HHS Public Access

Author manuscript
J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.
Author Manuscript

Published in final edited form as:

J Addict Med. 2020 ; 14(1): 56–62. doi:10.1097/ADM.0000000000000542.

Drug Legalization and Decriminalization Beliefs Among

Substance-Using and Non-using Individuals
Alexis S. Hammond, MD, PhD, Kelly E. Dunn, PhD, Eric C. Strain, MD
Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit (BPRU), Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral
Sciences, the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 5510 Nathan Shock Drive, Baltimore,
Maryland, United States, 21224
Author Manuscript

Abstract
Objectives: There has been advocacy for legalization of abusable substances, but systematic data
on societal beliefs regarding such legalization are limited. People who use substances may have
unique beliefs about legalization, and this study assessed whether they would be in favor of drug
legalization/decriminalization. It was hypothesized that those who use particular drugs (especially
marijuana) would support its legalization/decriminalization, but that this would not be the case
across all classes (especially opioids and stimulants).

Methods: A nationwide sample of 506 adults were surveyed online to assess demographic
characteristics, substance misuse, and beliefs regarding drug legalization/decriminalization.
Legalization/decriminalization beliefs for specific drugs were assessed on an 11-point scale
(0=strongly disagree; 10=strongly agree).
Author Manuscript

Results: For persons with opioid misuse (15.4%), when asked about their agreement with:
“heroin should be legalized,” the mean score was 4.6 (SEE= 0.4; neutral). For persons with
stimulant misuse (12.1%), when asked about their agreement with: “cocaine should be legalized,”
the score was 4.2(0.5). However, for persons with marijuana misuse (34.0%), when asked about
their agreement with: “medical marijuana should be legalized” the score was 8.2 (0.3; indicating
agreement), and for “recreational marijuana” the score was also 8.2(0.3).

Conclusions: These results suggest that persons who used marijuana strongly support the
legalization of both recreational and medical marijuana, whereas persons who primarily have
opioid or stimulant misuse have less strongly held beliefs about legalization of substances within
those respective categories. By including those who misuse drugs, these data assist in framing
discussions of drug legalization and have the potential to inform drug policy considerations.
Author Manuscript

Keywords
drug legalization; drug decriminalization; medical marijuana; opioid misuse; stimulant misuse

Corresponding Author: Alexis S. Hammond, MD, PhD, BPRU, 5510 Nathan Shock Drive, Baltimore, MD 21224, 410-550-0045
office phone, 410-550-0030 fax, [email protected].
 Hammond et al. Page 2

1.0 Introduction
Author Manuscript

Substance use is a major concern in both the United States (US) and abroad, with important
consequences related not only to morbidity and mortality, but legal and economic concerns
as well. In 2010, the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study found that
mental illness was the leading cause of years living with disability worldwide, with illicit
substance use disorders (SUDs) and alcohol use disorders (AUDs) accounting for 11% and
10% of disability-adjusted life years within that category, respectively (Whiteford et al.,
2013). The 2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) estimates that 7.8% of
adults in the US had a SUD during that year (Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and
Quality, 2017).

While much drug use remains illegal, there are growing efforts to legalize and/or
decriminalize certain drug classes (such as marijuana and heroin), despite international drug
Author Manuscript

treaties prohibiting the non-medical use of marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, and heroin
(Hall, 2017). This is related, in part, to evidence that drugs such as marijuana or heroin,
which had been previously categorized as having no medicinal value, may have potential
medical benefit. These efforts are also premised upon the experiences of countries like
Portugal, which decriminalized all illicit drugs in 2001 and reported subsequent decreases in
drug-related societal problems, as well as support for legalizing drugs like marijuana for
non-medical use in countries such as Canada and Uruguay (Room, 2014; Goncalves et al.,
2015; Cox, 2018). Several European countries and Canada have now endorsed the use of
medicinal injectable and oral heroin (diacetylmorphine or diamorphine) as an effective
medication for heroin use disorder among persons who are not otherwise responding to
treatments (Ayanga et al., 2016).
Author Manuscript

The US is beginning to demonstrate varied support for drug legalization and

decriminalization. For instance, although not formally supported by the US federal
government, eight states and the District of Columbia have legalized recreational marijuana,
and twenty-nine states have legalized medicinal marijuana. However, systematic data on the
opinions of Americans regarding the legalization/decriminalization of marijuana are lacking,
and attitudes regarding the legalization/decriminalization of other substances are even
sparser. Data show that the public’s opinions about marijuana seem to have changed over
time (Carliner et al., 2017), with 12% of the public supporting legalization in 1969 (based on
survey data), compared with 61% per an online poll conducted in 2017 (Geiger, 2018).
Another recent online poll of registered US voters found that a modest majority (68%) was
in support of legalization of marijuana for medical purposes, with 52% supporting its
legalization for recreational purposes. However, this sample was vastly opposed to the
Author Manuscript

legalization and decriminalization of other drugs (including cocaine, heroin, and

methamphetamine), for both medical and recreational purposes (Lopez, 2016).

