001) but not after implementation (b = 0.174; = .533). Although recreational marijuana legalization was not associated with changes in marijuana use among youths in California, we observed increased rates of use in Pennsylvania after legalization in California. Recreational marijuana laws may be indirectly related to youths' marijuana use by supporting more permissive national attitudes toward marijuana.
为了确定加利福尼亚州娱乐用大麻合法化对涉及司法系统的青少年和年轻成年人中大麻使用的影响，并区分这些变化是源于合法化（法律通过）还是源于法律的实施。我们比较了两个州中涉及司法系统的年轻人大麻使用情况的变化：加利福尼亚州（n=504），那里的娱乐用大麻最近合法化了；宾夕法尼亚州（n=478），那里的娱乐用大麻仍然被禁止。此外，我们还检查了大麻使用在三个关键时期（2015 年 10 月至 2018 年 6 月）的变化：合法化之前、合法化之后但实施之前以及实施之后。加利福尼亚州涉及司法系统的年轻人在合法化后（b=-0.010； =.950）或实施后（b=-0.046； =.846）并未表现出大麻使用显著增加。然而，在宾夕法尼亚州，大麻使用的比率在合法化后显著增加（b=0.602； =.001），但在实施后没有增加（b=0.174； =.533）。尽管加利福尼亚州娱乐用大麻合法化与加利福尼亚州年轻人大麻使用的变化无关，但我们观察到，在加利福尼亚州合法化后，宾夕法尼亚州的使用比率有所增加。娱乐用大麻法律可能通过支持更宽容的全国大麻态度间接地与年轻人的大麻使用有关。
