Do stoner couples have better relationships, or is it just the weed?

A recent “study” came under scrutiny after making some pretty wild claims about how people who use cannabis interpret their human interactions. The study is entitled “Relationship perceptions and conflict behavior among cannabis users”.

The study completed;

There are discrepancies between perceived and objective measures of how relationships work among cannabis users, such that cannabis users considered their relationships to function better compared to reports from independent evaluators. These results underscore the need for a sophisticated understanding of the associations between cannabis and the functioning of relationships that appear distinct from alcohol, as well as an organizing theoretical framework to stimulate future research. – Source

As you can read with your eyes, this conclusion is fraught with questions that the study doesn’t seem to answer. I’ll go through the main points of the study while providing some perspectives and some interesting observations from Reddit.

Before we continue, let’s take a look at the methods the study used to arrive at its conclusions;

Cannabis users (N = 232; 96 males; 122 females; 14 undisclosed sex) and their partners completed self-reports on cannabis frequency and global relationship satisfaction and engagement. During a lab visit Couples engaged in a 10-minute conflict discussion and a 5-minute discussion of areas of agreement, and reported on their perceptions after the conflict. Each partner’s parasympathetic activity was assessed during the conflict task, and Trained raters coded conflict and recovery behavior

In other words, a group of stoners got together with their partners and went to a lab. There they spoke for 10 minutes about a conflict they had in the past and then had a 5 minute discussion on areas of agreement. Why talk times are not created immediately is not addressed.

After they completed their discussions, they were given a survey in which they rated their feelings after the perceived conflict. Then “trained raters” – whatever that is for reference – then “coded” conflicts – assuming they took the data from the surveys and compiled them together, possibly adding their own interpretations as well. Again not clarified by the study authors.

According to the study, they found the following;

More cannabis use by actors was associated with more negative engagement and avoidance behaviors during conflict, less parasympathetic withdrawal during conflict, and less effective behavioral recovery immediately after a conflict. More frequent cannabis use was also associated with greater satisfaction with post-conflict resolution conflict resolution, but was not associated with perceived relationship satisfaction or overall engagement. Cannabis effects were independent of alcohol consumption

In other words, they claim that couples who smoke cannabis have more “negative engagement,” which isn’t defined in the study (or at least what I had access to). But one might assume that this would mean being snappy, aggressive, loud, etc. The authors also claim that the couples “remained angry” or “couldn’t shake the feeling” after the conflict.

Here are the highlights of the study;

highlights

• Cannabis use is associated with less effective behavior and less effective physiological regulation during romantic conflict.

• The effects of cannabis use on couple functioning were independent of alcohol use.

• The subjective reports of cannabis users differ from objective measures of couple functioning.

• Cannabis users’ positive relationship perceptions may impair their ability to identify problematic relationship dynamics.

Now that we have everything on the table, let’s take a closer look at these points.

How did you create the partner model?

A Redditor helped explain how they create these types of psychological models that were used to create the study’s findings;

This is coming from Redditor, “Striking_Menu9765” which can be found in THIS THREAD

Usually in psychology we are taught about models that assume independent observations in the outcome variable. But dyads are actually about interdependence, because one person and their romantic partner influence each other’s outcomes. The data of the partners are usually correlated. Treating the study results as independent when you have participants who not only know each other but definitely influence each other would violate the assumption of this model. You can’t unravel that, and often it’s actually a pretty interesting piece of data. Enter the actor-partner interdependence model! This accounts for interdependence by nesting the individuals in a dyad for analysis. That way, when you look at the result, you “check” the fact that this data correlates and you observe the actual differences that remain.

In connection with this study, I can roughly guess. I only read the synopsis. But it seems they had the couples discuss conflicts and resolutions, and they measured how the couples felt about it. And they also had some more objective measurements for comparison. Each dyad had one or more cannabis users and they wanted to know if cannabis use made a difference in outcomes. But they need to show that difference statistically, beyond the influence of the partners’ data that is also included. Since both partners were present during the conflict discussion.

This design is stronger than just giving a poll asking individuals, “How do you think things went during your last argument?” An association between cannabis use and that would be moronic without the partner’s involvement, and without the observation they would have missed the discrepancy between the participants’ perceptions and the more objective measurement. So a good technique that you can safely use. That said… more research is needed to fully invalidate the findings of this study. It’s quite interesting, but it’s early days.

Now that we have a decent breakdown of what statistical models are, we can address some more questions that other Redditors have had. One such comment came from Redditor machina99, who observed;

The study states that couples reported how they handled conflict, which was compared to an observer’s judgment of how they handled it. But it doesn’t seem to suggest that this difference really matters to the couple. If the couple thinks their relationship is okay, does it matter that a researcher says they aren’t?

What I mean is that, for example, someone has seen my fiancee and I’m arguing – they’d probably say we’re terrible at conflict resolution because she wants to discuss right away and I avoid it until I’ve properly thought the issue through. Objectively, it looks like I’m exhibiting avoidance behavior, which is negative. But my partner knows that’s how I work and we adapt. We’d both say we handle conflict well, but an outside observer would likely disagree.

Edit: As many have pointed out, in some situations you need an outside observer – abuse, dependency, etc. could all be situations where an outside observer is required.

That’s a fair point. While it’s true that there is a sense of interdependence among couples, each couple also develops their own conflict resolution protocols that usually work for them. Of course, I am sure that some of the results were accurate and that some people avoided conflict or suffered from post-engagement “feelings”.

But is that cannabis? Isn’t that just emotional immaturity? Is the emotional immaturity related to the cannabis or maybe something to do with the type of community, the ages of the couples, etc.?

There are many factors when it comes to conflict resolution and although the study used an objective model, there are still so many elements they failed to consider when creating these models. Because of this, psychology is not considered a science due to the sheer objectivity of its models.

What to do with this study?

A Redditor pointed this out;

Reddit science in brief: posting messy psych study > top comment points out an apparent major methodological flaw > someone cites the authors who already addressed it or made it transparent as a caveat > repeating steps – /cutzen

This is true. I’ve read hundreds of these messy psychostudies and found that major publications talk about them as if they were fact. This, in turn, informs politicians who pass insane laws on flawed premises. This is a major issue we deal with these days, “non-news” masquerading as news.

The fact is, some couples who smoke cannabis together will be excellent at resolving interpersonal conflicts, while others would be terrible. While there is a certain sense of modeling in psychology to arrive at “general conclusions,” each individual’s subjectivity makes painting with big strokes a bad idea.

This study used a wide brush to paint as broadly as possible.

CANNABIS PAIRS, MORE IDEAS….

Stoner date night ideas – what to do with cannabis?