l law or regulation

Characteristics Associated with Attitudes toward Marijuana Legalization in Michigan Jennifer D. Ellis, M.A.a, Stella M. Resko, Ph.D. b,c, Kathryn Szechy, M.S.W.b, Richard Smith, Ph.D.b, and Theresa J. Early, Ph.D.d

aDepartment of Psychology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA; bSchool of Social Work, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA; cMerrill Palmer Skillman Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA; dCollege of Social Work, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

ABSTRACT Support for legalization of marijuana has increased over the past several years. While studies have examined correlates of favoring marijuana legalization, less attention has been placed on those who are unsure about legalization, despite the potentially important role of this group as states vote on legalization in upcoming elections. Using data from a statewide sample of adults in Michigan, this study examined whether those who support, oppose, or are unsure about legaliza- tion differed based on demographics, marijuana use, and perceived risk associated with marijuana use. Those who were older and perceived marijuana use to pose a greater risk had lower odds of being unsure about legalization (relative to opposing legalization); those who were politically left of center or centrist and those who reported lifetime marijuana use had higher odds of being unsure about legalization. Older respondents, women, and those who perceived marijuana use to be risky had lower odds of supporting legalization; those who were politically left of center or centrist, and those who reported recent or lifetime marijuana use had higher odds of supporting legalization. Better understanding correlates of being unsure about marijuana legalization may help inform political and prevention efforts as states continue to vote on these issues.

ARTICLE HISTORY Received 12 June 2018 Accepted 11 March 2019

KEYWORDS Marijuana; cannabis; legalization; perspectives

Introduction

Although marijuana is illegal under federal United States (US) drug policy, state and local marijuana policies have shifted dramatically over the past two decades (Millhorn et al. 2009; Nielsen 2010). As of November 2018, 33 states have legalized medical marijuana use and 13 states, as well as several local jurisdictions, have decriminalized mari- juana possession. Additionally, 10 states and the District of Columbia have legalized recreational marijuana use for adults over 21 years of age. Michigan became the first Midwestern state to legalize recreational marijuana when 56% of its voters approved a November 2018 ballot mea- sure. Other states are expected to vote on medical mar- ijuana, marijuana decriminalization and recreational legalization initiatives in future elections (Caulkins, Kilmer, and Kleiman 2016). As of early 2018, medical marijuana is supported by an overwhelming majority of Americans (>90%) (Quinnipiac University/Poll 2018), and as of October 2018, approximately two in three supported legalization of recreational marijuana (McCarthy 2017).

Public opinion researchers have examined correlates of support for recreational marijuana legalization. In recent studies of adults, male gender (Galston and Dionne 2013; Looby, Earleywine, and Gieringer 2007; Musgrave and Wilcox, 2013; Nielsen 2010), minority

racial/ethnic status (Looby, Earleywine, and Gieringer 2007; Nielsen 2010), having children (Caulkins et al. 2012; Cruz, Queirolo, and Boidi 2016; Nielsen 2010), and being politically liberal (Looby, Earleywine, and Gieringer 2007; Musgrave and Wilcox 2013; Nielsen 2010), were associated with supporting recreational marijuana legalization. In the past two decades, spend- ing a greater amount of time engaged with media (e.g., watching television or reading the newspaper) also was associated with favoring legalization, although this rela- tionship was not observed prior to 1990, and may be due to more positive depictions of marijuana in recent years (Stringer and Maggard 2016). Other researchers have found that residents of states and countries that have legalized medical or recreational marijuana sup- port legalization at higher rates than residents of states or countries where marijuana is not legal (Sznitman and Bretteville-Jensen 2015; McGinty et al. 2017); Schuermeyer et al. 2014). Exceptions to this trend have been seen in young adult samples where rates of support for legalization of marijuana for recreational use are high regardless of the state’s policies (Cohn et al. 2017; Moreno et al. 2016).

