Background As COVID-19 continues to spread globally, it is important to understand psychological factors that may influence compliance with social distancing. Purpose The present study examined whether Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) constructs were associated with social distancing, with a focus on exploring moderators of the intention–behavior relationship. Methods Using a longitudinal design, U.S. adults (N = 507) self-reported TPB constructs and social distancing behavior at baseline and 3 months later. Participants were from 48 U.S. States and the District of Columbia and were on average 50.39 years old (SD = 15.32, range = 18–80). The majority were Non-Hispanic White (71.6%), had a bachelor’s degree or higher (55.3%), and resided in suburban areas (55.8%). Results While positive attitudes toward social distancing increased over time (p = .002), subjective norms weakened (p < .001) and perceived behavioral control (PBC) remained stable (p = .22). Interestingly, despite an increase in intentions from baseline to follow-up (p < .001), there was a significant decrease in social distancing behavior over time (p < .001). Consistent with the TPB, baseline attitudes (p < .001), subjective norms (p < .001), and PBC (p < .001) for social distancing were all associated with baseline intentions to social distance. In turn, baseline intentions were significantly associated with social distancing behavior at follow-up (p < .001). Younger adults (p < .001) and non-White participants (p = .002) displayed a greater intention–behavior gap relative to older and White participants. In contrast, participants with more stable intentions over time displayed a stronger intention–behavior relationship (p < .001). Conclusions Targeting individuals’ attitudes, norms, and PBC may effectively promote protective behaviors intended to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 and similar viral outbreaks. Future research should examine effective strategies for translating social distancing intentions into actions.

No abstract

No abstract

Using a federally compatible, naturalistic at‐home administration procedure, the present study examined the acute effects of three cannabis flower chemovars with different tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) to cannabidiol (CBD) ratios, in order to test whether chemovars with a higher CBD content produce different effects. Participants were randomly assigned to ad libitum administration of one of three chemovars (THC‐dominant: 24% THC, 1% CBD; THC+CBD: 9% THC, 10% CBD; CBD‐dominant: 1% THC, 23% CBD); 159 regular cannabis users (male = 94, female = 65) were assessed in a mobile pharmacology lab before, immediately after, and 1 h after ad libitum administration of their assigned chemovar. Plasma cannabinoids as well as positive (e.g., high, elation) and negative (e.g., paranoia and anxiety) subjective effects were assessed at each time points. Participants who used the CBD‐dominant and THC + CBD chemovars had significantly less THC and more CBD in plasma samples compared to participants who used the THC‐dominant chemovar. Further, the THC + CBD chemovar was associated with similar levels of positive subjective effects, but significantly less paranoia and anxiety, as compared to the THC‐dominant chemovar. This is one of the first studies to examine the differential effects of various THC to CBD ratios using chemovars that are widely available in state‐regulated markets. Individuals using a THC + CBD chemovar had significantly lower plasma THC concentrations and reported less paranoia and anxiety while also reporting similar positive mood effects as compared to individuals using THC only, which is intriguing from a harm reduction perspective. Further research is needed to clarify the harm reduction potential of CBD in cannabis products.

No abstract