مقایسه عملکرد حافظه ی دیداری در افراد وابسته به ماری جوانا و افراد بهنجار

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناس ارشد روانشناسی بالینی دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان، ایران

2 استادیار، گروه روانشناسی بالینی دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان، ایران

چکیده

مقدمه: مصرف مواد و درگیری با اثرات  مخرب آن از چالش­های بزرگ اکثر جوامع است. گستره این تخریب به حدی است که نه تنها بر خود فرد بلکه بر ارتباطات اجتماعی فرد از دوستان و خانواده تا محل تحصیل و شغل را تحت تأثیر قرار می­دهد. ماری جوانا یکی از موادی است که در بین جوانان شایع بوده و نسبت به سیگار و الکل رشد بیشتری در مصرف میان جوانان داشته است. پژوهش حاضر با هدف مقایسه عملکرد حافظه­ی دیداری در افراد وابسته به ماری جوانا با افراد بهنجار انجام شد.
روش: طرح پژوهش حاضر علی- مقایسه­ای بود که به روش نمونه­گیری در دسترس روی دو گروه افراد وابسته به ماری جوانا و بهنجار انجام شد. جامعه­ی آماری این پژوهش کلیه افراد وابسته به ماری جوانای شهر تهران بودند که در بازه­ی زمانی اردیبهشت تا مرداد سال 1396 به مراکز ترک اعتیاد مراجعه می­نمودند. نمونه آماری شامل 30نفر وابسته به ماری جوانا و گروه مقایسه شامل 30 نفر از افراد عادی بودند که از میان همراهان مراجعین به مراکز ترک اعتیاد انتخاب شدند و از لحاظ سن، جنس و تحصیلات با گروه افراد وابسته به ماری جوانا همتاسازی شدند. برای سنجش عملکرد حافظه دیداری آزمون تصویر پیچیده ری-استریث مورد استفاده قرار گرفت.
یافته‌ها: نتایج نشان داد که افراد وابسته به ماری جوانا مشکلات بیشتری در حافظه­ی دیداری داشتند و نمرات پایین­تری در هر سه مرحله­ی اجرای آزمون نسبت به گروه بهنجار کسب کردند.
نتیجه‌گیری: مصرف منظم ماری جوانا، نقایص و آسیب­های شناختی فراوانی در عملکرد حافظه دیداری برای فرد به همراه دارد. می­توان در برنامه­های توان­بخشی که برای بهبود شرایط معتادان و درمان آنها در نظر گرفته می­شود به این نوع از نقایص توجه داشت و در صدد طراحی برنامه­هایی مناسب برای کاهش آن بود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparison of Visual Memory Performance in Marijuana Dependent and Normal Persons

نویسندگان [English]

  • S.M.M Tabatabaei-poor, 1
  • p Sabahi, 2
1 Student of Clinical Psychology, Semnan University, Mehdishahr School
2 psychology, semnan university, semnan, iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Drug use and involvement with its harmful effects are major challenges for most societies.The extent of this destruction is so much that it affects not only the individual but also the social relationships of friends, family, education and work. Marijuana is a prevalent drug among young people and its consumption has grown more in youth rather than cigarettes and alcohol. The aim of this study was to compare the visual memory of marijuana dependents to normal individuals.
Method: The present study was a causal-comparative study which was performed on two groups of marijuana and normal individuals by available sampling method. The statistical population of this study was all individuals with marijuana consumption in Tehran who referred to addiction treatment centers from May to August 2017. The sample consisted of 30 marijuana users and the group of 30 normal individuals who were selected from adolescent addicts who were matched in terms of age, sex and education with the marijuana group. To test the visual memory function, the Ray-Ostrrieth Complex Figure Test was used.
Results: The results showed that marijuana-dependent people had more problems in visual memory and scored lower scores in all three stages of testing compared to the normal group.
Conclusion: Regular use of marijuana has many defects and cognitive impairments in the performance of visual memory. These types of defects can be considered in rehabilitation programs intended to improve the conditions of addicts and treat them, and seek to design appropriate programs to reduce them.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Marijuana
  • Dependency
  • Visual Memory
  • Addiction

1- Johnston LD, O’Malley PM, Miech RA, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE. Monitoring the Future National Resultson Adolescent Drug Use: Overview of Key Findings. 1 ed. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan. 2015; 3-28.

2- Ashrafi HA, Fakor ZM, Babaee-Haidar-Abadi A, Hosaini F, Razmposh E, Gharlipour Z. Assessment of Psychoactive Substances Use and Their Associated Factors among Students of Shiraz University and shiraz University of Medical Sciences. JIUMS. 2013; 21(4): 58-66.

