Implications of Cannabis Legalization on University Student’s Cannabis Use and Associated Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent legalization of recreational cannabis use in Canada suggests that minimal research exists regarding post-legalization trends in cannabis consumption and related outcomes with usage. The purpose of this study was to examine trends in cannabis use, motives to use, and related psychosocial and academic outcomes of usage among students at the University of Saskatchewan. Four hundred and seventy-eight students who had used cannabis in the last six months, ages 18 to 55 years (mean age = 25.02, SD = 5.95) completed a battery of measures designed to examine cannabis use severity and associated constructs (i.e., substance use risk, personal well-being, non-specific psychological distress, academic behaviors, and motivations for use). Among the participants, 31% (n = 148) were found to be hazardous users. Results demonstrated significant small negative associations between cannabis use severity and academic behaviors, personal well-being, and age onset of use, as well as significant positive small associations between cannabis use severity and psychological distress, substance use risk, and all recreational and medicinal motives except for the conformity motive. Hazardous users more often used cannabis for all of the motives, except for the conformity and CNS motives, than non-hazardous users. Lastly, using cannabis for enhancement, coping, expansion, sleep difficulties, and conformity purposes, as well as having impulsive personality traits were found to be important predictors of cannabis use severity, with the enhancement motive identified as the strongest predictor. The small effect sizes found may suggest that legalization has impacted the demographic of cannabis users, with initiatives potentially acting as protective factors against the typical associates of use. Information gleaned from this study can inform prevention and treatment options and the development of campus guidelines for safe cannabis use.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".