Use of Cognitive Enhancement Medication Among Northern Italian University Students

Castaldi, Silvana; Gelatti, Umberto; Orizio, Grazia; Hartung, Uwe; Moreno-Londono, Ana Maria; Nobile, M.; Schulz, Peter

doi:10.1097/adm.0b013e3182479584

Cited by 51 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A combined measure of pharmaceuticals, illicit drugs, and caffeine tablets revealed a prevalence of 20% also among German students aiming to enhance cognitive performance [16]. A similar rate (16%) was found in a small-scale study among Italian students without reporting the type of substance used [17]. However, the authors assume that a reasonable share refers to OTC drugs.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Impact of Contextual Factors and Substance Characteristics on Perspectives toward Cognitive Enhancement

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Enhancing cognitive performance with substances–especially prescription drugs–is a fiercely debated topic among scholars and in the media. The empirical basis for these discussions is limited, given that the actual nature of factors that influence the acceptability of and willingness to use cognitive enhancement substances remains unclear. In an online factorial survey, contextual and substance-specific characteristics of substances that improve academic performance were varied experimentally and presented to respondents. Students in four German universities rated their willingness to use and moral acceptance of different substances for cognitive enhancement. We found that the overall willingness to use performance enhancing substances is low. Most respondents considered the use of these substances as morally unacceptable. Situational influences such as peer pressure, policies concerning substance use, relative performance level of peers, but also characteristics of the substance, such as perceptions of substance safety, shape the willingness and acceptability of using a substance to enhance academic performance. Among the findings is evidence of a contagion effect meaning that the willingness was higher when the respondents have more CE drug users in their social network. We also found deterrence effects from strong side effects of using the substance, as well as from policy regulations and sanctions. Regulations might activate social norms against usage and sanctions can be seen as costly to users. Moreover, enhancement substances seem to be most tempting to low performers to catch up with others compared to high performers. By identifying contextual factors and substance characteristics influencing the willingness and acceptability of cognitive enhancers, policy approaches could consider these insights to better manage the use of such substances.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Impact of Contextual Factors and Substance Characteristics on Perspectives toward Cognitive Enhancement

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies on CE found large differences in prevalence rates for CE use ranging from > 1 – 20% among students [10-19]. Using the Randomized Response Technique (RRT) which guarantees an especially high degree of privacy, anonymity, and confidentiality, we found in German students a one-year prevalence rate of 20.0% for the use of “pharmaceuticals or illegal drugs which you cannot buy in a drug-store and which were not prescribed to you to treat a disease”.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attitudes towards prescribing cognitive enhancers among primary care physicians in Germany

Franke

Papenburg²,

Schotten³

et al. 2014

BMC Fam Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPrimary care physicians are gate keepers to the medical system having a key role in giving information and prescribing drugs to their patients. In this respect they are involved in claims of patients/clients for pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement (CE). Therefore, we studied the knowledge of primary care physicians about CE and their attitudes toward prescribing CE drugs to healthy subjects.MethodsA self-report paper-and-pencil questionnaire and case vignettes describing a hypothetical CE drug were sent out to all 2,753 registered primary care physicians in Rhineland Palatine, Germany. 832, i.e. 30.2% filled in the questionnaire anonymously.Results96.0% of all participating physicians had already heard about CE. However, only 5.3% stated to be very familiar with this subject and 43.5% judged themselves as being not familiar with CE. 7.0% had been asked by their clients to prescribe a drug for CE during the last week, 19.0% during the last month, and 40.8% during the last year. The comfort level to prescribe CE drugs was very low and significantly lower than to prescribe sildenafil (Viagra®). Comfort level was mainly affected by the age of the client asking for prescription of CE drugs, followed by the availability of non-pharmacological alternatives, fear of misuse of the prescribed drug by the client and the missing indication of prescribing a drug.ConclusionsAlthough a relatively high proportion of primary care physicians have been asked by their clients to prescribe CE drugs, only a small proportion are well informed about the possibilities of CE. Since physicians are gate keepers to the medical system and have a key role regarding a drugs’ prescription, objective information should be made available to physicians about biological, ethical and social consequences of CE use.

show abstract

“…These medications are currently widely used as study aids by college students in the US and Canada (Poulin, 2007; Smith and Farah, 2011) and, to a lesser extent, in many other countries (Sahakian and Morein-Zamir, 2007; Franke, 2011; Castaldi et al, 2012; Partridge et al, 2013), providing a non-hypothetical case in point for neuroethical analyses of cognitive enhancement. It is therefore surprising that a growing number of researchers now question whether these medications do, in fact, enhance cognition (for reviews, see Advokat, 2010; Chamberlain et al, 2010; Hall and Lucke, 2010; Repantis et al, 2010; Smith and Farah, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancement stimulants: perceived motivational and cognitive advantages

Ilieva

Farah

2013

Front. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychostimulants like Adderall and Ritalin are widely used for cognitive enhancement by people without ADHD, although the empirical literature has shown little conclusive evidence for effectiveness in this population. This paper explores one potential explanation of this discrepancy: the possibility that the benefit from enhancement stimulants is at least in part motivational, rather than purely cognitive. We review relevant laboratory, survey, and interview research and present the results of a new survey of enhancement users with the goal of comparing perceived cognitive and motivational effects. These users perceived stimulant effects on motivationally-related factors, especially “energy” and “motivation,” and reported motivational effects to be at least as pronounced as cognitive effects, including the effects on “attention.”

show abstract

Use of Cognitive Enhancement Medication Among Northern Italian University Students

Cited by 51 publications

References 17 publications

Impact of Contextual Factors and Substance Characteristics on Perspectives toward Cognitive Enhancement

Impact of Contextual Factors and Substance Characteristics on Perspectives toward Cognitive Enhancement

Attitudes towards prescribing cognitive enhancers among primary care physicians in Germany

Enhancement stimulants: perceived motivational and cognitive advantages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About