Opinions about drug legalization/decriminalization can differ based on whether a person has
a personal history of substance use and as a function of demographic and ideological
characteristics (such a religious or political preference); these associations have only been
evaluated in a few studies. The first such study was conducted in 2002 among 188 out-of-
treatment persons who used substances, and persons who did not use substances, from low

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 3

income, high drug-use sections of a US urban setting (Houston, TX), and reported that
Author Manuscript

persons who used substances (marijuana, heroin, cocaine, or methamphetamine) were more
likely to support the legalization of marijuana (68% in favor) than persons who did not use
substances (33%), while each group showed little support for the legalization of heroin (12%
vs. 8%) or cocaine (14% vs. 8%, respectively; Trevino and Richard, 2002). More recently,
an online poll reported that Americans identifying as Democrats were more likely to be in
favor of marijuana legalization (69%) than Republicans (43%). Also, white mainline
Protestants were more in favor of marijuana legalization (64%) than white evangelical
Protestants (38%) or Catholics (52%), while those who were not affiliated with any religion
showed the highest support (78%; Geiger, 2018).

These polls have various limitations, and have not focused upon the attitudes and beliefs of
people who use drugs. This population may have unique beliefs about legalization and/or
decriminalization of a drug - either their drug of choice, or illicit drugs more broadly. The
Author Manuscript

direct experience of using a drug might predispose a person to support more ready
availability of that drug or, conversely, might make a person more cautious about decreasing
barriers to its use. Survey data have demonstrated that opinions on drug legalization/
decriminalization can differ based on the person’s belief system, such as varying as a
function of political or religious affiliation. Persons who are generally more conservative
may not be in favor of legalizing or decriminalizing substances. Surprisingly, there is little
information on attitudes regarding legalization/decriminalization of drugs that systematically
evaluates these domains. This study aimed to address this gap by surveying both persons
who used substances and persons who did not use substances about their opinions regarding
legalization and decriminalization of drugs, and to also evaluate whether differences in these
attitudes were associated with different religious and political affiliations, or the lack
thereof, as a secondary outcome. It was hypothesized that individuals who use marijuana
Author Manuscript

would support the legalization and decriminalization of that drug, but that this would not be
the case for heroin or cocaine among persons who used opioids or stimulants, respectively.

2.0 Methods
2.1 Participants
The sample was recruited online between July and November 2017. Participants (N=506)
were registered as “workers” on the Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) platform (Paolacci et
al., 2010; Bartneck et al., 2015), which is an online forum where workers can anonymously
complete tasks (such as surveys) assigned by “requestors” for a wage. Workers receive
requestor approval ratings based on the quality of their work and completion time, which
serves as an index of credibility and reliability (Peer et al., 2014). To take the present survey,
Author Manuscript

workers had to have an average requestor approval rating of 90% (as a quality control
measure) and be located in the US. A short screening survey was given to ensure that
participants were at least 18 years old, and it included other demographic questions, such as
sex and race, to distract from the subject of the survey. The screening survey also limited the
number of persons per category of primary substance used (including no use) using quotas,
with a goal of obtaining at least 60 people in each primary substance category. A total of
2,672 persons attempted the screening survey, and 545 persons completed the primary

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 4

survey. Those who were not eligible to continue on to the primary survey received $0.10 for
Author Manuscript

completing the screening survey. After providing consent by agreeing to participate in the
survey, those who answered questions in the primary survey received a bonus of two dollars,
for a total of $2.10. The following quality control questions were included: 1) “Have you
taken this survey before?” and 2) “Is there any reason for which we should not use your
responses? For instance, you weren’t paying attention, you did not answer honestly, you had
major computer issues, etc.” Those who answered “yes” to either of these questions were
not included. The survey was hosted on Qualtrics (Provo, UT). The Johns Hopkins
University Institutional Review Board approved the use of AMT for this survey research.

