Social network norms predicted cannabis use frequency in young adults
Young adults whose social networks included more cannabis users tended to use more frequently, with this effect being stronger for recreational users than medicinal users.
Quick Facts
What This Study Found
Descriptive norms (how much one's social contacts use cannabis) were associated with more frequent cannabis use (aIRR 1.19), but not with problematic use. The effect was stronger for recreationally oriented users (aIRR 1.62) than medicinally oriented users (aIRR 1.22).
Key Numbers
339 participants (182 medical patients, 157 nonpatients). Descriptive norms associated with use frequency (aIRR 1.19). Recreational users: aIRR 1.62. Medicinal users: aIRR 1.22. No association with problematic use.
How They Did This
Cross-sectional survey of 339 young adult cannabis users (182 medical patients, 157 nonpatients) in Los Angeles (2015-2016). Regression models examined associations between egocentric network characteristics and past-90-day cannabis use.
Why This Research Matters
Understanding how social environments influence cannabis use patterns can inform prevention and harm reduction strategies for young adults.
The Bigger Picture
The finding that social norms influenced frequency but not problematic use suggests that being around other users increases consumption but does not necessarily lead to dependency or problems.
What This Study Doesn't Tell Us
Cross-sectional design limits causal claims. Los Angeles sample may not generalize. Self-reported cannabis use and network composition.
Questions This Raises
- ?Do medicinal users self-regulate against social pressure?
- ?Would interventions targeting social norms reduce cannabis consumption among recreational users?
Trust & Context
- Key Stat:
- Recreational users 62% more influenced by peer cannabis norms
- Evidence Grade:
- Cross-sectional survey with moderate sample size. Cannot determine direction of causation between social norms and use patterns.
- Study Age:
- Published in 2022 with data from 2015-2016.
- Original Title:
- Egocentric Network Characteristics and Cannabis Use in a Sample of Young Adult Medical Cannabis Patients and Nonpatient Users.
- Published In:
- Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 83(6), 802-811 (2022)
- Authors:
- DiGuiseppi, Graham T, Fedorova, Ekaterina V(12), Lankenau, Stephen E(16), Davis, Jordan P, Wong, Carolyn F
- Database ID:
- RTHC-03809
Evidence Hierarchy
A snapshot of a population at one point in time.
What do these levels mean? →Frequently Asked Questions
Did peer cannabis use lead to problematic use?
No. While being around more cannabis users was linked to higher frequency of use, it was not associated with problematic or disordered cannabis use.
Why were recreational users more influenced by peers?
Medicinal users may have more structured, self-regulated use patterns driven by symptom management, making them less responsive to social pressure to use.
Read More on RethinkTHC
Cite This Study
https://rethinkthc.com/research/RTHC-03809APA
DiGuiseppi, Graham T; Fedorova, Ekaterina V; Lankenau, Stephen E; Davis, Jordan P; Wong, Carolyn F. (2022). Egocentric Network Characteristics and Cannabis Use in a Sample of Young Adult Medical Cannabis Patients and Nonpatient Users.. Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 83(6), 802-811. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.21-00286
MLA
DiGuiseppi, Graham T, et al. "Egocentric Network Characteristics and Cannabis Use in a Sample of Young Adult Medical Cannabis Patients and Nonpatient Users.." Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 2022. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.21-00286
RethinkTHC
RethinkTHC Research Database. "Egocentric Network Characteristics and Cannabis Use in a Sam..." RTHC-03809. Retrieved from https://rethinkthc.com/research/diguiseppi-2022-egocentric-network-characteristics-and
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.