By Charles A. Warnock, Ashlin R. Ondrusek, E. Jennifer Edelman, Trace Kershaw, Jessica L. Muilenburg

Cannabis use is increasingly pervasive throughout the U.S. People in treatment for substance use disorders (SUD) may be especially at-risk of harm due to this changing context of cannabis in the U.S. This study’s objective was to qualitatively describe experiences and beliefs around cannabis among people who had entered treatment for any SUD in the past 12-months.

Methods

From May to November of 2022, we conducted 27 semi-structured interviews (n=16 in Georgia, n=11 in Connecticut) with individuals in treatment for SUD in Georgia and Connecticut. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed using an emergent approach.

Results

All participants had used cannabis in the past. Four themes emerged from the interviews. Participants: (1) perceived cannabis as an important contributor to non- cannabis substance use initiation in adolescence; (2) viewed cannabis as a substance with the potential to improve health with fewer side effects than prescription medications; (3) expressed conflicting opinions regarding cannabis as a trigger or tool to manage cravings for other non-cannabis substances currently; and 4) described concerns related to negative legal, social service, and treatment-related consequences as well as negative peer perception relating to the use of cannabis.

Conclusion

Although participants described cannabis’s important role as an initiatory drug in adolescence and young adulthood, many felt that cannabis was a medicinal substance for a range of health problems. These findings suggest SUD treatment clinicians should address medicinal beliefs related to cannabis among their clients and emphasizes the need for research on cannabis use and SUD treatment outcomes.

Drug and Alcohol Dependence Reports. Online First, March 2024

By Matt Vogel and Steven F. Messner

Group threat theory has stimulated an impressive number of studies over the course of the past several decades. Our review takes stock of this literature, focusing on core issues of concern to the criminological community. We begin by documenting the theoretical origins of group threat theory and discussing the early research informed by the theory. We then highlight the ways in which criminologists have built on and extended the early research by expanding the theory's scope, clarifying mechanisms, and addressing methodological issues. In our concluding remarks, we direct attention to the more consequential limitations of the work to date and offer suggestions about areas for fruitful growth in the future

Annual Review of Criminology, Volume 7, Page 39 - 58

By  Aaron Erlich, Jordan Gans-Morse, and Simeon Nichter

  Corruption often persists not only because public officials take bribes, but also because many citizens are willing to pay them. Yet even in countries with endemic corruption, few people always pay bribes. Why do citizens bribe in some situations but not in others? Integrating insights from both principal-agent and collective action approaches to the study of corruption, the authors develop an analytical framework for understanding selective bribery. Their framework reveals how citizens’ motivations, costs, and risks influence their willingness to engage in corruption. A conjoint experiment conducted in Ukraine in 2020 provides substantial corroboration for 10 of 11 pre-registered predictions. By shedding light on conditions that dampen citizens’ readiness to pay bribes, the researchers’ findings offer insights into the types of institutional reforms that may reduce corruption. 

Evanston, IL: Northwestern University, Institute for Policy Research, Working Paper-22-28, 2022. 55p