Understanding the Motivations for Recreational Marijuana Use Among Adult Canadians

Abstract

The Canadian Special Senate Committee on Illegal Drugs (2003) noted that little ethnographic research had been devoted to exploring why people use marijuana recreationally or the social contexts in which it is used. The purpose of this exploratory qualitative research is to better understand both of these neglected topics through interviews conducted with 41 adult Canadian users between 2005 and 2006. The participants' ages ranged from 21 to 61 and included 25 males and 16 females whose consumption patterns ranged from sporadic use to regular daily use. They were predominantly middle class, employed in a wide range of occupations, and used marijuana recreationally to enhance relaxation and concentration while engaged in leisure activities. Implications for drug laws and policies are discussed. The study's limitations are noted.

Keywords:

• marijuana
• motivations for use
• social context
• recreational use
• enhancement
• qualitative methods
• semistructured interviews

Notes

Notes

* The authors are aware that this sample is not and cannot be representative of either adult Canadians or adult Canadian marijuana users. Editor's note.

† The journal's style utilizes the category substance abuse as a diagnostic category. Substances are used or misused; living organisms can be, and are, abused. Editor's note.

‡ Horst Rittel has suggested that problems can and should be usefully categorized into two types: “tame problems” and “wicked problems.” The former are solved in a traditional known and tried “water fall paradigm”; gather data, analyze data, formulate solution, implement solution. The latter “wicked problems” can only be responded to individually, each time anew, with no ultimate, repeatable solution (Rittel and Noble, 1989). The cyberneticist Heinz Von Foerster posited that there are two types of questions: legitimate questions and illegitimate questions. The former are those for which the answer is not known. An illegitimate question is one for which the answer is known (Von Foerster, Mora, and Lawrence Amiot, 1960). Editor's note.

§ The reader is reminded to distinguish between a “drug's” pharmacological actions and a “drug experience which is the result of the interaction between a chemically active substance—-whatever its legal status—-the person and the site of use and experiencing the “drug” (Zinberg, 1984). Editor's note.

§§ Behavioral economists have posited the concept and process of “rational addiction,” which is based on an economic analysis of individual behavior in which individuals will not voluntarily take actions which they expect will make them worse off. This challenges the moral, criminal, and medical models which are based on a posited existing “impairment.” The individual, in this thesis, judges when s/he is better off or worse off; a dynamic, multidimensional, subjective, a more than likely nonlinear process which is also bounded (culture, time, place, etc.) (Vuchinich & Heather, 2003). The reader is also reminded to consider the work by Daniel Kahneman, who received the Noble Prize for documenting the irrationality underpinnings of man's judgments (Kahneman, Slovic, & Tverskey, 1982). Editor's note.

1. This research was made possible by an Augustana Faculty Research Grant and a Roger S. Smith Student Award. The authors would like to thank Trudi Lorenz for her research assistance and Stan Einstein and an anonymous reviewer for their editorial suggestions and comments. Elements of this article were presented at the Pacific Sociological Association 77th Annual Meeting, Hollywood Hills, Universal City, California, April 20–23, 2006.

2. Marijuana was first prohibited in 1923 and over the proceeding years the question decriminalization has been debated with some regularity. For accounts see Solomon and Usprich (1991), Giffen, Endicott, and Lambert (1991); Fischer, Ala-Leppilampi, Single, and Amanda (2003); and Martel (2006).

3. Similarly, according to Gettman (2006, 3) “Marijuana is the largest cash crop in the United States, more valuable than corn and wheat combined. Using conservative price estimates domestic marijuana production has a value of $35.8 billion. The domestic marijuana crop consists of 56.4 million marijuana plants cultivated outdoors worth $31.7 billion and 11.7 million plants cultivated indoors worth $4.1 billion.”

4. Although it is beyond the scope of this article, the reader should consider the motives of various stakeholders (individuals and systems) for making recreational drugs more available and accessible. For instance, according to Mulgrew (2005), some marijuana growers and various other cannabis product entrepreneurs support legalization, because they expect to benefit financially, however, others are resistant to legalization because it would eliminate the need for their services.

