Marijuana consumers respond better to anti-impaired driving messaging that’s rooted in “realistic” portrayals of the issue that avoid stoner stereotypes, according to new research from AAA.
The organization released a pair of studies on Wednesday that examined both how cannabis users view the topic of impaired driving and self-reported behavior behind the wheel, as well as strategies to deter operating vehicles after consuming marijuana.
With technology on detecting active impairment from THC still in its infancy, the studies aim to inform the debate and provide potential solutions to mitigate the risks associated with driving under the influence.
One of the key takeaways is that marijuana users are more inclined to respond to public safety messaging that focuses on personal responsibility—but not those that stigmatize cannabis consumers or veer out of the lane of facts.
“Effective messaging about cannabis-impaired driving needs to include credible voices, real-world scenarios, and respectful language,” Jake Nelson, AAA’s director of traffic safety advocacy, said in a press release. “Individuals who consume cannabis come from all walks of life and that should be reflected in the messaging.”
The study—titled “Development and Validation of Messaging to Deter Cannabis Impaired Driving”—found that focus groups of marijuana consumers were most receptive to messages that were “positive,” “realistic,” “avoided stereotypes” and “reflected diversity.”
“The ranking exercise indicated that messages that highlighted personal responsibility and safety concerns performed better than messages based on legal risks and separating cannabis use from driving,” AAA’s Foundation for Traffic Safety found.
Here are the top-rated messages from the ranking study:
- Driving high isn’t just reckless; it’s selfish. Think twice before getting behind the wheel after using marijuana.
- You wouldn’t drink and drive, so why drive high? Don’t drive under the influence of marijuana.
- Marijuana impairs your judgement, slows your reactions, and increases your risk of crashing. Don’t drive high.
Interestingly, the researchers noted that the top-ranked message was developed by AI via ChatGPT, rather than through the focus group ideation process.
Also with respect to messaging strategy, 39 percent of respondents said they’d trust advisories about cannabis use and driving from industry groups. Another 37 percent said it’d be effective to hear those messages from marijuana brands.
“There is pertinent need to identify effective means of persuading cannabis users not to get behind the wheel while they are under the influence. However, this effort needs to be thoughtful and planned out,” AAA said. “Risk messaging that might seem intuitive may, in fact, be ineffective, and thus it is important to screen and validate risk messages.”
To that point, the federal National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has been preparing a series of public education campaigns meant to deter driving after using marijuana—notably choosing messaging that leans into cannabis culture, rather than peddling negative stereotypes about consumers as government-backed PSAs have historically done.
AAA said the motivation to conduct this latest research was based on the expanding legalization movement, as well as surveys on marijuana use and driving behavior.
For example, AAA found that 44 percent of respondents self-reported using cannabis multiple times per day, and about 58 percent said they drive daily. Eighty-five percent said they’ve driven on the same day they used marijuana, including 53 percent who said they consumed an hour or less before driving.
That may be partly driven by the fact that cannabis consumers believe they drive either the same (47 percent), a little better (15 percent) or much better (19 percent) after using marijuana.
“Understanding what motivates cannabis consumers to drive under the influence can be helpful in developing effective safety strategies,” David Yang, president and executive director of the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, said. “With insights on perceptions, decision-making, and behavior, we aim to inform policies and interventions that make our roads safer for everyone.”
It should be noted that AAA has historically advocated against marijuana reform, lobbying to block legalization efforts in states such as Connecticut, Delaware and Maryland, for example. Advocates have accused the organization of relying on “misinformation and propaganda” in those efforts.
“One would hope that AAA would be nonpartisan in this debate; that they would be the group to separate the facts from the myths so that politicians and law enforcement would be more likely to pursue evidence-based policies with regard to regulating marijuana in a manner that strengthens public safety,” NORML said in 2017. “Instead they’re largely fear-mongering and further politicizing the issue—calling for the continued criminalization and arrest of millions of Americans who choose to use marijuana privately and responsibly.”
It should further be noted that, while AAA is suggesting that the expansion of the legalization movement raises the risk of more rampant impaired driving, other studies and reports have contradicted that position.
For example, a scientific review of available evidence on the relationship between cannabis and driving that was released last October found that most research “reported no significant linear correlations between blood THC and measures of driving,” although there was an observed relationship between levels of the cannabinoid and reduced performance in some more complex driving situations.
“The consensus is that there is no linear relationship of blood THC to driving,” the paper concluded. “This is surprising given that blood THC is used to detect cannabis-impaired driving.”
That report was by no means the first research to challenge the popular view that THC blood levels are a suitable proxy for driving impairment. In 2015, for instance, NHTSA concluded that it’s “difficult to establish a relationship between a person’s THC blood or plasma concentration and performance impairing effects,” adding that “it is inadvisable to try and predict effects based on blood THC concentrations alone.”
In a separate report last year, NHTSA said there’s “relatively little research” backing the idea that THC concentration in the blood can be used to determine impairment, again calling into question laws in several states that set “per se” limits for cannabinoid metabolites.
“Several states have determined legal per se definitions of cannabis impairment, but relatively little research supports their relationship to crash risk,” that report says. “Unlike the research consensus that establishes a clear correlation between [blood alcohol content] and crash risk, drug concentration in blood does not correlate to driving impairment.”
Similarly, a Department of Justice (DOJ) researcher said last year that states may need to “get away from that idea” that marijuana impairment can be tested based on the concentration of THC in a person’s system.
“If you have chronic users versus infrequent users, they have very different concentrations correlated to different effects,” Frances Scott, a physical scientist at the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Office of Investigative and Forensic Sciences under DOJ, said.
That issue was also examined in a recent federally funded study that identified two different methods of more accurately testing for recent THC use that accounts for the fact that metabolites of the cannabinoid can stay present in a person’s system for weeks or months after consumption.
Back in 2022, Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) sent a letter to the Department of Transportation (DOT) and NHTSA seeking an update on the status of a federal report into testing THC-impaired drivers. The department was required to complete the report under a large-scale infrastructure bill that then-President Joe Biden (D) signed, but it missed that deadline and is unclear how much longer it will take.
Last summer, a congressional report for a Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (THUD) bill said that the House Appropriations Committee “continues to support the development of an objective standard to measure marijuana impairment and a related field sobriety test to ensure highway safety.”
A study published in 2019 concluded that those who drive at the legal THC limit—which is typically between two to five nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood—were not statistically more likely to be involved in an accident compared to people who haven’t used marijuana.
Separately, the Congressional Research Service in 2019 determined that while “marijuana consumption can affect a person’s response times and motor performance … studies of the impact of marijuana consumption on a driver’s risk of being involved in a crash have produced conflicting results, with some studies finding little or no increased risk of a crash from marijuana usage.”
Another study from 2022 found that smoking CBD-rich marijuana had “no significant impact” on driving ability, despite the fact that all study participants exceeded the per se limit for THC in their blood.
Two Out Of Three Marijuana Consumers Are Buying Less Cannabis Due To Inflation, Poll Finds
The post Marijuana Consumers Respond Better To ‘Realistic’ Anti-Impaired Driving Message That Avoid Stoner Stereotypes, AAA Study Finds appeared first on Marijuana Moment.
