Public perceptions of arguments supporting and opposing recreational marijuana legalization
Public perceptions of arguments supporting and opposing recreational marijuana legalization
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.01.024
复制
发表时间：
2017-06-01
影响因子：
5.1
通讯作者：
Barry, Colleen L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McGinty, Emma E.;Niederdeppe, Jeff;Barry, Colleen L.
在关于娱乐性大麻合法化的辩论中，强调经济和其他潜在政策利益的支持合法化论点与强调公共健康风险的反对合法化论点相竞争。在2016年，我们进行了一项全国性的调查，使用一个在线小组（N = 979），旨在回答两个主要的研究问题：（1）美国人如何看待有关娱乐性大麻合法化的竞争性论点的相对优势？(2)公众对娱乐性大麻合法化的支持与争论强度的看法如何？我们研究了生活在娱乐性大麻合法化/未合法化的州的个人以及民主党人/独立人士/共和党人之间的态度差异。有序logit回归评估了感知的论点强度和公众对娱乐性大麻合法化的支持之间的关系。受访者认为，支持合法化的论点强调有益的经济和刑事司法后果，比反对合法化的论点强调不利的公共卫生影响更有说服力。受访者更有可能同意强调合法化可能增加税收（63.9%）和减少监狱人满为患（62.8%）的论点，而不是强调对机动车碰撞（51.8%）和青少年健康（49.6%）的负面影响的论点。最高评级的反合法化论点强调了州和联邦大麻法律之间的冲突（63.0%），并断言合法化将无法消除黑市（57.2%）。赞同赞成合法化的经济和刑事司法论点的受访者比其他受访者更有可能支持合法化。我们的研究结果表明，在娱乐性大麻合法化辩论的双方，都有与美国公众产生共鸣的论点。然而，公共健康风险信息被认为不如支持合法化的经济和刑事司法论点那么令人信服。(C)2017爱思唯尔公司All rights reserved.
In debates about recreational marijuana legalization, pro-legalization arguments highlighting economic and other potential policy benefits compete with anti-legalization arguments emphasizing public health risks. In 2016, we conducted a national survey using an online panel (N = 979) designed to answer two main research questions: (1) How do Americans perceive the relative strength of competing arguments about recreational marijuana legalization? (2) How are perceptions of argument strength associated with public support for recreational marijuana legalization? We examined differences in attitudes among individuals living in states that have/have not legalized recreational marijuana and among Democrats/Independents/Republicans. Ordered logit regression assessed the relationship between perceived argument strength and public support for recreational marijuana legalization. Respondents rated pro-legalization arguments highlighting beneficial economic and criminal justice consequences as more persuasive than anti-legalization arguments emphasizing adverse public health effects. Respondents were more likely to agree with arguments highlighting legalization's potential to increase tax revenue (63.9%) and reduce prison overcrowding (62.8%) than arguments emphasizing negative consequences on motor vehicle crashes (51.8%) and youth health (49.6%). The highest rated anti-legalization arguments highlighted the conflict between state and federal marijuana laws (63.0%) and asserted that legalization will fail to eliminate the black market (57.2%). Respondents who endorsed pro-legalization economic and criminal justice arguments were more likely than other respondents to support legalization. Our findings indicate that, on both side of the recreational marijuana legalization debate, there are arguments that resonate with the American public. However, public health risk messages were viewed as less compelling than pro-legalization economic and criminal justice-oriented arguments. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.