Application of Self-Determination Theory to Substance Use and Its Treatment: A Scoping Review of the Literature.

Background: Self-determination theory (SDT) may provide important insights for understanding substance misuse and treatment outcomes. However, to date, the literature applying SDT to substance use and its treatment is varied and difficult to integrate. Methods: The authors searched psycINFO and PubMed on October 26th, 2021 to identify articles applying SDT to substance use and its treatment. Eligible studies were published in peer-reviewed articles in English, on adult populations (18+), and explicitly applied SDT to the context of substance use or its treatment. Results were categorized as studies applying SDT in non-treatment or treatment settings and were synthesized within these categories by substance(s) of focus, primary outcome(s), component(s) of SDT utilized, and relevant findings. Results: The search revealed 38 articles applying SDT in non-treatment (k = 16) and treatment (k = 22) settings. Causality orientations and the basic psychological needs were the most frequently studied components of SDT. Studies that applied SDT in non-treatment settings placed a greater emphasis on causality orientations, whereas treatment studies more frequently targeted or measured basic psychological needs. Conclusions: SDT constructs consistently predicted both substance misuse and treatment outcomes in a theoretically consistent manner, however, several important gaps remain and opportunities for future research are discussed.

How Does Being under the Influence Affect Willingness to Experience Overlapping Effects of Alcohol and Marijuana?

OBJECTIVE: This study tested how individuals anticipate they will respond to opportunities to engage in simultaneous alcohol and marijuana (SAM) use. METHODS: Two studies utilizing a within-subjects design were conducted. Study 1 was conducted in Spring 2021 and a replication (Study 2) was conducted in Fall 2021. Participants were presented with pairs of scenarios. One scenario pair compared how willing participants expected to be to get drunk if they were sober vs. high. Another pair compared how willing participants would be to take a hit of marijuana if they were sober vs. drunk. College attending young adults (Study 1: N = 173; female = 81%; Study 2: N = 212; female = 49.1%) with varying degrees of substance use experience were recruited. RESULTS: In Study 1 participants reported greater willingness to get drunk when sober than when high. This was qualified by a statistically significant interaction whereby differences were greater among those who had more experience with past 30-day heavy drinking. Similar findings emerged for willingness to use marijuana. Participants anticipated greater willingness to use marijuana when sober than when drunk. This was also qualified by a statistically significant interaction whereby differences were greater among experimental or established users of marijuana than among abstainers. Study 2 findings replicated those from Study 1. CONCLUSIONS: College attending young adults state greater willingness to remain under the influence of one substance than to engage in SAM use when opportunities arise. Simultaneous use of alcohol and marijuana among college students is likely an exception, not the rule. Implications for prevention are discussed.

Abstaining College Students' Motives to Use E-Cigarettes: A Brief Report.

OBJECTIVE: Although college students have higher rates of e-cigarette use compared with non-college-attending young adults, e-cigarette-abstaining college students are an understudied population. The present study was designed to create a scale assessing current e-cigarette abstainers' motives to abstain from or initiate e-cigarette use. METHOD: Participants from two universities who had never used e-cigarettes (n = 281) completed an online survey. Participants indicated their e-cigarette abstention and initiation motives, and their perceived vulnerability to, willingness to use, and intentions to use e-cigarettes. RESULTS: Analyses revealed three factors of abstention motives (avoiding health outcomes, low incentive to initiate, and concerns regarding social approval of use) and three factors of initiation motives (tobacco alternatives, social reasons, and coping with negative emotions). When demographics were controlled for, only coping motives significantly positively related to abstainers' willingness and intentions for future e-cigarette initiation. Furthermore, only the avoiding health outcomes abstention motive was positively related to participants' perceived vulnerability to the negative health effects of e-cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides initial support for a scale to assess what motives abstainers may have to initiate e-cigarette use. Results indicated that coping motives may be indicators of readiness to initiate e-cigarettes.