Search

Background: Young adults frequently use alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco together. Given the increased prevalence of e-cigarette use and recreational cannabis use, we investigated daily patterns of alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco use and distinguished combustible tobacco from e-cigarettes., Methods: Young adult college students (N=341) reporting past-month alcohol and cannabis use "at the same time so that their effects overlapped" completed two 28-day bursts of repeated daily surveys. Exposures were day- and person-level use of each substance. Outcomes were (1) same-day co-use of each remaining substance or (2) poly-use of the other substances., Results: Daily use of alcohol, cannabis, combustible cigarettes, and e-cigarettes increased the odds of same-day co-use of the other substances (except combustible tobacco with e-cigarettes) and each poly-use outcome. The influence of person-level substance use on daily substance use was less consistent. Only e-cigarette use increased the odds of daily alcohol use. Use of either tobacco product but not alcohol increased the odds of daily cannabis use. Person-level alcohol and cannabis use increased the odds of daily use of either tobacco product but use of one tobacco product was not associated with daily use of the other product., Conclusions: These findings increase our understanding of emerging daily patterns of alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco co-use, and the impact of different tobacco products. Future work is needed to extend this research into non-college samples and people who use tobacco but do not use alcohol and cannabis simultaneously, and examine daily chronologies of multiple substances that could serve as dynamic markers of risk., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest There are no interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Co-use of alcohol and cannabis has been associated with more total negative consequences than single-substance use, but results have been mixed depending on whether the single substance was alcohol or cannabis. The present study used within-person analyses to examine whether co-use increased the risk for experiencing specific acute negative consequences., Method: College students who were co-users of alcohol and cannabis ( N = 341; M age = 19.8 years; 51.3% female; 74.8% White) completed 56 days of five daily surveys across two bursts. We used generalized linear mixed effects models to examine the effects of type of substance use day on specific negative consequences, controlling for consumption and covariates., Results: Relative to both alcohol-only and co-use days, cannabis-only days were associated with decreased likelihood of experiencing hangover, blackout, nausea/vomiting, injury, rude/aggressive behavior, and unwanted sex. Relative to alcohol-only days, cannabis-only and co-use days were associated with an increased likelihood of driving high/drunk. Finally, there was an increased likelihood of hangovers on alcohol-only days compared with co-use days., Conclusions: Days with different types of substance use differed in specific consequences. Most of the negative co-use consequences investigated here appear to be driven by alcohol consumption rather than cannabis use. The results also indicated that these young adults were more likely to endorse driving under the influence of cannabis than alcohol. Interventions for co-use should target alcohol consumption to reduce negative consequences such as blackout, injury, rude/aggressive behavior, and unwanted sex and highlight the dangers of driving under the influence of cannabis.

