Numerous consequences of sexual assault have been identified, including psychological consequences such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and health-risk behaviors such as substance misuse. Previous research has indicated that survivors of sexual assault may engage in substance misuse (i.e. alcohol and other illicit and prescription drug use) in attempt to suppress negative thoughts, memories, and flashbacks of the assault. The present study seeks to expand on and examine health-risk behaviors among undergraduate college women after the experience of sexual assault. Although many researchers have focused on the use of alcohol following sexual assault, less have studied non-medical use of prescription drugs (NMUPD) as an alternative method of maladaptive coping. NMUPD has recently been identified as the fastest rising recreational substance among college populations. With NMUPD becoming a norm among college students in recreational settings, exploring NMUPD for alternative uses seems like the next logical step in research. This study views sexual assault on a continuum starting from unwanted sexual contact and ending in completed rape. This study aims to bridge the gap in research by attempting to connect the risky behavior of NMUPD to coping with any experience on the sexual assault continuum among college undergraduate women. Participants with and without a history of sexual assault were recruited for the present study. Participants completed a measure of sexual assault history and severity, along with questionnaires assessing current alcohol, marijuana, and NMUPD use

Background:Non-medical use of prescription opioids (NMUPO) has become a clear threat to public health. Young adults (aged 18 to 25) have a high risk of NMUPO. My prior work on Chinese undergraduates indicates a high prevalence of lifetime NMUPO (49.2%). Health behavior theories propose that outcome expectancies are robust psychosocial determinants of substance use. Literature has identified the influence of outcome expectancies on alcohol and drug use. However, the role of outcome expectancies in NMUPO in China is unknown, and a scarcity of a valid measures for NMUPO outcome expectancies may be a barrier. Our previous research also found an association of cultural orientation with NMUPD in Chinese college students, implying that cultural orientation may affect NMUPD-related perceptions, such as outcome expectancies. The purposes of this study were to (1) conduct initial work to develop and validate an NMUPO outcome expectancies scale (NMUPOES) for Chinese college students; (2) examine the association of cultural orientation with factors identified in NMUPOES. Method: Partial data (n = 202) derived from a bigger online dataset collected from 849 undergraduates (average age = 19.65) at two universities in Beijing and Macau in Jan-April 2017 was used in this study. Participants completed the NMUPOES and reported their past-3-month NMUPO and cultural orientation. Exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modeling were employed to test the study hypotheses. Results: Findings suggested four subscales in the 50-item NMUPOES (i.e., social enhancement and tension reduction, academic enhancement, physiological discomfort, and guilt and dependence) and two higher-order factors (i.e., positive expectancies and negative expectancies). All subscales were positively correlated and had good internal consistency. The negative expectancies scale was negatively associated with past-3-month NMUPO. No significant association was found between cultural orientation and the two expectancy factors. Conclusion:NMUPOES is a psychometrically appropriate measure of NMUPO expectancies for Chinese college students. Future research may validate the NMUPOES using a large sample size in both clinical and non-clinical populations in China. An intervention program tailored to outcome expectancies may be beneficial to reduce the risk of NMUPO in Chinese college students.

No description available.

L’émergence de l’utilisation du méthylphénidate (MPH; Ritalin) par des étudiants universitaires afin d’améliorer leur concentration et leurs performances universitaires suscite l’intérêt du public et soulève d’importants débats éthiques auprès des spécialistes. Les différentes perspectives sur l’amélioration des performances cognitives représentent une dimension importante des défis sociaux et éthiques autour d’un tel phénomène et méritent d’être élucidées. Ce mémoire vise à examiner les discours présents dans les reportages internationaux de presse populaire, les discours en bioéthique et en en santé publique sur le thème de l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate. Cette recherche a permis d’identifier et d’analyser des « lacunes » dans les perspectives éthiques, sociales et scientifiques de l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate pour accroître la performance cognitive d’individus en santé. Une analyse systématique du contenu des discours sur l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate pour accroître la performance cognitive a identifié des paradigmes divergents employés pour décrire l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate et discuter ses conséquences éthiques. Les paradigmes « choix de mode de vie », « abus de médicament » et « amélioration de la cognition » sont présents dans les discours de la presse populaire, de la bioéthique et de la santé publique respectivement. Parmi les principales différences entre ces paradigmes, on retrouve : la description de l’utilisation non médicale d’agents neuropharmacologiques pour l’amélioration des performances, les risques et bénéfices qui y sont associés, la discussion d’enjeux éthiques et sociaux et des stratégies de prévention et les défis associés à l’augmentation de la prévalence de ce phénomène. La divergence de ces paradigmes reflète le pluralisme des perceptions de l’utilisation non médicale d’agents neuropharmacologiques Nos résultats suggèrent la nécessité de débats autour de l’amélioration neuropharmacologique afin de poursuivre l’identification des enjeux et de développer des approches de santé publique cohérentes. / The non-medical use of neuropharmaceuticals has sparked ethical debates. For example, there is mounting evidence that methylphenidate (MPH; Ritalin) is being used by healthy university students to improve concentration, alertness, and academic performance, a phenomenon known as cognitive enhancement. The different perspectives on the ethics of cognitive enhancement represent an important dimension of the social and ethical challenges related to such practices but have yet to be examined thoroughly. This thesis aimed to assess existing positive and negative reports in international print media, bioethics literature, and public health literature on the use of MPH to identify and analyze gaps in the ethical, social, and scientific perspectives about the non-medical use of MPH for cognitive enhancement in healthy individuals. A systematic content analysis of discourses on the non-medical use of methylphenidate for cognitive enhancement identified divergent frameworks employed to describe the non-medical use of methylphenidate and discuss its ethical implications: The frameworks of “lifestyle choice”, “prescription drug abuse” and “cognitive enhancement” are present in print media, bioethics, and public health discourses respectively. Important differences between frameworks include the description of the non-medical use of neuropharmaceuticals for cognitive enhancement, associated risks and benefits, discussion of ethical and social issues surrounding the phenomenon and the prevention strategies and challenges to the widespread use of neuropharmaceuticals for cognitive enhancement. Diverging frameworks reflect pluralism in perceptions if the non-medical use of neuropharmaceuticals for cognitive enhancement. At this time, unacknowledged pluralism and implicit assumptions about cognitive enhancement may impede public health interventions and ethics discussions.