3- Maithya RJAJoMs. Drug Abuse in Secondary Schools in Kenya; Developing a Programme for its Prevention and Control. Central Division of Machakos District, Kenya. LAP. 2009; 29-36.

4- Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-5. Arlington, Va: American Psychiatric Publishing. 2013; 547-58.

5- Njuho P, Davids AJAJoD, Studies A. Extent and influence of recreational drug use on men and

 

women aged 15 years and older in South Africa. Afr J Drug Alcohol Stud. 2010; 9(1).

6- Sarrami H, Ghorbani M, Minoeie M. Four decades of research on prevalence drug use in Iran. Int J High Risk Behav Addict. 2012; 7(26): 29-52.

7- Gowing LR, Ali RL, Allsop S, Marsden J, Turf EE, West R, et al. Global statistics on addictive behaviours: 2014 status report. 2015; 1100(6): 904-19.

8- Mandelbaum DE, Suzanne MJPn. Adverse structural and functional effects of marijuana on the brain: evidence reviewed. 2017; 66: 12-20.

9- Ammerman S, Ryan S, Adelman WP, Pediatrics CoSAJ. The impact of marijuana policies on youth: clinical, research, and legal update. AAP. 2015; 153(3): 769-85.

10- Pacula RL, Jacobson M, Maksabedian EJJA. In the weeds: a baseline view of cannabis use among legalizing states and their neighbours. ADD. 2016; 111(6): 973-80.

11- Holland JJS, Culture. Park Street Press R, NY, USA. The Pot Book-A Complete Guide to Cannabis: Its Role in Medicine, Politics. SouthParis, ME: Park Street Press. 2010. 45.

12- Nader DA, Sanchez ZMJTAjod, abuse a. Effects of regular cannabis use on neurocognition, brain structure, andfunction: a systematic review of findings in adults. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2018; 30(3): 251-67.

13- Volkow ND, Baler RD, Compton WM, Weiss SRJNEJoM. Adverse health effects of marijuana use. Engl J Med. 2014; 370(23): 2219-27.

14- Di Forti M, Sallis H, Allegri F, Trotta A, Ferraro L, Stilo SA, et al. Daily use, especially of high-potency cannabis, drives the earlier onset of psychosis in cannabis users. 2014; 40(6): 1509-17.

15- Dekker N, Schmitz N, Peters BD, van Amelsvoort TA, Linszen DH, de Haan LJPRN. Cannabis use and callosal white matter structure and integrity in recent-onset schizophrenia. Psychiatry research Psychiatry Research. 2010; 181(1): 51-6.

16- Meier MH, Caspi A, Ambler A, Harrington H, Houts R, Keefe RS, et al. Persistent cannabis users showneuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2012; 109: 2657-64.

17- Crean RD, Crane NA, Mason BJJJoam. An evidence based review of acute and long-term effects of cannabis use on executive cognitivefunctions. J Addict Med. 2011; 5(1): 1-8.

18- Solowij N, Stephens RS, Roffman RA, Babor T, Kadden R, Miller M, et al. Cognitive functioning of long-term heavy cannabis users seeking treatment. The JAMA Network Journals. 2002; 287(9): 1123-31.

19- Volkow ND, Swanson JM, Evins AE, DeLisi LE, Meier MH, Gonzalez R, et al. Effects of cannabis use on human behavior, including cognition, motivation, and psychosis: a review. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016; 73(3): 292-7.

20- Schneck CM. Visual perception. Occupational therapy for children. 5 ed. USA: Mosby. 2006.

21- Umphred DA, Jewell MJ. Neurological rehabilitation. 5 ed. USA: Mosby. 2007.

22- Sligte IG, Scholte HS, Lamme VAJJoN. V4 activity predicts the strength of visual short-term memory representations. Journal of Neuroscience. 2009; 29(23): 7432-8.

23- Johnson JS, Hollingworth A, Luck SJJJoEPHP, Performance. The role of attention in the maintenance of feature bindings in visual short-term memory. 2008; 34(1): 3-41.

24- Brady TF, Konkle T, Alvarez GAJJov. A review of visual memory capacity: Beyond individual items and toward structured representations. JOV. 2011; 11(5): 1-34.

25- Batalla A, Bhattacharyya S, Yücel M, Fusar-Poli P, Crippa JA, Nogue S, et al. Structural and functional imaging studies in chronic cannabis users: a systematic review of adolescent and adult findings. PLoS One. 2013; 8(2): 1-118.

26- Ghanaii A. Effect of sports rhythmic movement training on memoirs' neuropsychological function in students with learning disabilities. Tabriz: Tabriz University. 2008.