2.2 Measures
Demographic and Drug Use Characteristics: Primary survey questions included
demographic information such as education level, employment status, and income, as well as
Author Manuscript

characteristics related to religious and political affiliations and whether the participant or
someone close to them had ever experienced legal consequences related to substance use
(Table 1). Participants were asked whether they identified with a particular religion and to
choose which major political party they identified with most among a list of the most
common options; the options “none” and “other” were also provided. Additionally,
participants were provided a list of substances and asked which they had used in the past
year (including a write-in “other” option); for each substance they reported using, they were
then asked to characterize use based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) SUD criteria (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).
Answering “yes” to two or more symptoms was operationalized as meeting criteria for a
SUD for that substance. Participants who indicated using more than one substance in the
past year were asked to identify which substance they would consider their primary
Author Manuscript

substance; this was the basis upon which they were categorized for the remainder of the
survey analyses.

Decriminalization and Legalization Questions: Participants were provided with

definitions of legalization and decriminalization, and were then asked to rate their level of
agreement with statements about legalization and decriminalization of heroin, cocaine,
medical marijuana, and recreational marijuana on an 11-point scale with 0 representing
“strongly disagree,” and 10 representing “strongly agree.” Some statements were worded in
support of legalization/decriminalization of the substance while others were worded against
legalization/decriminalization, to ensure participants were maintaining attention. Responses
to the latter were reverse coded for consistency in reporting.

2.3 Statistical analyses

Author Manuscript

Participants were categorized into groups based on their self-reported primary substance
used in the past year, with heroin and prescription painkiller misuse (taking pills other than
how they were prescribed) collapsed into the “opioids” group; cocaine, methamphetamines,
prescription stimulant misuse, or other stimulant use collapsed into the “stimulants” group;
marijuana products, including synthetics, making up the “marijuana” group; any alcohol use
included in the “alcohol” group; and no substance use in the “none” group. The degree to
which demographic characteristics were associated with ratings for decriminalization/

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 5

legalization was also assessed. Some demographic characteristics with multiple subgroups
Author Manuscript

were dichotomized given limited numbers in some subgroups, including marital status
(never married vs. ever married), race (minority vs. Caucasian), employment status
(employed full time vs. other), education level (associates degree vs. less education),
household income (less than or equal to $45,000 vs. more than $45,000) and political
affiliation (Democrat vs. other).

Opinions on drug legalization and decriminalization as a function of primary substance used

served as the primary analyses, while all others were secondary analyses. Categorical data,
including demographics and SUD categorization were analyzed with chi-square analyses.
Continuous data, such as age and drug legalization/decriminalization ratings, were analyzed
with ANOVA or ANCOVA as appropriate. ANCOVAs controlled for those demographic
variables that were significantly different among groups and showed a significant
relationship with the outcome measure (see Table 2). Between-group planned comparisons
Author Manuscript

of drug legalization/decriminalization ratings were compared between the primary substance

categories, and then as a function of the group for whom the rating was deemed most
relevant (e.g., ratings for heroin among persons who primarily used opioids, for cocaine
among persons who primarily used stimulants, and for medical/recreational marijuana
among persons who primarily used marijuana). Analyses used Type III sums of squares and
planned comparisons among the primary substance use groups, and Pearson’s correlations to
evaluate the relationship between legalization/decriminalization ratings. The primary
outcome variables (legalization and decriminalization ratings) were not normally distributed.
For the analyses in which we needed to control for certain demographic variables, ANCOVA
were used as the main analyses, based on support for analyzing Likert data with parametric
statistics (Lubke and Muthén, 2004; De Winter and Dodou, 2010). The analyses by primary
substance were significant when analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis tests, indicating that
Author Manuscript

parametric and nonparametric statistics are approximately equivalent for these data. There
were minor exceptions among the secondary analyses, but not the primary analyses. All
analyses were performed in SPSS version 24.0. Statistical tests were considered significant
at the p < 0.05 level.