Objective: Impulsivity is an established etiological risk factor for alcohol- and cannabis-related outcomes. However, limited work has focused on longitudinal associations between multiple trait impulsivity facets and indices of alcohol and cannabis use among military veterans-a contextually distinct population that evidence unique impulsive personality traits and substance use patterns., Method: A structural equation model (SEM) examined longitudinal associations between five UPPS-P impulsivity facets measured at baseline and six indices of alcohol and cannabis use (i.e., frequency, quantity, and problems) measured at 1-year follow-up among 361 returning Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation New Dawn (OEF/OIF/OND) veterans., Results: Findings indicated baseline sensation seeking was significantly positively associated with 1-year alcohol use frequency (β = .18); baseline negative urgency was positively associated with alcohol use problems (β = .31); and baseline lack of perseverance (β = .25) and sensation seeking (β = .21) were positively associated with 1-year cannabis use problems. None of the baseline impulsivity facets were associated with 1-year alcohol use quantity, cannabis use frequency, or cannabis use quantity., Conclusions: Results provide preliminary support that impulsivity may play a unique role in understanding alcohol- and cannabis-related problems over time among veterans. Further, results suggest that specific impulsivity facets are prospectively associated with cannabis problems (i.e., lack of perseverance and sensation seeking) and alcohol problems (i.e., negative urgency). Findings reinforce the importance of differentially evaluating impulsivity-substance use associations within contextually distinct populations (e.g., adolescent, veteran), and highlight potentially meaningful intervention targets among veterans. However, replication is needed with stronger temporal controls and more diverse veteran subsamples. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Substance use in young adulthood and polysubstance users (PSU), in particular, pose unique risks for adverse consequences. Prior research on young adult PSU has identified multiple classes of users, but most work has focused on college students. We examined PSU patterns by age and college attendance during young adulthood in two nationally representative samples. Using National Epidemiological Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC) Wave 1 and NESARC-III data sets, multigroup latent class analysis (MG-LCA) was employed to examine PSU patterns based on age (18-24 vs. 25-34) and determine whether solutions were similar (i.e., statistically invariant) by college attendance/graduation. Classes were estimated by binary past-year use of sedatives, tranquilizers, opioids/painkillers, heroin, amphetamines/stimulants, cocaine, hallucinogens, club drugs, and inhalants, and past-year frequency of alcohol, cigarette, and cannabis use. PSU patterns are largely replicated across waves. Model fit supported 3-class solutions in each MG-LCA: Low frequency-limited-range PSU (alcohol, cigarettes, and cannabis only), medium-to-high frequency limited-range PSU (alcohol, cigarettes, and cannabis only), and extended-range PSU (ER PSU; all substances). Apart from one model, MG-LCA solutions were not invariant by college attendance/graduation, suggesting important differences between these groups. Except for alcohol, cannabis, and cigarette use frequency, results showed that probabilities of illicit and prescription drug use declined in the older age group. Findings also supported examining college and noncollege youth separately when studying PSU. ER PSU may be uniquely vulnerable to coingesting substances, particularly for nongraduates, warranting future research to classify patterns of simultaneous PSU and identify predictors and consequences of high-risk combinations (e.g., alcohol and opioids). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: Simultaneous alcohol and cannabis use is common among college students and associated with more consumption and consequences compared to single-substance use. This study examined occasions of simultaneous use and compared planned occasions to unplanned occasions with respect to motives, contexts, consumption, and consequences., Method: College student simultaneous users ( N = 341; 53% women; 74% White) completed five daily surveys for 54 days. Mixed-effects models examined motives and contexts of simultaneous use occasions as a function of whether alcohol and cannabis use were (a) both planned versus (b) unplanned, no use planned, or (c) unplanned, single-substance use planned and whether alcohol and cannabis consumption and negative simultaneous use-related consequences varied across planned versus unplanned occasions., Results: Social and enhancement motives were related to planned simultaneous use; offered and coping motives were associated with planned single-substance use that became simultaneous use (vs. planned simultaneous use). Compared to unplanned use, planned simultaneous use was negatively associated with using at home or alone, and positively associated with using with others, more intoxicated people, and more people using cannabis. Planned simultaneous use was associated with more alcohol and cannabis consumption. No significant differences were found for negative consequences., Conclusions: Planned simultaneous use was motivated by social and enhancement reasons, whereas planned single-substance use that became simultaneous use was more likely motivated by offers or for coping. Planned simultaneous use resulted in greater consumption, but not negative consequences. Results provide specific motives and contexts associated with unplanned and planned simultaneous use to be incorporated into real-time interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Objective: Several studies suggest that alcohol and cannabis co-users are heavier drinkers and experience more alcohol-related consequences. However, day-level associations between co-use and drinking levels are mixed. One reason may be that individual characteristics moderate the daily impact of using alcohol alone or in conjunction with cannabis. The theory would suggest that highly impulsive individuals may drink more on co-use days, yet this assertion remains untested. Therefore, the current study tested whether impulsivity moderated the effect of co-use on same-day drinking quantity within veterans, a high-risk sample for substance use and impulsivity. Method: In a longitudinal observational study, co-using veterans ( N = 139) completed three semi-annual assessments reporting on their daily drinking quantity and cannabis use via Timeline Followback ( Observations = 19,245) and impulsivity via the UPPS-P. Mixed effect modeling was used to test hypotheses that co-use (compared to alcohol-only) days would be associated with heavier drinking for those high (but not low) in positive and negative urgency. Results: Significant interactions were found for positive urgency (PU) and lack of perseverance (LP), such that individuals at mean and low levels of PU and LP drank less on co-use (compared to alcohol-only) days. There were no significant interactions for other UPPS-P impulsivity facets. Conclusion: Findings are consistent with a substitution/compensatory effect for individuals at mean and low levels of both UPPS-P facets, and may be a byproduct of frequent cannabis use in veterans. In contrast, findings suggest that co-use and alcohol-only days may be characterized by similarly high levels of drinking for highly impulsive individuals. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

College students who use alcohol and marijuana often use them simultaneously, so that their effects overlap. The present study examined whether negative consequences experienced by simultaneous alcohol and marijuana (SAM) users vary from those experienced by individuals who use alcohol and marijuana concurrently but not simultaneously (CAM) or single-substance users. We considered 9 types of consequences: cognitive, blackout, vomiting, academic/occupational, social, self-care, physical dependence, risky behaviors, and driving under the influence (DUI). Further, we examined whether consequences experienced by SAM users are attributed to using alcohol, marijuana, or both simultaneously. The sample included past-year alcohol and marijuana users age 18-24 (N = 1,390; 62% female; 69% White; 12% Hispanic) recruited from 3 U.S. college campuses. SAM users experienced a greater overall number of consequences than CAM or alcohol-only users, even controlling for frequency and intensity of alcohol and marijuana use and potentially confounding psychosocial and sociodemographic factors. Experiencing specific consequences differed between simultaneous and concurrent users, but after adjusting for consumption and other covariates, only blackouts differed. In contrast, SAM users were more likely to experience each consequence than alcohol-only users, with strongest effects for DUI, blackouts, and cognitive consequences. Among SAM users, consequences were most likely to be attributed to alcohol and were rarely attributed to simultaneous use. Being a user of both alcohol and marijuana and using alcohol and marijuana together so that their effects overlap each contribute to risk, suggesting there is value in targeting the mechanisms underlying type of user as well as those underlying type of use. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Previous studies have demonstrated that working memory capacity plays a central role in delay discounting in people with externalizing psychopathology. These studies used a hyperbolic discounting model, and its single parameter-a measure of delay discounting-was estimated using the standard method of searching for indifference points between intertemporal options. However, there are several problems with this approach. First, the deterministic perspective on delay discounting underlying the indifference point method might be inappropriate. Second, the estimation procedure using the R2 measure often leads to poor model fit. Third, when parameters are estimated using indifference points only, much of the information collected in a delay discounting decision task is wasted. To overcome these problems, this article proposes a random utility model of delay discounting. The proposed model has 2 parameters, 1 for delay discounting and 1 for choice variability. It was fit to choice data obtained from a recently published data set using both maximum-likelihood and Bayesian parameter estimation. As in previous studies, the delay discounting parameter was significantly associated with both externalizing problems and working memory capacity. Furthermore, choice variability was also found to be significantly associated with both variables. This finding suggests that randomness in decisions may be a mechanism by which externalizing problems and low working memory capacity are associated with poor decision making. The random utility model thus has the advantage of disclosing the role of choice variability, which had been masked by the traditional deterministic model. (PsycINFO Database Record, ((c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).)