27- Yarmohammadiyan A. Exploring Kettle's Intelligence Scale (3) and Andrew Ray's Visual Memory Test in Detecting Students with Brilliant Talent. New Edu App. 2007; 7(1): 77-94.

28- Bahraami H. Psychological Tests: Theoretical and Applied Fundamentals and Applications. 2 ed. Tehran: Allameh Tabataba'i University. 2005.

29- Naazeri M. Standardization of André Rey's Image Test (A Card) on Girl's Students in Tehran. Q Edu Sci RB. 2004; 1(2): 1-28.

30- Cadet JL, Bisagno VJFip. Neuropsychological consequences of chronicdrug use: relevance to treatment approaches. Front Psychiatry. 2016; 6(189) :1-10.

31- Smith AM, Fried PA, Hogan MJ, Cameron IJN, teratology. Effects of prenatal marijuana on visuospatial working memory: an fMRI study in young adults. NeurotoxicolTeratol. 2006; 28(2): 286-95.

32- Jungerman FS, Menezes PR, Pinsky I, Zaleski M, Caetano R, Laranjeira RJAb. Prevalence of cannabis use in Brazil: data from the I Brazilian National Alcohol Survey (BNAS). Addictive Behaviors. 2010; 35(3): 190-3.

33- Dempere-Marco L, Melcher DP, Deco GJPo. Correction: Effective Visual Working Memory Capacity: An Emergent Effect from the Neural Dynamics in an Attractor Network. PLoS ONE. 2012; 7(8): 1-20.

34- Pan C-H, Jhong J-R, Tsai S-Y, Lin S-K, Chen C-C, Kuo C-JJD, et al. Excessive suicide mortality and risk factors for suicide among patients with heroin dependence. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2014; 145: 224-30.

35- Iversen LJB. Cannabis and the brain. brain. 2003; 126(6): 1252-70.

36- Quickfall J, Crockford DJTJon, neurosciences c. Brain neuroimaging in cannabis use: a review. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2006; 18(3): 318-32.

37- Camchong J, Lim KO, Kumra SJCC. Adverse effects of cannabis on adolescent brain development: a longitudinal study. OUP. 2017; 27(3): 1922-30.

38- Shollenbarger SG, Price J, Wieser J, Lisdahl KJDcn. Impact of cannabis use on prefrontal and parietal cortex gyrification and surface area in adolescents and emerging adults. DEV COGN NEUROS. 2015; 16: 46-53.

39- Medina KL, Hanson KL, Schweinsburg AD, Cohen-Zion M, Nagel BJ, Tapert SFJJotINS. Neuropsychological functioning in adolescent marijuana users: subtle deficits detectable after a month of abstinence. JINS. 2007; 13(5): 807-20.

40- Schweinsburg AD, Nagel BJ, Schweinsburg BC, Park A, Theilmann RJ, Tapert SFJPRN. Abstinent adolescent marijuana users show altered fMRI response during spatial working memory. Psychiatry Research. 2008; 163(1): 40-51.

41- Schuster R, Hareli M, Nip E, Gilman J, Schoenfeld D, Evins AEJBP. T266. Memory Deficits are Reversible With Sustained Cannabis Abstinence Among Cannabis Using Adolescents. Biological Psychiatry. 2018; 83(9): S233.

42- Gilman J, Ulysse C, Schoenfeld D, Evins AEJBP. S260. An Updated Report of Associations Between Cannabis Use and Brain Structure. Biological Psychiatry. 2018; 83(9): S449.

43- Bossong MG, van Berckel BN, Boellaard R, Zuurman L, Schuit R, Windhorst A, et al. Delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol induces dopamine release in the human striatum. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2008; 34(41): 759-66.

44- Bhattacharyya S, Falkenberg I, Martin-Santos R, Atakan Z, Crippa JA, Giampietro V, et al. Cannabinoid modulation of functional connectivity within regions processing attentional salience. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2015; 40(6): 1343-52.

45- Volkow ND, Wang G-J, Telang F, Fowler JS, Logan J, Jayne M, et al. Profound decreases in dopamine release in striatum in detoxified alcoholics: possible orbitofrontal involvement. J Neurosci. 2007; 27(46): 12700-6.

46- Bush G, Luu P, Posner MIJTics. Cognitive and emotional influences in anterior cingulate cortex. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000; 4(6): 215-22.

47- Volkow ND, Fowler JS, Wang G-J, Swanson JM, Telang FJAon. Dopamine in drug abuse and addiction: results of imaging studies and treatment implications. Mol Psychiatry. 2014; 9: 575-9.

48- Rolls ETJCc. The orbitofrontal cortex and reward. Cereb Cortex. 2000; 10(3): 284-94.