3.0 Results
3.1 Participant characteristics
A total of 506 participants completed the survey (Table 1). Over the time of enrollment, the
screening process targeted participants to ensure there were at least 60 subjects for each
primary substance category. The final population had a mean age of 33.6 years old and was
53.0% male, 45.5% single (never married), and 25.9% racial minority (i.e., not Caucasian).
Author Manuscript

Sixty-two percent of participants were employed full-time, 59.1% had at least an Associate’s
degree, and 50.4% had a yearly household income of $45,000 or less. Among the total
population, 36.4% of persons had experienced a legal consequence related to substance use
among themselves or someone close to them. This was significantly more common among
persons who used opioids (35.9%), stimulants (39.3%), marijuana (43.0%), or alcohol
(36.4%), compared to those without substance use (19.5%). Participants were located in 43
states and the District of Columbia. For those persons who self-reported a primary substance

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 6

used in the past year (N=429; 84.8%), a substantial proportion within each substance
Author Manuscript

category reported symptoms meeting criteria for a SUD, including OUD (33/78; 42.3% of
persons with opioid misuse), stimulant use disorder (25/61; 41.0%), marijuana use disorder
(35/172; 20.3%), and AUD (39/118; 33.1%).

3.2 Preference for drug legalization and decriminalization of specific drug categories
(Table 2)
3.2.1 Heroin—Overall, participants were not in favor of legalizing heroin (mean 3.8/10
for the total sample). However, persons whose primary substance was an opioid tended to
have higher ratings (reflecting more positive attitudes) towards legalizing heroin (4.6/10)
than persons who were classified as having primarily stimulant (3.3/10) or alcohol (3.4/10)
use, as well as persons with no past-year substance use (3.4/10). The ratings of those with
primary opioid misuse were similar to the ratings of persons with primary marijuana misuse
Author Manuscript

with respect to attitudes towards heroin legalization (4.2/10). Ratings among all groups for
decriminalization of heroin were even lower (total mean 2.9/10) indicating general lack of
support. Persons who primarily misused opioids rated heroin decriminalization at 3.1 on
average, which was not significantly different from other groups.

3.2.2 Cocaine—Similarly, the total sample of 506 persons was not in favor of cocaine
legalization (3.8/10) or decriminalization (3.3/10). Persons with stimulant misuse rated
cocaine legalization (4.2/10) and decriminalization (3.5/10) in a comparably low manner.
Those who primarily used marijuana rated their agreement with cocaine decriminalization
significantly higher (4.4/10), compared to those with primary alcohol use (2.8/10) and those
with no use (2.8/10).

3.2.3 Marijuana—The total group of 506 participants was generally more in favor of the
Author Manuscript

legalization and decriminalization of both medical (means for legalization = 7.2/10 and for
decriminalization = 8.3/10) and recreational marijuana (legalization = 7.2/10 and
decriminalization = 7.4/10), compared to legalization or decriminalization of heroin and
cocaine. When examining the specific substance use groups, persons without any past-year
substance use had lower ratings regarding legalization and decriminalization of marijuana,
compared to other primary substance use groups. Conversely, persons with primary
marijuana use had higher ratings for marijuana legalization (medical and recreational both =
8.2/10) and decriminalization (medical = 9.2/10 and recreational = 8.4/10).

3.3 Ratings as a function of primary substance used

This study hypothesized that respondents who identified a particular substance as their
primary substance of use over the past year might be more inclined to see that substance
Author Manuscript

legalized and/or decriminalized (particularly for marijuana). Results demonstrated that

participants categorized as having primary opioid or stimulant misuse rated legalization and
decriminalization of heroin and cocaine, respectively, at significantly lower values
(indicating less endorsement) when compared to how those with primary marijuana use
rated legalization and decriminalization of both medical and recreational marijuana (see
corresponding cells of Table 2).

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 7

3.4 Religious characteristics

Author Manuscript

Whether persons identified with a particular religion or not proved to be an important

variable among demographic characteristics, as well as legalization/decriminalization ratings
(with religion serving as a covariate for those analyses). Thirty percent of participants
identified with a religion. A significantly lower proportion of persons who used marijuana
(21.5%) identified with a religion, compared to those who primarily used alcohol (37.3%),
stimulants (36.1%), or no substances (37.7%). Similarly, those who identified with a religion
were significantly less likely to report primary marijuana use (23.7%) than those who did
not (38.6%). However, those persons who identified with a religion and used substances
were significantly more likely to endorse 2 or more criteria on the DSM-5 SUD checklist
(37.8%) than those who used substances but did not identify with a particular religion
(27.8%).
Author Manuscript

There were statistically significant, though weak, negative correlations between identifying
with a religion, and all drug legalization/decriminalization ratings (see Supplemental Table
1). Participants with a self-reported religious affiliation had significantly lower mean
legalization/decriminalization ratings compared to those without any religious affiliation
(Figure 1a).

