Modeling students’ instrumental (mis-) use of substances to enhance cognitive performance: Neuroenhancement in the light of job demands-resources theory

Abstract

BackgroundHealthy university students have been shown to use psychoactive substances, expecting them to be functional means for enhancing their cognitive capacity, sometimes over and above an essentially proficient level. This behavior called Neuroenhancement (NE) has not yet been integrated into a behavioral theory that is able to predict performance. Job Demands Resources (JD-R) Theory for example assumes that strain (e.g. burnout) will occur and influence performance when job demands are high and job resources are limited at the same time. The aim of this study is to investigate whether or not university students’ self-reported NE can be integrated into JD-R Theory’s comprehensive approach to psychological health and performance.Methods1,007 students (23.56 ± 3.83 years old, 637 female) participated in an online survey. Lifestyle drug, prescription drug, and illicit substance NE together with the complete set of JD-R variables (demands, burnout, resources, motivation, and performance) were measured. Path models were used in order to test our data’s fit to hypothesized main effects and interactions.ResultsJD-R Theory could successfully be applied to describe the situation of university students. NE was mainly associated with the JD-R Theory’s health impairment process: Lifestyle drug NE (p < .05) as well as prescription drug NE (p < .001) is associated with higher burnout scores, and lifestyle drug NE aggravates the study demands-burnout interaction. In addition, prescription drug NE mitigates the protective influence of resources on burnout and on motivation.ConclusionAccording to our results, the uninformed trying of NE (i.e., without medical supervision) might result in strain. Increased strain is related to decreased performance. From a public health perspective, intervention strategies should address these costs of non-supervised NE. With regard to future research we propose to model NE as a means to reach an end (i.e. performance enhancement) rather than a target behavior itself. This is necessary to provide a deeper understanding of the behavioral roots and consequences of the phenomenon.

Nonmedical Use of Prescription Drugs: Perceptions of Minority College Students

“…The motives discussed may be a characteristic of demanding universities and programs where pressure to perform are more likely to be observed academically. The findings were consistent with previous literature that examined college students' motives for NMUPD [12,17]. Similar to our findings, a quantitative study conducted among college students found that stimulants were primarily used for studying for examinations periods such as midterms and finals [16].…”

“…For instance, the literature indicates that the primary motives for NMUPD among college students include experimentation, recreational purposes, and to increase their academic performance [11][12][13][14]. More specifically, common reasons college students reported engaging in the non-medical use of stimulants (i.e., Adderall, Vyvanse, and Ritalin) to increase performance during academic examination periods [15,16].…”

Pharmaceutical Cognitive Enhancement in Greek University Students: Differences Between Users and Non-Users in Social Cognitive Variables, Burnout, and Engagement

“…The positive association between high study demands, psychological distress and self-reported PCE among University students has been empirically supported by several studies (e.g., Weyandt et al, 2009;Wolff & Brand, 2013). Another study among German University students found that self-reported PCE was associated with higher burnout scores (Wolff, Brand, Baumgarten, Lösel, & Ziegler, 2014). Taken together, these findings suggest that PCE can be seen as a way of coping with high demands and stress and, therefore, can be seen as a means-to-an-end (i.e., self-administering PCE to cope better with study demands).…”

“…Although engagement was primarily studied in relation to workplace stress and burnout several studies have shown that this concept also applies to University students (Schaufeli, Salanova, González-Romá, & Bakker, 2002). If academic burnout is positively associated with PCE use (e.g., Wolff et al, 2014) and engagement with studies represents a positive student experience that is antithetical to academic burnout, then, it is sensible to expect that engagement with studies will be negatively associated with PCE use among University students. This hypothesis, however, remains to be determined by empirical evidence.…”

“…So far, research on PCE use among University students has described prevalence trends and user characteristics, and relevant behavioural science studies have been largely concerned with the associations between PCE use and situational characteristics and negative student experiences, such as high demands, stress and burnout (Weyandt et al, 2009;Wolff et al, 2014). Limited research also highlighted that PCE users may differ from non-users in their beliefs and intentions towards PCE use (e.g., Judson & Langdon, 2009).…”