Additionally, an individual’s own use of substances contributes to their broader opinions on substance use

CONTACT Jennifer D. Ellis [email protected] Department of Psychology, Wayne State University, 5447 Woodward Ave., Detroit, MI 48202

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOACTIVE DRUGS 2019, VOL. 51, NO. 4, 335–342 https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2019.1610199

© 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

issues (Hilton and Kaskutas 1991; Latimer et al. 2001; Resko 2014; Wagenaar et al. 2000). Cruz, Quierolo, and Boidi’s (2016) analysis of samples from the United States, El Salvador, and Uruguay found that past mar- ijuana use was among the strongest predictors for sup- porting recreational marijuana legalization. Williams, Van Ours, and Grossman (2011) analysis of the Australian Drug Strategy’s National Household Survey similarly found current and past marijuana use were significantly associated with supporting recreational marijuana legalization. A sample of adults living in Houston found that frequency of past 30-day use of marijuana, as well as use of other drugs, was associated with supporting legalization of marijuana (Trevino and Richard 2002). In a US-based sample of young adults, Cohn et al. (2017) found past month use of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, and other drugs were associated with greater likelihood of supporting recreational mar- ijuana legalization.

Much of the research on attitudes toward recrea- tional marijuana legalization has used binary measures that force respondents to indicate support for or against marijuana legalization; however, some research sug- gests that a number of individuals are still undecided about whether they believe marijuana should be lega- lized (Geiger 2016). Individuals who are undecided about legalization have the potential to play an impor- tant role as they decide how to vote in future elections. Therefore, characterizing those who are unsure about legalization may be useful. Additionally, examining perceived risk towards marijuana use as a potential correlate of attitudes towards legalization is important, as perceived risk of marijuana has decreased over time in the United States (Okaneku, Vearrier, McKeever, LaSala & Greenberg, 2015), as support for legalization has increased.

The present study examines the extent to which recrea- tional marijuana legalization was supported by adults in Michigan, as well as factors associated with supporting, opposing, and being unsure about marijuana legalization. In line with previous work demonstrating that one’s own substance use is associated with perspectives about lega- lization (Cohn et al. 2017; Trevino and Richard 2002), we hypothesized that past year marijuana users would be more likely to favor legalization, whereas those with less recent marijuana use would be more likely to be unsure. Additionally, because political orientation has been related to supporting or opposing marijuana legalization (Looby, Earleywine, and Gieringer 2007; Musgrave and Wilcox, 2013; Nielsen 2010), we expected that those who identify as politically centrist would be more likely to be unsure about legalization. Finally, because women have historically been more likely to be opposed to marijuana

legalization, but otherwise tend to lean politically liberal relative to men (Galston and Dionne 2013), we expected that women would be more likely to oppose or be unsure about legalization when given this option.

Methods

Sample and study procedures

The present study was exempted from the Wayne State University institutional review board. Data were drawn from an anonymous web-based survey conducted by the Michigan Prevention Association (MPA). The MPA is a statewide advocacy group focused on substance misuse prevention. The purpose of the statewide survey was to examine attitudes toward marijuana legalization in Michigan. In 2008, Michigan voters passed a ballot mea- sure to legalize medical marijuana. Ten years later, Michigan voters passed a measure to legalize recreational marijuana (November 2018). For the current survey, the MPA recruited a sample of adults (ages 18+) in Michigan. Recruitment emails were sent to community partners (e.g., health-care providers, mental health providers, city/county health departments, county substance abuse coalitions, non-profit/government agencies serving families or older adults). Ads also were placed online (e.g., Facebook), and recruitment announcements were made at community events (e.g., community meetings, health fairs). Advertisements stated MPA was looking for adults (ages 18+) in Michigan to respond to a brief survey (5–10 min) regardless of their experiences with marijuana. Data collection took place over a three-week period in August and September of 2016, prior to Michigan voters passing a ballot measure for marijuana legalization. As a validity check for the online survey, the researchers included “please leave this item blank” in the middle of the survey and examined the length of time spent com- pleting the survey. The recruitment efforts yielded a sample of 2,608 participants, of which 2,190 passed validity checks and had complete data for all relevant study measures. This group of 2,190 was included in the following analyses.

Measures

Survey questions were grounded in previous public opinion and substance use survey research. The MPA steering committee developed the survey with input from its mem- bers who worked in non-profit and government agencies that provide community-based substance abuse treatment and prevention services. Because participants were not provided incentives for survey participation, efforts were made to ensure brevity.

