A cross-cultural fMRI investigation of cannabis approach bias in individuals with cannabis use disorder

Q1 Psychology
Lauren Kuhns , Emese Kroon , Francesca Filbey , Janna Cousijn
{"title":"A cross-cultural fMRI investigation of cannabis approach bias in individuals with cannabis use disorder","authors":"Lauren Kuhns ,&nbsp;Emese Kroon ,&nbsp;Francesca Filbey ,&nbsp;Janna Cousijn","doi":"10.1016/j.abrep.2023.100507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>As cannabis policies and attitudes become more permissive, it is crucial to examine how the legal and social environment influence neurocognitive mechanisms underlying cannabis use disorder (CUD). The current study aimed to assess whether cannabis approach bias, one of the mechanisms proposed to underlie CUD, differed between environments with distinct recreational cannabis policies (Amsterdam, The Netherlands (NL) and Dallas, Texas, United States of America (TX)) and whether individual differences in cannabis attitudes affect those differences.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Individuals with CUD (NL-CUD: 64; TX-CUD: 48) and closely matched non-using controls (NL-CON: 50; TX-CON: 36) completed a cannabis approach avoidance task (CAAT) in a 3T MRI. The cannabis culture questionnaire was used to measure cannabis attitudes from three perspectives: personal, family/friends, and state/country attitudes.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Individuals with CUD demonstrated a significant behavioral cannabis-specific approach bias. Individuals with CUD exhibited higher cannabis approach bias-related activity in clusters including the paracingulate gyrus, anterior cingulate cortex, and frontal medial cortex compared to controls, which was no longer significant after controlling for gender. Site-related differences emerged in the association between cannabis use quantity and cannabis approach bias activity in the putamen, amygdala, hippocampus, and insula, with a positive association in the TX-CUD group and a negative association in the NL-CUD group. This was not explained by site differences in cannabis attitudes.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Pinpointing the underlying mechanisms of site-related differences—including, but not limited to, differences in method of administration, cannabis potency, or patterns of substance co-use—is a key challenge for future research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":38040,"journal":{"name":"Addictive Behaviors Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0a/96/main.PMC10359718.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addictive Behaviors Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352853223000299","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

As cannabis policies and attitudes become more permissive, it is crucial to examine how the legal and social environment influence neurocognitive mechanisms underlying cannabis use disorder (CUD). The current study aimed to assess whether cannabis approach bias, one of the mechanisms proposed to underlie CUD, differed between environments with distinct recreational cannabis policies (Amsterdam, The Netherlands (NL) and Dallas, Texas, United States of America (TX)) and whether individual differences in cannabis attitudes affect those differences.

Methods

Individuals with CUD (NL-CUD: 64; TX-CUD: 48) and closely matched non-using controls (NL-CON: 50; TX-CON: 36) completed a cannabis approach avoidance task (CAAT) in a 3T MRI. The cannabis culture questionnaire was used to measure cannabis attitudes from three perspectives: personal, family/friends, and state/country attitudes.

Results

Individuals with CUD demonstrated a significant behavioral cannabis-specific approach bias. Individuals with CUD exhibited higher cannabis approach bias-related activity in clusters including the paracingulate gyrus, anterior cingulate cortex, and frontal medial cortex compared to controls, which was no longer significant after controlling for gender. Site-related differences emerged in the association between cannabis use quantity and cannabis approach bias activity in the putamen, amygdala, hippocampus, and insula, with a positive association in the TX-CUD group and a negative association in the NL-CUD group. This was not explained by site differences in cannabis attitudes.

Conclusions

Pinpointing the underlying mechanisms of site-related differences—including, but not limited to, differences in method of administration, cannabis potency, or patterns of substance co-use—is a key challenge for future research.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

大麻使用障碍个体大麻接近偏向的跨文化fMRI研究
引言随着大麻政策和态度变得更加宽容,研究法律和社会环境如何影响大麻使用障碍(CUD)的神经认知机制至关重要。目前的研究旨在评估大麻方法偏见(CUD的机制之一)在具有不同娱乐性大麻政策的环境(荷兰阿姆斯特丹和美利坚合众国得克萨斯州达拉斯)之间是否存在差异,以及大麻态度的个体差异是否会影响这些差异。方法CUD患者(NL-CUD:64;TX-CUD:48)和密切匹配的非使用对照组(NL-CON:50;TX-CON:36)在3T MRI中完成大麻接近回避任务(CAAT)。大麻文化问卷用于从三个角度衡量大麻态度:个人、家人/朋友和州/国家态度。结果CUD患者表现出显著的大麻行为特异性方法偏倚。与对照组相比,CUD患者在包括扣带旁回、前扣带皮层和额内侧皮层在内的集群中表现出更高的大麻接近偏差相关活动,这在控制性别后不再显著。在壳核、杏仁核、海马体和脑岛中,大麻使用量与大麻接近偏向活动之间的关联出现了与位点相关的差异,TX-CUD组为正关联,NL-CUD小组为负关联。这并不能用大麻态度的地点差异来解释。结论指出位点相关差异的潜在机制——包括但不限于给药方法、大麻效力或物质共同使用模式的差异——是未来研究的一个关键挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Addictive Behaviors Reports
Addictive Behaviors Reports Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: Addictive Behaviors Reports is an open-access and peer reviewed online-only journal offering an interdisciplinary forum for the publication of research in addictive behaviors. The journal accepts submissions that are scientifically sound on all forms of addictive behavior (alcohol, drugs, gambling, Internet, nicotine and technology) with a primary focus on behavioral and psychosocial research. The emphasis of the journal is primarily empirical. That is, sound experimental design combined with valid, reliable assessment and evaluation procedures are a requisite for acceptance. We are particularly interested in ''non-traditional'', innovative and empirically oriented research such as negative/null data papers, replication studies, case reports on novel treatments, and cross-cultural research. Studies that might encourage new lines of inquiry as well as scholarly commentaries on topical issues, systematic reviews, and mini reviews are also very much encouraged. We also welcome multimedia submissions that incorporate video or audio components to better display methodology or findings.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信