You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A biosocial cognitive model of cannabis use in emerging adulthood
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Addictive Behaviors, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.08.011 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zoe E. Papinczak, Jason P. Connor, Paul Harnett, Matthew J. Gullo |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to test a new theoretical model of cannabis use incorporating biologically-based personality traits and social cognition. This biosocial cognitive theory (bSCT) has robust support in alcohol studies, but has not been applied to cannabis. The model proposes two pathways linking dimensions of impulsivity to cannabis use. The first predicts that the association between Reward Sensitivity (SR) and cannabis use is mediated by positive outcome expectancies. The second predicts that the relationship between Rash Impulsiveness (RI) and cannabis use is mediated by cannabis refusal self-efficacy. An extended version of this model was also tested and included a third pathway linking Punishment Sensitivity (SP) to cannabis use via higher negative outcome expectancies. Participants were 252 18-to-21-year-olds who completed questionnaires assessing cannabis use, personality and social cognition. Theoretical models were tested using structural equation modeling. The bSCT model provided a good fit to the data (CFI=0.95; RMSEA=0.07; SRMR=0.06). Positive cannabis expectancies and refusal self-efficacy partially mediated the association between SR and cannabis use (p<0.05). Cannabis refusal self-efficacy fully mediated the relationship between RI and cannabis use (p<0.05). The addition of a third SP pathway did not improve model fit. Consistent with alcohol studies, the association between impulsivity and cannabis use is largely mediated by social cognition. The bSCT may provide novel insights to inform prevention and treatment of problematic cannabis use. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 90 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 12% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 25 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 39 | 43% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 29 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 August 2017.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Addictive Behaviors
#3,245
of 4,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,453
of 326,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Addictive Behaviors
#63
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,432 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,939 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.