336 J. D. ELLIS ET AL.

Marijuana legalization Attitudes toward marijuana legalization were assessed with a question from the Pew Research Center (Geiger, 2016) that asks: “Do you think marijuana should be made legal for recreational use, or not?” Response options adapted for this study were: “Yes, Legal”, “No, illegal” and “Unsure”.

Demographic variables Demographic questions were selected or adapted from the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (Substance Use and Mental Health Administration 2016). These self-report questions included gender (male, female, or other), age, race or ethnic origin (White/Caucasian, Black/African American, Latino/ Hispanic, American Indian, Asian/Pacific Islander, Arab/Middle Eastern, Multiracial, Other), highest level of education (less than high school diploma or general education degree (GED), high school diploma/GED, bachelor’s degree, or graduate degree), and whether participants had children age 18 or under. Because small portions of respondents endorsed Latino/ Hispanic, American Indian, Asian/Pacific Islander, Arab/Middle Eastern, multiracial, or other race/ethni- city, those participants were combined into an “Other race” group. Political affiliation was assessed with responses grouped into three categories: left of center, right of center, and center/other, a framework that has been used in other studies (e.g., Furnham and Thomson 1996).

Marijuana use Participants were asked to self-report the last time that they used marijuana. Response options were never, within the past year, and more than one year ago.

Perceived risk associated with Marijuana Participants were asked to rate their agreement with four items addressing perceived risks associated with mari- juana use. The items said 1) “Marijuana use is harmless” (reverse scored), 2) “Marijuana is addictive”, 3) “Using marijuana poses serious mental health risks”, and 4) “Using marijuana poses serious physical health risks.” Responses were rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 4 = Strongly Agree. Scores for the items were summed to create a composite measure assessing the perceived risks of marijuana use, which demonstrated good reliability in the present sample (α = .886). These items were developed for this study, and were informed by existing research examining com- mon perceived risks associated with marijuana use (e.g., Berg et al. 2015; Danseco, Kingery, and Coggeshall 1999; Wilkinson et al. 2016).

Data analysis

Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25 (IMB Corp. 2017). Descriptive statistics were examined for all study variables. We conducted bivariate analyses using Pearson’s χ2 tests for categorical independent variables and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for continuous independent vari- ables to compare those who supported, opposed and were unsure about marijuana legalization. Independent variables included demographics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, having children in household, education level), political orienta- tion and substance use-related variables (current or past marijuana use, perceived risk associated with marijuana use). After examining the bivariate relationships, a multinomial logistic regression model was conducted where all correlates were examined simultaneously. Being opposed to marijuana legalization was used as the reference category. To investigate potential problems with multicol- linearity, we conducted correlational (Spearman’s rho) analyses of the predictor variables (Menard 2001). No issues with multicollinearity were found.

Results

Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 1. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 88 years, with an average age of 45.37 years (SD = 13.39). The sample was 71.7% female and 90.7% of the sample reported their race as “white.” Just under half of the sample (47.4%) supported legalization of recreational mari- juana, 41.6% did not support legalization, and 11.1% were unsure.

Bivariate relationships between variables of interest and opinions towards marijuana legalization are reported in Table 2. Given the uneven group sizes and a violation of the homogeneity of variance assumption for both age (p = .004) and perceived risk associated with marijuana use (p = .001), post-hoc tests using the Games-Howell statistic were performed for the ANOVA models. The results of these tests indicated that individuals who opposed legalization were more likely to be older than those who were unsure about legalization (Mean Difference = 3.43, p = .001) and who supported legalization (Mean Difference = 4.36, p < .001). Individuals who opposed legalization per- ceived marijuana to be more risky than those who were unsure about legalization (Mean Difference = 0.63, p < .001) and those who supported legalization (Mean Difference = 1.46, p < .001). Those who were unsure about legalization reported significantly greater per- ceived risk than those who supported legalization (Mean Difference = 0.83, p < .001). In addition to these findings, chi-square tests indicated that, at the bivariate

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOACTIVE DRUGS 337

level, gender, education level, political orientation, and marijuana use were significantly associated with opi- nions regarding legalization of recreational marijuana. No differences were observed for race/ethnicity or being a parent.

