Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences.
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2022 Apr;30(2):159-171. doi: 10.1037/pha0000397. Epub 2020 Oct 1.
As cannabis policy changes, there is an urgent need to understand interactions between cannabis and alcohol couse. An online sample of 711 adult past-month cannabis and alcohol users completed both single-item hypothetical purchasing tasks for cannabis and alcohol and cross-commodity purchasing tasks assessing adjusting-price cannabis with concurrently available, fixed-price alcohol, and vice versa. Participants provided information about cannabis and alcohol use patterns, and completed the Alcohol and Cannabis Use Disorder Identification Tests (AUDIT and CUDIT, respectively). Group data showed that cannabis and alcohol served as complements (as the price of the adjusting-price commodity increased, consumption of both commodities decreased). However, individual data showed substantial variability with nontrivial proportions showing patterns of complementarity, substitution, and independence. More negative slopes (greater complementarity) for fixed-price cannabis and alcohol were both associated with greater self-reported drug consumption and CUDIT and AUDIT scores. The negative relation between cross-price slope and CUDIT/AUDIT score indicates that individuals who treat cannabis and alcohol more as complements are more likely to experience disordered use. Based on these cross-commodity purchasing data, when both cannabis and alcohol are concurrently available at low prices, both may be used at high levels, whereas limiting consumption of one commodity (e.g., through increased price) may reduce consumption of the other. These data show the importance of examining individual participant analyses of behavioral economic drug interactions and suggest that manipulation of cost (e.g., through taxes) or cosale restrictions are potential public health regulatory mechanisms for reducing alcohol and cannabis use and couse behaviors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
随着大麻政策的变化,迫切需要了解大麻和酒精之间的相互作用。一项针对 711 名过去一个月内使用过大麻和酒精的成年人的在线样本完成了大麻和酒精的单一项目假设购买任务,以及评估同时提供的、固定价格的酒精与可调节价格的大麻之间的交叉商品购买任务,反之亦然。参与者提供了关于大麻和酒精使用模式的信息,并完成了酒精和大麻使用障碍识别测试(AUDIT 和 CUDIT)。群体数据显示,大麻和酒精是互补品(随着调整价格商品的价格上涨,两种商品的消费都会下降)。然而,个体数据显示出很大的可变性,有相当比例的个体表现出互补、替代和独立的模式。固定价格的大麻和酒精的斜率越负(互补性越大),自我报告的药物使用量和 CUDIT 和 AUDIT 评分越高。交叉价格斜率与 CUDIT/AUDIT 评分之间的负相关表明,将大麻和酒精视为互补品的人更有可能出现紊乱使用。基于这些交叉商品购买数据,当大麻和酒精同时以低价供应时,两者都可能被大量使用,而限制一种商品的消费(例如,通过提高价格)可能会减少另一种商品的消费。这些数据表明,需要检查行为经济学药物相互作用的个体参与者分析的重要性,并表明操纵成本(例如,通过税收)或共同销售限制是减少酒精和大麻使用和使用行为的潜在公共卫生监管机制。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2022 APA,保留所有权利)。