3.5 Political characteristics

Political party affiliation (or the lack thereof) was also a significant factor among the
demographic makeup of this population, their substance use, and opinions on drug
legalization/decriminalization (making it a covariate for these analyses). The majority of
persons surveyed (88.7%) were registered to vote. Fifty-one percent of participants
identified with the Democratic Party, and the proportion of persons who used marijuana and
Author Manuscript

identified as Democrats (60.5%) was significantly higher than those who primarily used
alcohol (44.1%) or no substances (42.9%). Those who identified as Democrats were
significantly more likely to use marijuana (40%) compared to non-Democrats (27.6%).
Among those persons whose primary substance was alcohol, Democrats were significantly
less likely to have an alcohol use disorder (12.7%) compared to non-Democrats (19.1%).
Persons who identified as Republicans had significantly lower legalization/decriminalization
ratings for each substance compared to those who identified as Democrats and those without
any political affiliation (see Figure 1b).

3.6 Ratings as a function of having a DSM-5 SUD vs. no SUD within primary drug
categories
It is also possible that people with a more severe pattern of use (i.e., a SUD) would be more
Author Manuscript

supportive of legalizing and/or decriminalizing the substance they use. However, there were
no differences in ratings for legalization and decriminalization for any substance when
comparing persons who use a substance but did not fulfill the DSM-5 SUD criteria, with
those within that substance category who did meet the DSM-5 SUD criteria (data not
shown).

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 8

3.7 Correlation of medical marijuana ratings to ratings of other substances

Author Manuscript

The use of medical marijuana is becoming more acceptable across the US, and it is possible
that people who support the legalization/decriminalization of medical marijuana may also be
open to supporting the legalization/decriminalization of other substances. We found a
significant, though at times weak, positive correlation between how much participants
agreed that medical marijuana should be decriminalized with ratings on heroin
decriminalization (r=0.13, p=0.003), cocaine decriminalization (r= 0.15, p=0.001),
recreational marijuana legalization (r=0.37, p=0.000) and recreational marijuana
decriminalization (r=0.39, p=0.000). There was a significant, positive correlation between
how participants rated medical marijuana legalization, and decriminalization of cocaine
(r=0.09, p=0.038), legalization of recreational marijuana (r=0.43, p=0.000) and
decriminalization of recreational marijuana (r=0.28, p=0.000).
Author Manuscript

4.0 Discussion
The current study provides new insights into opinions regarding the legalization and
decriminalization of heroin, cocaine and marijuana. This study is unique in examining
attitudes as a function of past year drug use, and hypothesized that persons who used
substances would have differing drug legalization/decriminalization ratings for their self-
reported primary substance, especially when comparing persons who primarily used
marijuana to those who primarily used opioids and stimulants. Our hypothesis was
supported by these findings, as persons who primarily used marijuana rated both the
legalization and decriminalization of this drug favorably, but persons who primarily used
opioids and simulants rated their support for both the legalization and decriminalization of
heroin and cocaine relatively low, respectively. We found that overall most respondents were
in favor of the legalization and decriminalization of marijuana (both medical and
Author Manuscript

recreational), but not heroin and cocaine. These findings are consistent with the limited data
that is currently known about opinions on marijuana legalization and decriminalization
(Lopez, 2016; Carliner et al., 2017; Geiger, 2018) as well as, heroin and cocaine (Trevino
and Richard, 2002; Geiger, 2018), though this is the first hypothesis-driven study of its kind
since recent changes in marijuana laws have been made. Of note, while the concepts of
legalization and decriminalization are fundamentally different, and were asked about
separately in our survey, we found that they tended to track together (i.e. for each drug the
mean ratings were either low, or below five, as in the case of heroin and cocaine, or above 5,
as in the case of both recreational and medical marijuana). Thus, we will discuss the
attitudes about both together.

These findings are particularly important because persons who misuse legal or illicit
Author Manuscript

substances often have had interactions with the legal system, which may influence their
attitudes and beliefs. Over a third of our participants had experienced legal consequences
related to substance use themselves or through someone close to them. Data from the 2002–
2008 NSDUH survey provides corroborating evidence of this relationship between drug use
and legal consequences by showing that among those who had past year illicit drug
dependence or abuse, 18% and 36% had been arrested once or more than once that year,
respectively. Within the subsample of NSDUH respondents reporting past year alcohol

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 9

dependence or abuse, these values increased to 38% and 52%, respectively (Lattimore et al.,
Author Manuscript

2014). The estimated prevalence of SUDs among incarcerated persons, while largely varied
across studies, is substantial within both female (30–60%) and male (10–48%) prisoners
(Gerstein and Harwood, 1990; Mason et al., 1997; Lo and Stephens, 2000; Fazel et al.,
2006). The high prevalence and comorbidity with SUDs indicates that legal issues are a
significant factor in the current climate of substance use in the US.