5. For thorough reviews of current research on various aspects of marijuana use see Sussman and Stacy (1996), Zimmer and Morgan (1997), Iverson (2000) Earleywine (2002), and Green, Kavanagh, and Young (2003).

6. Becker's (1963) qualitative research on marijuana use, deviant subcultures, and the social construction of deviance was largely responsible for the development of labelling theory.

7. A few qualitative studies have focused their attention on marijuana subcultures (Golub, 2006; Johnson, 1973), marijuana and sexuality (Weller and Halikas, 1984), illegal marijuana use by those suffering from chronic illness (Coomber, Oliver, and Morris, 2003), marijuana argot (Johnson, Bardhi, Sifaneck, and Dunlap 2006), marijuana use by Jamaican women and children (Dreher, 1984a, 1984b), the consequences of marijuana abuse (Baum, 1998; Hendin, Hass, Singer, Ellner, and Ulman 1987), social meanings of marijuana use for Asian youth (Lee and Kirkpatrick, 2005), and the “normalization” of drugs by British youths and adolescents (Measham, Newcome, and Parker, 1994; Parker, Alridge, and Measham, 1998, 2002; Shiner and Newburn, 1997; Williams and Parker, 1991), Canadian adolescents (Warner, Room, and Adlaf, 1999a, 1999b), and Canadian adults (Hathaway, 1997b, 2004a).

8. Hathaway has published five articles based on two qualitative studies. See Hathaway (1997a, 1997b; 2003, 2004a, 2004b).

9. This is echoed by Sullum (2003, 134), a journalist in the United States, who interviewed 32 “controlled drug users,” when he argues that “marijuana's compatibility with a wide range of activities is one reason for its popularity and, moreover, that the “use of marijuana to enhance various kinds of experiences belies the notion that pot smokers do nothing but lie around in a stupor.”

10. E-mail interviewing is obviously a very recent research strategy. For a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of e-mil interviews, see Murray and Sixsmith (1998), Mann and Stewart (2000), Hamilton and Bowers (2006), and Meho (2006).

11. Although participants were told that it was unlikely they would benefit directly from participating in the study, approximately one-fourth of them (N = 10) reported that the interview process was personally useful because it provided them the opportunity to reflect on why they used marijuana and the impact their use had on their lives. In addition, it is possible that participants were motivated to participate because they believed that this study might contribute to the legalization of marijuana in Canada making it more accessible and available and eliminating its criminal status. For a discussion of the ethical implications of collecting data from individuals who are not very likely to benefit directly from their participation see Kleinig and Einstein (2006).

12. Participants differed slightly in their opinions as to what constituted responsible use. Although most agreed that moderation was important, a small number (N = 10) believed that it was acceptable to use at work, depending on the nature of the work and the level of intoxication. Seven participants thought it was not irresponsible or slightly irresponsible to drive while under the influence of marijuana. A more detailed analysis and discussion of participants' perceptions of responsible marijuana use can be found in a forthcoming article by the authors.

13. Interestingly, almost all of the participants stated that it was very difficult to describe what it felt like to be under the influence of marijuana. As one participant put, “I don't really know how to describe it. It's like asking someone to describe … I don't know … what it feels like to be in love.”

14. When asked what she meant by “real” recreation the participant replied: Real recreation would mean—-finding the time to go out and do things like movies or go hiking or camping. It takes more time and effort to plan an activity like that than it does to find the time to roll a dub and smoke it. Some recreational activities are non-child friendly so … a lot of my friends like to spend their time at the bar, not so much fun for me, as it entails a sitter and usually a hangover in the morning.

15. The minor physical, emotional, or psychological problems associated with marijuana use as reported by the participants are discussed in a forthcoming article by the authors.

16. Gelé literally translates as “frozen” but is commonly used by the Québécois for “stoned.”

17. For a concise overview of cannabis and auditory perception research see Fachner (2006), who has written extensively on the topic.

18. Other personal testimonies to marijuana's sex-enhancing properties have been recorded by sex columnist Dan Savage on his website Savage Love: http://www.thestranger.com/savage/pot