Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2025
Cannabinoid content on product labels influences cannabis health perceptions.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Stanz Joshua L, Ladd Benjamin O, Magnan Renee E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cannabis use in the United States is increasing and research is needed to understand factors contributing to decisions to use. Features of cannabis product labels communicating product content may influence health perceptions and willingness to use.
PURPOSE: We tested how individuals who use cannabis respond to different cannabinoid content and the inclusion of a visual aid to communicate cannabinoid potency.
METHOD: We used a 3 (within-subjects: THC-dominant, CBD-dominant, and equal THC:CBD ratio) × 2 (between-subjects: numeric information vs numeric information plus visual aid) mixed experimental design administered online through Prolific.com. Participants (N = 431) evaluated cannabis product packages on perceived health harms and benefits and likelihood to purchase and use cannabis.
RESULTS: Relative to other products, CBD-dominant products were evaluated as least harmful, most beneficial, and least likely to purchase or use (all Ps < 005; ds 0.10-0.68) while THC-dominant products were evaluated as most harmful, least beneficial, and most likely to purchase and use (all Ps < .02; ds 0.11-0.68). Perceptions did not vary based on the inclusion of a visual aid (Ps > .10). In a parallel mediation model, cannabinoid content was indirectly associated with likelihood to use through perceived benefits (b = -.14, CI = -.22, -.07) but not perceived harms (b = -.01, CI = -.04, .07).
CONCLUSIONS: Communicating about cannabinoid content could have intended and unintended consequences. Cannabinoid content contributed to product health perceptions and willingness to purchase and use; visual depictions of cannabinoid content did not. Perceived benefits of cannabis could be a valuable intervention target to reduce potential harm.
PURPOSE: We tested how individuals who use cannabis respond to different cannabinoid content and the inclusion of a visual aid to communicate cannabinoid potency.
METHOD: We used a 3 (within-subjects: THC-dominant, CBD-dominant, and equal THC:CBD ratio) × 2 (between-subjects: numeric information vs numeric information plus visual aid) mixed experimental design administered online through Prolific.com. Participants (N = 431) evaluated cannabis product packages on perceived health harms and benefits and likelihood to purchase and use cannabis.
RESULTS: Relative to other products, CBD-dominant products were evaluated as least harmful, most beneficial, and least likely to purchase or use (all Ps < 005; ds 0.10-0.68) while THC-dominant products were evaluated as most harmful, least beneficial, and most likely to purchase and use (all Ps < .02; ds 0.11-0.68). Perceptions did not vary based on the inclusion of a visual aid (Ps > .10). In a parallel mediation model, cannabinoid content was indirectly associated with likelihood to use through perceived benefits (b = -.14, CI = -.22, -.07) but not perceived harms (b = -.01, CI = -.04, .07).
CONCLUSIONS: Communicating about cannabinoid content could have intended and unintended consequences. Cannabinoid content contributed to product health perceptions and willingness to purchase and use; visual depictions of cannabinoid content did not. Perceived benefits of cannabis could be a valuable intervention target to reduce potential harm.