L’émergence de l’utilisation du méthylphénidate (MPH; Ritalin) par des étudiants universitaires afin d’améliorer leur concentration et leurs performances universitaires suscite l’intérêt du public et soulève d’importants débats éthiques auprès des spécialistes. Les différentes perspectives sur l’amélioration des performances cognitives représentent une dimension importante des défis sociaux et éthiques autour d’un tel phénomène et méritent d’être élucidées. Ce mémoire vise à examiner les discours présents dans les reportages internationaux de presse populaire, les discours en bioéthique et en en santé publique sur le thème de l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate. Cette recherche a permis d’identifier et d’analyser des « lacunes » dans les perspectives éthiques, sociales et scientifiques de l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate pour accroître la performance cognitive d’individus en santé. Une analyse systématique du contenu des discours sur l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate pour accroître la performance cognitive a identifié des paradigmes divergents employés pour décrire l’utilisation non médicale du méthylphénidate et discuter ses conséquences éthiques. Les paradigmes « choix de mode de vie », « abus de médicament » et « amélioration de la cognition » sont présents dans les discours de la presse populaire, de la bioéthique et de la santé publique respectivement. Parmi les principales différences entre ces paradigmes, on retrouve : la description de l’utilisation non médicale d’agents neuropharmacologiques pour l’amélioration des performances, les risques et bénéfices qui y sont associés, la discussion d’enjeux éthiques et sociaux et des stratégies de prévention et les défis associés à l’augmentation de la prévalence de ce phénomène. La divergence de ces paradigmes reflète le pluralisme des perceptions de l’utilisation non médicale d’agents neuropharmacologiques Nos résultats suggèrent la nécessité de débats autour de l’amélioration neuropharmacologique afin de poursuivre l’identification des enjeux et de développer des approches de santé publique cohérentes. / The non-medical use of neuropharmaceuticals has sparked ethical debates. For example, there is mounting evidence that methylphenidate (MPH; Ritalin) is being used by healthy university students to improve concentration, alertness, and academic performance, a phenomenon known as cognitive enhancement. The different perspectives on the ethics of cognitive enhancement represent an important dimension of the social and ethical challenges related to such practices but have yet to be examined thoroughly. This thesis aimed to assess existing positive and negative reports in international print media, bioethics literature, and public health literature on the use of MPH to identify and analyze gaps in the ethical, social, and scientific perspectives about the non-medical use of MPH for cognitive enhancement in healthy individuals. A systematic content analysis of discourses on the non-medical use of methylphenidate for cognitive enhancement identified divergent frameworks employed to describe the non-medical use of methylphenidate and discuss its ethical implications: The frameworks of “lifestyle choice”, “prescription drug abuse” and “cognitive enhancement” are present in print media, bioethics, and public health discourses respectively. Important differences between frameworks include the description of the non-medical use of neuropharmaceuticals for cognitive enhancement, associated risks and benefits, discussion of ethical and social issues surrounding the phenomenon and the prevention strategies and challenges to the widespread use of neuropharmaceuticals for cognitive enhancement. Diverging frameworks reflect pluralism in perceptions if the non-medical use of neuropharmaceuticals for cognitive enhancement. At this time, unacknowledged pluralism and implicit assumptions about cognitive enhancement may impede public health interventions and ethics discussions.