↓ Skip to main content

Verbal Learning and Memory in Cannabis and Alcohol Users: An Event-Related Potential Investigation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Verbal Learning and Memory in Cannabis and Alcohol Users: An Event-Related Potential Investigation
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02129
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janette L. Smith, Frances M. De Blasio, Jaimi M. Iredale, Allison J. Matthews, Raimondo Bruno, Michelle Dwyer, Tessa Batt, Allison M. Fox, Nadia Solowij, Richard P. Mattick

Abstract

Aims: Long-term heavy use of cannabis and alcohol are known to be associated with memory impairments. In this study, we used event-related potentials to examine verbal learning and memory processing in a commonly used behavioral task. Method: We conducted two studies: first, a small pilot study of adolescent males, comprising 13 Drug-Naive Controls (DNC), 12 heavy drinkers (HD) and 8 cannabis users (CU). Second, a larger study of young adults, comprising 45 DNC (20 female), 39 HD (16 female), and 20 CU (9 female). In both studies, participants completed a modified verbal learning task (the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, RAVLT) while brain electrical activity was recorded. ERPs were calculated for words which were subsequently remembered vs. those which were not remembered, and for presentations of learnt words, previously seen words, and new words in a subsequent recognition test. Pre-planned principal components analyses (PCA) were used to quantify the ERP components in these recall and recognition phases separately for each study. Results: Memory performance overall was slightly lower than published norms using the standardized RAVLT delivery, but was generally similar and showed the expected changes over trials. Few differences in performance were observed between groups; a notable exception was markedly poorer delayed recall in HD relative to DNC (Study 2). PCA identified components expected from prior research using other memory tasks. At encoding, there were no between-group differences in the usual P2 recall effect (larger for recalled than not-recalled words). However, alcohol-related differences were observed in a larger P540 (indexing recollection) in HD than DNC, and cannabis-related differences were observed in a smaller N340 (indexing familiarity) and a lack of previously seen > new words effect for P540 in Study 2. Conclusions: This study is the first examination of ERPs in the RAVLT in healthy control participants, as well as substance-using individuals, and represents an important advance in methodology. The results indicate alterations in recognition memory processing, which even if not manifesting in overt behavioral impairment, underline the potential for brain dysfunction with early exposure to alcohol and cannabis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Student > Master 6 16%
Researcher 4 11%
Librarian 2 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Neuroscience 4 11%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 12 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 December 2017.
All research outputs
#7,975,471
of 24,151,461 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,507
of 32,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,150
of 447,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#249
of 530 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,151,461 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,452 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 447,513 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 530 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.