No abstract

Drug research should more fully incorporate previously hidden populations to more fully inform theory and practice. The pharmacological properties of specific substances should not be assumed to inevitably lead to addictive and destructive patterns of drug use.

Semistructured interviews were carried out with 20 illicit users of ketamine in Scotland. Participants had used a wide range of illegal drugs. Scottish drug agencies reported limited contact with ketamine users; however, subjects were knowledgeable regarding the licit purpose of ketamine, its effects, and its legal status. Ketamine was usually obtained through diversion from legitimate sources. Three participants reported extensive use, indicating the potential for psychological dependence. A standard dose of ketamine was typically 1/8 g, usually taken intranasally. Participants reported the ketamine experience as being extremely intense and dissociative, usually lasting for approximately one hour. All participants reported using ketamine in a carefully preplanned setting, emphasizing comfort, security, and familiarity. Participants identified potential problems arising from using ketamine in a public place, or in unfamiliar surroundings, and also suggested that novice users may encounter problems through lack of knowledge concerning the intense nature of the experience. Accurate information concerning the effects and nature of ketamine as well as the importance of set and setting should be made available. However, publicizing the drug should be avoided as widespread interest could cause greater problems than currently exist.

Purpose. This study examined how simple procedures can lead eyewitnesses to behave in a manner compliant to those held in authority. It was hypothesized that eyewitnesses will alter their responses to questions if they think that an authority figure (in this case the experimenter) sees them as unhelpful and/or unobservant. Methods. The experiment had a repeated measures design in which a participant's eyewitness ability was measured before and after being labelled a ‘good’ or ‘poor’ eyewitness. Participants watched a short video clip and were then asked specific questions regarding what they had just witnessed. After watching a second similar video, participants were labelled as either ‘good’ or ‘poor’ eyewitnesses. Forty undergraduate university students took part in the study. Results. Results confirmed that those participants who had received a negative label (‘poor’ eyewitness) altered their original responses and submitted to leading questions, whereas those who had received a positive label (‘good’ eyewitness) actually improved their eyewitness observation scores. Conclusions. Results suggest that a simple manipulation by a figure perceived to be in authority can alter the responses of eyewitnesses.

No abstract