A comparison of delay discounting in adolescents and adults in treatment for cannabis use disorders.

Abstract

Delay discounting is associated with problematic substance use and poorer treatment outcomes in adolescents and adults with substance use disorders. Although some research has addressed delay discounting among individuals with cannabis use disorders (CUD), results have been equivocal and no study has examined whether discounting rates differ between adolescent and adult cannabis users. The aim of this study was to compare discounting rates between adolescents and adults in treatment for CUD in order to determine whether discounting at intake or changes in discounting across treatment differed between age groups. Participants were 165 adolescents and 104 adults enrolled in treatment for CUD. Participants completed a delay discounting task at intake and end of treatment for two commodities (money and cannabis) at two different magnitudes ($100 and $1000). Repeated measures mixed models examined differences in discounting rates by commodity and magnitude across age groups at intake, and changes in discounting across treatment. At intake, adolescents discounted money more than adults, while adults showed greater discounting at $100 magnitude than $1000. In addition, adults had greater decreases in discounting of cannabis over the course of treatment. Overall, adolescents appeared less sensitive to changes in magnitude of rewards, discounted money at higher rates, and showed less improvement in discounting over the course of treatment compared to adults. Comparing delay discounting in adolescents and adults with CUD can contribute to a better understanding of how development influences the impact of discounting on substance use in order to better inform treatment for substance use disorders.

Age-related differences in the impact of cannabis use on the brain and cognition: a systematic review

“…Lee et al [31] discovered that adolescents, compared to adults, in outpatient therapy for CUDs showed a smaller reduction in bias toward immediate, smaller cannabis and monetary rewards from pre to post treatment, as measured by a delay discounting task. Adolescents and adults both showed decreased reductions in bias towards cannabis compared to money from pre to post treatment, suggesting no age-related differences in delay discounting based on the type of reward presented.…”

“…Adolescents and adults both showed decreased reductions in bias towards cannabis compared to money from pre to post treatment, suggesting no age-related differences in delay discounting based on the type of reward presented. These results suggest that adolescents with CUDs, compared to adults, exhibit less positive change in impulsive responding to cannabis and money from pre to post-treatment [31]. Lastly, although not one of their central questions, Albertella et al [32] cross-sectional study analyzed the effect of continuous age (15–24 years old) by cannabis use frequency, defined as less than once a week or more than once a week over the past 6 months, on the ability to detect relevant targets amongst distracting stimuli in a location-based negative priming task.…”

“…Lee et al [31] study was classified as weak level of causality. Adolescents showed a smaller decrease in bias toward immediate cannabis-related and monetary rewards from pre to post treatment.…”

Age and impulsive behavior in drug addiction: A review of past research and future directions

“…One study directly compared delay discounting between adolescents (mean age = 15.8, SD = 1.3) and young-to-middle adults (mean age = 34, SD = 10.2) in drug use treatment (Lee, Stanger, & Budney, 2015). In this study, discounting rates of the two age groups in two types of rewards were compared (i.e., commodity (money and cannabis) and the magnitude of the monetary reward).…”

“Cognitive, emotion control, and motor performance of adolescents in the NCANDA study: Contributions from alcohol consumption, age, sex, ethnicity, and family history of addiction”: Correction to Sullivan et al. (2016).

“…The delay rate, lnk, was calculated for each of the 2 values and each of the 4 delays, yielding 8 total variables. Subjects who had an indifference point 20% or larger than the previous point were excluded (Lee, Stanger, & Budney, 2015). Data for the two monetary conditions ($100 and $1000) were first analyzed separately and then those subjects who had valid data for both values were analyzed together to determine the effect of the monetary value.…”