The majority of our participants were not in favor of legalizing nor decriminalizing heroin
and cocaine, even if they or someone they knew had suffered legal consequences related to
substance use, or if they themselves met criteria for a SUD. These findings suggest that this
population would not support policy changes related to heroin and cocaine legalization/
decriminalization, which may reflect their own experiences, making them more cautious
about increasing availability of these drugs. This sample was generally supportive of
legalization and decriminalization of both medical and recreational marijuana. However,
Author Manuscript

persons without any substance use in the last 12 months had significantly lower ratings than
other groups, and were mainly neutral about marijuana legalization/decriminalization. The
exception was that persons with no primary substance use had a higher rating on
decriminalization of medical marijuana (mean 7.1/10) compared with their other ratings,
perhaps because this was the most conservative marijuana option given. Interestingly, there
was a positive relationship between agreement with decriminalizing medical marijuana, and
decriminalizing heroin, cocaine, and recreational marijuana among our total population,
suggesting an openness to minimizing criminal consequences associated with medical
marijuana tracked with openness to the same for other drugs.

Understanding attitudes and associated characteristics towards drug legalization and

decriminalization is important, especially in the currently changing social landscape, as
Author Manuscript

several states in the US have passed laws legalizing and/or decriminalizing marijuana. For
example, a study involving persons who voted on the initiative to legalize marijuana in
Washington state reported that once marijuana stores began to open, persons who previously
voted against the initiative were more likely to change their vote, if given the chance,
compared to those who had voted in support of it (Subbaraman and Kerr, 2016). Given the
current changing environment, it is timely to determine whether persons continue to support
legalization/decriminalization of marijuana and, more broadly, whether they would support
legalization/decriminalization of other illicit drugs. Additionally, with other countries
conducting research on heroin as a treatment for OUD (Ayanga et al., 2016), it is important
to consider how this may be perceived in the US and whether attitudes vary as a function of
demographic and/or ideological beliefs.
Author Manuscript

There are several limitations to this work. The use of an online survey through AMT
involves some selection bias, and resulted in a population which, while diverse, is not
completely representative of the US population as a whole though it is demographically
consistent with other studies involving AMT workers (Chandler and Shapiro, 2016).
Additional studies conducted within a representative sample of the US population would be
helpful to determine the impact of demographic characteristics, as well as legal status of
marijuana in the state of residence, on perceptions of drug decriminalization/legalization.
The fact that self-reported substance use was not verified, and was from an anonymous

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 10

population, is another limitation, in addition to the fact that all persons who used opioids or
Author Manuscript

stimulants were grouped together, due to small numbers, instead of being able to assess
those who used heroin and cocaine, specifically. We were also unable to look at how the use
of multiple substances (especially those with primary use of alcohol, a legal substance, in
addition to illegal substances) affected attitudes toward drug legalization/decriminalization.

This study appears to be the first to systematically study opinions of persons from across the
US who use substances, and those who do not, about the legalization and decriminalization
of multiple substances, and results have relevance for current and future policies.
Legalization/decriminalization of marijuana was supported, but not in the case of other
drugs, despite changes in apparent attitudes in other countries. As more information is
learned about potential health benefits of certain substances that may drive policy changes in
favor of their legalization/decriminalization, it is critical that persons who are directly
affected by any policy changes (i.e. those who use substances) be included in these
Author Manuscript

discussions to provide their unique perspectives. Studies among persons in SUD treatment,
or those with varying SUD severity, are also warranted, as they may prove even more
insightful to inform policies on legalization/decriminalization and the use of currently illicit
drugs as treatment for SUDs. It is also important to monitor and track the evolution in
changes in attitudes and beliefs over time. These nuances may impact public health
messaging and the ability to target certain groups.

Supplementary Material
Refer to Web version on PubMed Central for supplementary material.

Conflict of interest and Source of Funding:

Author Manuscript

This work was supported by internal funding from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. No conflicts
declared.

