Advertisement

Psychopharmacologia

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 137–145 | Cite as

Effects of marihuana on auditory signal detection

  • Herbert Moskowitz
  • William McGlothlin
Human Pharmacology

Abstract

23 male subjects were tested for auditory signal detection under a no-treatment condition, and smoke marihuana conditions containing 0, 50, 100 and 200 Μg δ9-THC per kg body weight. Signal detection was measured under conditions of concentrated attention, in which the subject reported the presence or absence of a tone in a 3-sec noise burst; and divided attention, where the subject also repeated a series of six digits which were presented simultaneously with the noise burst. No differences were found between the no-treatment and placebo conditions. Significant dose-dependent impairment of signal detection resulted for the marihuana conditions under both concentrated and divided attention. Application of signal detection theory indicated that impaired performance was due to a decline in sensitivity (d′), independent of changes in subject criteria (beta). There was also some indication of change in criteria—a greater tendency for erroneous reporting of a signal when it was not present.

Key words

Auditory Signal Detection Marihuana Attention 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abel, E. L.: Retrieval of information after use of marijuana. Nature (Lond.) 58, 231 (1971)Google Scholar
  2. Caldwell, D. F., Myers, S. A., Domino, E. F., Mirriam, P. E.: Auditory and visual threshold effects of marihuana in man. Percept. Mot. Skills 29, 755–759 (1969)Google Scholar
  3. Clark, L. D., Nakashima, E. N.: Experimental studies of marihuana. Amer. J. Psychiat. 125, 379–384 (1968)Google Scholar
  4. Dixon, W. J., ed.: Biomedical computer programs. Berkeley: University of California Press 1970Google Scholar
  5. Green, D. M., Swets, J. A.: Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley 1966Google Scholar
  6. Jones, R. T.: Marihuana induced “high”: Influence of expectation, setting and previous drug experience. Pharmacol. Rev. 23, 359–369 (1971)Google Scholar
  7. LeDain, G., Campbell, I. L., Lehmann, H., Stein, J. P., Bertrand, M. A.: Cannabis: A report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Non-medical Use of Drugs, pp. 143–144. Ottawa: Information Canada 1972Google Scholar
  8. Moskowitz, H., DePry, D.: Effect of alcohol upon auditory vigilance and divided attention tasks. Quart. J. Stud. Alcohol 29, 54–63 (1968)Google Scholar
  9. Moskowitz, H., Sharma, S.: Effects of alcohol on peripheral vision as a function of attention. Hum. Factors 16, 174–180 (1974)Google Scholar
  10. Moskowitz, H., Sharma, S., McGlothlin, W.: The effect of marihuana upon peripheral vision as a function of information processing demands on central vision. Percept. Mot. Skills 35, 875–882 (1972)Google Scholar
  11. Moskowitz, H., Sharma, S., Shapero, M.: A comparison of the effects of marihuana and alcohol on visual functions. In: Current research in marihuana. M. F. Lewis, ed., pp. 129–150. New York: Academic Press 1972Google Scholar
  12. Sharma, S., Moskowitz, H.: The effect of marihuana upon the visual autokinetic phenomenon. Percept. Mot. Skills 35, 891–894 (1972)Google Scholar
  13. Waskow, I. E., Olsson, J. E., Salzman, L., Katz, M. M.: Psychological effects of tetrahydrocannabinol. Arch. gen. Psychiat. 22, 97–107 (1970)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1974

Authors and Affiliations

  • Herbert Moskowitz
    • 1
    • 2
  • William McGlothlin
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyCalifornia State UniversityLos Angeles
  2. 2.Institute of Transportation and Traffic EngineeringUniversity of CaliforniaLos Angeles
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CaliforniaLos Angeles

Personalised recommendations