A Cannabis Crossroads: The Impact of Risk Interpretation on Cannabis-Related Behaviors Among Canadian Youth
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attitudes toward cannabis in Canada are continually shifting, leaving youth vulnerable as they navigate the pre- to post-legalization context. Using the Youth Risk Interpretation (Y-RIF) conceptual framework, our research aimed to explore youth’s interpretation of cannabis-related risks and gather insight into how this dynamic contextual shift influences their decisions. A qualitative study used a series of virtual focus groups with youth ( N = 38; M = 15) living in urban and rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador that were facilitated by young adults in 2021. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used to code all transcripts, and the identification of themes was informed by the Y-RIF. Our thematic analysis highlights the multitude of contextual factors (e.g., developmental, social, cultural, neurocognitive, geographical, and structural) that influence youths’ perceptions of cannabis-related risks, which in turn impact their cannabis-related decisions. Youths’ exposure to various circumstances, coupled with their internalization of contextual factors, interplay with cognitive processes, personal preferences, and agency. Consequently, this influenced how youth interpreted the risks associated with cannabis and their behaviors. Understanding youths’ risk perception and underlying factors that contribute to unsafe decisions will inform targeted substance use and mental health literacy efforts for youth.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it