Assessment of Impaired Control Over Cannabis Consumption: Psychometric Properties of the Impaired Control Scale-Cannabis (ICS-C)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Impaired control over substance use is a construct that is central to addiction and appears to play an early role in the development of addictive behaviors. The Impaired Control Scale (ICS) was developed to measure impaired control over alcohol, which has been associated with problem drinking and alcohol-related problems in young adults. However, there is relatively less research regarding impaired control over cannabis, and currently there is a lack of a comprehensive and valid scale that specifically measures this construct. This study addresses this gap in the literature by introducing the Impaired Control Scale-Cannabis (ICS-C), an adaptation of the ICS designed to measure impaired control over cannabis. We conducted a preliminary examination of the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the ICS-C. Methods: An online survey was administered to introductory psychology students (N=362; 63% women; 66% White, mean age=19.91) at two Canadian Universities who reported using cannabis at least once in the past month (average frequency = 9.34 days; SD = 9.60). All participants completed the ICS and ICS-C along with measures of cannabis use and problems, including the Impaired Control subscale of the Marijuana Consequences Questionnaire (MACQ-IC). A subset of participants completed additional measures of impulsivity and self-regulation. Results: An exploratory factor analysis (EFA, with an oblique rotation) of the 25 items of the ICS-C yielded 3 factors, one of which was comprised solely of reverse keyed items (despite reverse coding items prior to the EFA). These items were trimmed from the measure and the EFA was rerun. Two factors emerged: Attempted Control (i.e., frequency of attempts to control cannabis use) and a factor comprised of items assessing both Failed Control (i.e., unsuccessful attempts in limiting cannabis use) and Perceived Control (i.e., beliefs about the ability to control cannabis use in the future). Given that the Failed and Perceived Control items unexpectedly loaded on the same factor, suggesting high redundancy in the concepts of Failed and Perceived control, the items assessing Perceived Control were dropped from subsequent analyses. The final solution consisted of two factors, Attempted Control (alpha=0.96) and Failed control (alpha=0.88). High correlations between the MACQ-IC and ICS-C Attempted Control (r=0.42, p<.001) and Failed Control (r=0.67, p<.001) scales provided evidence for convergent validity. Weaker correlations between ICS (alcohol version) and ICS-C Attempted Control (r=0.36, p<.001) and Failed Control (r=0.34, p<.001) scales supported discriminant validity. Concurrent validity was demonstrated based on the moderate and statistically significant correlations of the ICS-C Failed Control subscale and frequency of cannabis use (r=0.47, p<.001) and grams of cannabis used (r=0.44, p<.001). Additional evidence for concurrent and discriminant validity were also found in the patterns of correlations between the ICS-C subscales and measures of impulsivity and self-regulation. Conclusions: ICS-C is a promising tool that can be used to assess impaired control over cannabis in young adults. Future research should confirm the factor structure of the ICS-C and examine its utility to screen for impaired control in the context of prevention and early intervention for cannabis-related problems.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».