Objective With the recent debates over marijuana legalization and increases in use, it is critical to examine its role in cognition. While many studies generally support the adverse acute effects of cannabis on neurocognition, the non-acute effects remain less clear. The current study used a cross-sectional design to examine relationships between recent and past cannabis use on neurocognitive functioning in a non-clinical adult sample. Method One hundred and fifty-eight participants were recruited through fliers distributed around local college campuses and the community. All participants completed the Brief Drug Use History Form, the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Disorders, and neurocognitive assessment, and underwent urine toxicology screening. Participants consisted of recent users (n = 68), past users (n = 41), and non-users (n = 49). Results Recent users demonstrated significantly (p < .05) worse performance than non-users across cognitive domains of attention/working memory (M = 42.4, SD = 16.1 vs. M = 50.5, SD = 10.2), information processing speed (M = 44.3, SD = 7.3 vs. M = 52.1, SD = 11.0), and executive functioning (M = 43.6, SD = 13.4 vs. M = 48.6, SD = 7.2). There were no statistically significant differences between recent users and past users on neurocognitive performance. Frequency of cannabis use in the last 4 weeks was negatively associated with global neurocognitive performance and all individual cognitive domains. Similarly, amount of daily cannabis use was negatively associated with global neurocognitive performance and individual cognitive domains. Conclusions Our results support the widespread adverse effects of cannabis use on neurocognitive functioning. Although some of these adverse effects appear to attenuate with abstinence, past users' neurocognitive functioning was consistently lower than non-users.

This study developed and then cross-validated a novel weighting algorithm based on multiple comorbid risk factors (stimulant use, vascular disease, hepatitis C, HIV disease severity, cognitive reserve) to predict cognitive functioning among 366 HIV+ adults. The resultant “risk severity score” was used to differentially weight, as a function of age, the impact and magnitude of multiple risk factors on cognition. Among older adults (> 50 years) the risk severity index was differentially predictive of learning/memory and verbal fluency, whereas among younger adults it was linked to working memory and executive function. Cognitive reserve was found to be the most robust predictor of neurocognition.

Objectives: This study aimed to develop and validate the Resistance and Empowerment Against Racism (REAR) scale. Method: Fifty items developed through processes adapted from Consensual Qualitative Research (CQR) were administered to a sample of 723 women and 230 men of color (Asian Americans, Black Americans, Latinx, and Native Americans). We employed exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses using stratified subsamples; examined construct validity of the final REAR scale and subscales; and evaluated 2-week test-retest reliability with a subsample. Results: Analyses supported a four-factor model, including Awareness and Relational Resistance; Participation in Resistance Activities and Organizations; Interpersonal Confrontation; and Leadership for Resistance. The REAR demonstrated good test-retest and internal reliability and construct validity. Conclusions: Use of the REAR may enable researchers and clinicians to examine how people of color proactively respond to racism through empowered action to challenge racism, and how these responses may moderate the negative effects of racism on psychological well-being. Public Significance StatementThe wide prevalence and negative effects of racism on people of color has been well established by prior literature. Resistance is a kind of empowered coping that attempts to proactively challenge the existence and perpetuation of racism. Being able to measure the extent to which people engage in resistance actions will help illuminate how resistance could be a proactive strategy to foster positive mental health for people of color and contribute to a more equitable society.

No abstract

The current study examined ethnic/racial differences in test-related anxiety and its relationship to neurocognitive performance in a community sample of African American (n = 40) and European American (n = 36) adults. The authors hypothesized the following: (a) Test-anxiety related to negative performance evaluation would be associated with lower neurocognitive performance, whereas anxiety unrelated to negative evaluation would be associated with higher neurocognitive performance. (b) African American participants would report higher levels of anxiety about negative performance evaluation than European Americans. (c) European Americans would report higher levels of anxiety unrelated to negative performance evaluation. The first two hypotheses were supported: Ethnic/racial differences in test-taking anxiety emerged such that African Americans reported significantly higher levels of negative performance evaluation, which was associated with lower cognitive performance. The third hypothesis was not supported: African Americans and European Americans reported similar levels of test-anxiety unrelated to negative evaluation.