References
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5®).
Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Pub 2013.
Ayanga D, Shorter D, Kosten TR. Update on pharmacotherapy for treatment of opioid use disorder.
Expert Opin Pharmacother 2016;17: 2307–2318. [PubMed: 27734745]
Bartneck C, Duense A, Moltchanova E, Zawieska K. Comparing the similarity of responses received
from studies in Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to studies conducted online and with direct recruitment.
PloS one 2015;10: e0121595. [PubMed: 25876027]
Carliner H, Brown QL, Sarvet AL, Hasin DS. Cannabis use, attitudes, and legal status in the US: A
review. Prev Med 2017;104:13–23. [PubMed: 28705601]
Author Manuscript

Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. Results from the 2016 National Survey on Drug
Use and Health: Detailed tables; 2017 Retrieved from https://www.samhsa.gov/data/. Accessed May
22, 2018.
Chandler J, Shapiro D. Conducting clinical research using crowdsourced convenience samples. Annual
Review of Clinical Psychology 2016;12:53–81.
Cox C The Canadian Cannabis Act legalizes and regulates recreational cannabis use in 2018. Health
Policy 2018;122:205–209. [PubMed: 29429644]
De Winter JC, Dodou D. Five-point Likert items: t test versus Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon. Practical
Assessment, Research & Evaluation 2010;15:1–12.

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 11

Fazel S, Bains P, Doll H. Substance abuse and dependence in prisoners: a systematic review. Addiction
2006;101:181–191. [PubMed: 16445547]
Author Manuscript

Geiger A About six-in-ten Americans support marijuana legalization. 2018 Retrieved from http://
www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/05/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/. Accessed
May 22, 2018.
Gerstein DR, Harwood HJ. Treating drug problems: A study of the evolution, effectiveness, and
financing of public and private drug treatment systems (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: Institute of
Medicine, 1990.
Goncalves R, Lourenco A, Silva SN. A social cost perspective in the wake of the Portuguese strategy
for the fight against drugs. Int J Drug Policy 2015;26:199–209. [PubMed: 25265899]
Hall W The future of the international drug control system and national drug prohibitions. Addiction
2017;113(7):1210–1223. [PubMed: 28884869]
Lattimore PK, Steffey DM, Gfroerer J, et al. Arrestee substance use: comparison of estimates from the
national survey on drug use and health and the arrestee drug abuse monitoring program. Rockville
(MD): Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2014.
Lo CC, Stephens RC. Drugs and prisoners: Treatment needs on entering prison. The American journal
Author Manuscript

of drug and alcohol abuse 2000;26: 229–245. [PubMed: 10852358]

Lopez G Poll: The only drug Americans want to legalize is marijuana. 2016 Retrieved from https://
www.vox.com/2016/3/15/11224500/marijuana-legalization-war-on-drugs-pol. Accessed May 22,
2018.
Lubke GH, Muthén BO. Applying multigroup confirmatory factor models for continuous outcomes to
Likert scale data complicates meaningful group comparisons. Structural equation modeling
2004;11:514–534.
Mason D, Birmingham L, Grubin D. Substance use in remand prisoners: a consecutive case study.
BMJ 1997;315:18–21. [PubMed: 9233320]
Paolacci G, Chandler J, Ipeirotis PG. Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment
and Decision Making 2010;5(5):411–419.
Peer E, Vosgerau J, Acquisti A. Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon
Mechanical Turk. Behavior research methods 2014; 46:1023–1031. [PubMed: 24356996]
Room R Legalizing a market for cannabis for pleasure: Colorado, Washington, Uruguay and beyond.
Author Manuscript

Addiction 2014;109;345–351. [PubMed: 24180513]

Subbaraman MS, Kerr WC. Marijuana policy opinions in Washington state since legalization: would
voters vote the same way? Contemporary drug problems 2016;43:369–380. [PubMed: 28845066]
Trevino RA, Richard AJ. Attitudes towards drug legalization among drug users. Am J Drug Alcohol
Abuse 2002;28:91–108. [PubMed: 11853137]
Whiteford HA, Degenhardt L, Rehm J, et al. Global burden of disease attributable to mental and
substance use disorders: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Lancet
2013;382:1575–1586.
Author Manuscript

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 12
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

Figure 1.
Mean drug legalization/decriminalization ratings as a function of (a) religious or (b) political
affiliation1
1Scales rated from 0–10, with 0 being strongly disagree and 10 being strongly agree.

