Attitudes toward driving after cannabis are mixed but generally negative
A systematic review of 70 studies found attitudes toward driving after cannabis use are predominantly negative but mixed, with youth, men, and frequent users viewing it more favorably, and perceived risk of getting caught remaining low.
Quick Facts
What This Study Found
Six themes emerged: (1) attitudes are mixed (35 studies negative, 20 studies with opposing views); (2) youth, men, and frequent users view DACU more favorably; (3) attitudes predict past and intended DACU; (4) DACU viewed more favorably than drunk driving; (5) relationship with legalization unclear; (6) perceived apprehension risk is low to moderate.
Key Numbers
70 studies from 7 countries (primarily US and Canada). 35 studies: predominantly negative attitudes. 20 studies: opposing/favorable views. DACU consistently viewed as less risky than drunk driving.
How They Did This
Systematic review searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and TRID through February 2024. 70 studies from 7 countries analyzed using inductive thematic synthesis.
Why This Research Matters
Attitudes predict behavior. Understanding who views cannabis-impaired driving favorably and why can help design targeted prevention campaigns, particularly for young males and frequent cannabis users.
The Bigger Picture
The finding that cannabis-impaired driving is consistently seen as less dangerous than drunk driving, combined with low perceived risk of getting caught, creates a permissive environment for DACU. This may explain why cannabis-related traffic incidents are increasing post-legalization.
What This Study Doesn't Tell Us
Heterogeneous study designs and attitude measures. Predominantly US/Canada data. Attitudes may not directly translate to behavior. Cannot assess actual driving impairment from attitude data.
Questions This Raises
- ?Would increasing enforcement visibility change perceived apprehension risk?
- ?Do attitude-change campaigns reduce cannabis-impaired driving?
- ?Should messaging compare cannabis impairment to alcohol impairment?
Trust & Context
- Key Stat:
- DACU viewed as less risky than drunk driving
- Evidence Grade:
- Comprehensive systematic review of 70 studies across 7 countries provides strong synthesis, but heterogeneous measures limit precise conclusions.
- Study Age:
- 2024 systematic review searching through February 2024
- Original Title:
- Attitudes toward driving after cannabis use: a systematic review.
- Published In:
- Journal of cannabis research, 6(1), 37 (2024)
- Authors:
- Boicu, Bianca, Al-Hakim, Durr, Yuan, Yue, Brubacher, Jeffrey
- Database ID:
- RTHC-05149
Evidence Hierarchy
Frequently Asked Questions
Do people think driving after cannabis is dangerous?
Attitudes are mixed. About half the studies found predominantly negative views (it is dangerous), but many others found favorable views, especially among young men and frequent cannabis users.
Is driving after cannabis seen as safer than driving after alcohol?
Consistently, yes. Across multiple studies, people viewed cannabis-impaired driving as less risky than driving after drinking alcohol, even though both increase crash risk.
Read More on RethinkTHC
Cite This Study
https://rethinkthc.com/research/RTHC-05149APA
Boicu, Bianca; Al-Hakim, Durr; Yuan, Yue; Brubacher, Jeffrey. (2024). Attitudes toward driving after cannabis use: a systematic review.. Journal of cannabis research, 6(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42238-024-00240-0
MLA
Boicu, Bianca, et al. "Attitudes toward driving after cannabis use: a systematic review.." Journal of cannabis research, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42238-024-00240-0
RethinkTHC
RethinkTHC Research Database. "Attitudes toward driving after cannabis use: a systematic re..." RTHC-05149. Retrieved from https://rethinkthc.com/research/boicu-2024-attitudes-toward-driving-after
Access the Original Study
Study data sourced from PubMed, a service of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
This study breakdown was produced by the RethinkTHC research team. We analyze and report published research findings without making health recommendations. All interpretations are based solely on the published abstract and study data.