Article contents
Residual Effects of Cannabis Use on Effort-Based Decision-Making
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 July 2021
Abstract
Acute Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) administration in humans (Lawn etal., 2016) and rats (Silveira, Adams, Morena, Hill, & Winstanley, 2016) has been associated with decreased effort allocation that may explain amotivation during acute cannabis intoxication. To date, however, whether residual effects of cannabis use on effort-based decision-making are present and observable in humans have not yet been determined. The goal of this study was to test whether prolonged cannabis use has residual effects on effort-based decision-making in 24-hr abstinent cannabis using adults.
We evaluated performance on the Effort Expenditure for Reward Task (EEfRT) in 41 adult cannabis users (mean age = 24.63 years, 21 males) and 45 nonusers (mean age = 23.90 years, 19 males). A mixed 2x3x3 ANOVA with age as a covariate was performed to examine the effect of group, probability of winning, and reward amount on EEfRT performance. EEfRT performance was operationalized as % of trials for which the hard (vs. easy) condition was chosen. Pearson’s correlations were conducted to test the relationship between EEfRT performance and measures of cannabis use, anhedonia and motivation.
We found that cannabis users selected hard trials significantly more than nonusers regardless of win probability or reward level. Frequency of cannabis use was positively correlated with amount of % hard trials chosen. There were no significant correlations between % hard trials chosen, self-reported anhedonia, or motivation.
These results suggest that unlike acute effects, residual effects of cannabis following 24 hrs of abstinence are associated with greater effort allocation during effort-based decision-making.
Keywords
- Type
- Regular Research
- Information
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 27 , Special Issue 6: Clarifying the Complexities of Cannabis and Cognition , July 2021 , pp. 559 - 569
- Copyright
- Copyright © INS. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2021
References
REFERENCES
- 4
- Cited by