Unadjusted mean differences between groups were assessed with one-way ANOVA, with
Tukey’s post hoc comparisons among political groups. Asterisks indicate p < 0.05 (b). Error
bars indicate standard error of the mean (SEM). Asterisks indicate p < 0.05 when comparing
persons who identify as republicans to those who identify as Democrats or have no political
affiliation. Abbreviations: L- legalization, D- decriminalization, MMJ- medical marijuana,
RMJ- recreational marijuana
Author Manuscript
Author Manuscript

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Hammond et al. Page 13

Table 1.
1
Participant demographic data (N=506)
Author Manuscript

Primary Substance Used

Opioids Stimulants Marijuana Alcohol None Total

(N=78) (N=61) (N=172) (N=118) (N=77) (N=506)
34.6 38.2
Age Mean (SD), years 33.6(10.5)a 31.4 (8.2)a 31.6 (8.2)a 33.6(10.1)
(10.5)ab (12.6)b

Sex % Male 41 47.5 55.8 55.1 59.7 53

Marital Status % Never Married 46.2 41.0 43.6 45.8 51.9 45.5

Race* % Minority 25.6ab 27.9a 32.6a 22.9ab 14.3b 25.9

% Employed Full
Employment Status 64.1 70.5 61 62.7 54.5 62.1
Time

Highest Education % Associate’s

Level Achieved* degree or above 48.7a 65.6bc 64.0b 61.9ab 49.4ac 59.1
Author Manuscript

Yearly Household
Income Level*
% $45,000 or less 61.5ad 36.1b 52.3acd 40.7bc 61.0d 50.4

Do you identify
with a particular % Yes 30.8ab 36.1a 21.5b 37.3a 37.7a 30.8
religion?*

% Democratic
Political Affiliation*
Party 50.0ab 52.5ab 60.5ac 44.1b 42.9b 51.4

Are you registered

% Yes 84.6 90.2 90.1 92.4 83.1 88.7
to vote?

Have you or
someone close to
you experienced a
legal consequence
% Yes 35.9a 39.3a 43.0a 36.4a 19.5b 36.4
related to substance
use?*

1
Asterisks indicate those variables for which the overall F or x2 statistic was significant at p<0.05. Differences among groups were compared using
Author Manuscript

a Chi-square test, with pairwise comparisons, or a one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc tests for pairwise comparisons. Categories within a row
that do not share a common superscript were significantly different (p< 0.05).
Author Manuscript

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

 Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript

Table 2.
1
Level of agreement with statements as a function of primary substance used

Medical Recreational
Cocaine Medical marijuana Recreational
Heroin should Heroin should be Cocaine should be marijuana marijuana
should be should be marijuana should
be legalized decriminalized decriminalized* should be should be
Hammond et al.

legalized decriminalized* be legalized*

legalized* decriminalized*

Primary
Substance Mean(SEE) Mean(SEE) Mean(SEE) Mean(SEE) Mean(SEE) Mean(SEE) Mean(SEE) Mean(SEE)
Used

Opioids 4.6(0.4) 3.1(0.4) 4.0(0.4) 3.2(0.4)a,b 7.3(0.4)a,b 8.0(0.3)a,b 6.7(0.4)a,b 7.2(0.4)a,c

Stimulants 3.3(0.5) 2.7(0.4) 4.2(0.5) 3.5(0.4)a,b 7.5(0.5)a,b 8.4(0.3)b 7.8(0.4)b,c 7.4(0.4)a,b

Marijuana 4.1(0.3) 3.6(0.3) 4.4(0.3) 4.4(0.3)b 8.2(0.3)b 9.2(0.2)b 8.2(0.3)c 8.4(0.2)b

Alcohol 3.4(0.4) 2.6(0.3) 3.2(0.3) 2.8(0.3)a 7.2(0.3)a,b 8.9(0.2)b 7.4(0.3)b,c 7.9(0.3)a,b

None 3.4(0.4) 2.4(0.4) 3.4(0.4) 2.8(0.4)a 6.0(0.4)a 7.1(0.3)a 5.9(0.4)a 5.9(0.4)c

1
Scales ranged from 0–10, with 0 being strongly disagree and 10 being strongly agree. Asterisks indicate those variables for which the overall F statistic was significant at p<0.05. Differences among the
adjusted means for all groups were compared using an ANCOVA and Fisher’s LSD procedure was used to conduct pairwise comparisons for variables with a significant group effect. Each analysis
controlled for having a religious affiliation, while age served as a covariate for cocaine legalization and recreational marijuana decriminalization analyses, heroin and cocaine legalization analyses controlled
for income, and analyses involving legalization of medical and recreational marijuana, and decriminalization of recreational marijuana controlled for political affiliation. Categories within a column that do
not share a common superscript were significantly different (p< 0.05). SEE= Standard error of the estimate

J Addict Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2021 January 01.

Page 14