Results of the multinomial logistic regression analy- sis are presented in Table 3. Politically left of center or centrist views, past year marijuana use, and lifetime marijuana use were associated with higher odds of supporting legalization, relative to opposing

legalization. Older age, female gender, and greater per- ceived risk of marijuana were associated with lower odds of supporting legalization. Similarly, politically left of center or centrist political views and lifetime marijuana use were associated with higher odds of being unsure about legalization. Older age and greater perceived risk of marijuana were associated with lower odds of being unsure about legalization, relative to opposing legalization. After controlling for other vari- ables, education level was not a significant predictor of attitudes towards legalization.

Notably, prior marijuana use and perceived risk of marijuana were the strongest predictors of opinions regarding legalization in the multivariate model. Among those who had used marijuana in the past year, 94.1% favored legalization, compared to 46.0% of those who had used prior to the previous year, and 24.1% of those who had never used marijuana. On a measure of perceived risk of marijuana ranging from 1 to 4, those who opposed legalization had the highest perceived risk (M = 3.4), followed by those who were unsure about legalization (M =2.7), and those who favored legalization (M = 1.9).

Discussion

As marijuana policy continues to evolve, an understand- ing of attitudes toward legalization for recreational pur- poses provides insights useful for political and prevention efforts. It is particularly important to characterize those who are undecided about marijuana legalization before

Table 1. Descriptive statistics. Variable N % M SD

Age - - 45.37 13.39 Gender Male 619 28.3 - - Female 1571 71.7 - -

Children under 18 in Household 903 41.2 - - Race White 1986 90.7 - - African American 97 4.4 - - Other Race 107 4.9 - -

Education Level High School Diploma or Less 459 21.0 - - Bachelor’s Degree 892 40.7 - - Graduate/Professional Degree 839 38.3 - -

Political Orientation Left of Center 888 40.5 - - Right of Center 536 24.5 - - Center/Other 766 35.0 - -

Past Marijuana Use Never used 781 35.7 - - Lifetime Use 994 45.4 - -

Past Year Use 415 18.9 - - Perceived Risk of Marijuana (scores range from 1 to 4)

- - 2.59 0.94

Support Marijuana Legalization Yes 1037 47.4 - - No 911 41.6 - - Unsure 242 11.1 - -

Table 2. Bivariate relationship between the predictors and support, unsure or opposition to legalization of recreational marijuana use in Michigan.

Marijuana Legalization Marijuana Legalization

Variable Legal % Illegal % Unsure % Legal M(SD) MIllegal (SD) Unsure M(SD) X2 F P value

Age - - - 43.5(13.6) 47.8(12.9) 44.4(13.2) - 27.06 < .001 Gender 38.14 - < .001 Male 57.7 34.6 7.8 - - - Female 43.3 44.4 12.3 - - -

Children under 18 in Home 44.7 44.2 11.1 - - - 4.69 - .096 Race 3.21 - .524 White 47.4 41.6 11.0 - - - African American 41.2 47.4 11.3 - - - Other Race 52.3 35.5 12.1 - - -

Education Level 34.54 - < .001 HS Diploma or Less 54.9 33.3 11.8 - - - Bachelor’s Degree 50.2 40.2 9.5 - - - Graduate/Professional 40.2 47.6 12.3 - - -

Political Orientation 112.80 - < .001 Center 50.7 37.5 11.9 - - - Right of Center 31.5 61.0 7.5 - - - Left of Center 54.1 33.4 12.5 - - -

Marijuana Use 591.97 - < .001 Never 24.1 65.9 10.0 - - - Lifetime Use 46.0 38.5 15.5 - - - Past Year Use 94.5 3.1 2.4 - - -

Perceived Risk of Marijuana (range 1–4) - - - 1.9(0.69) 3.4(0.60) 2.7(0.58) - 1267.63 < .001

N = 2190

338 J. D. ELLIS ET AL.

they decide how they will vote, as prevention or advocacy groups may benefit from giving particular attention to these populations prior to elections. While previous research on attitudes toward marijuana legalization (e.g., Cruz, Queirolo, and Boidi 2016; Galston and Dionne 2013) has yielded considerable insight on support for or against marijuana legalization, less is known about those who are undecided about marijuana legalization. Results from the present study suggest that 47.4% of adults in

Michigan supported marijuana legalization and a sizable minority were still undecided.

Findings from this study extend upon previous research (Caulkins et al. 2012; Cruz, Queirolo, and Boidi 2016; Looby, Earleywine, and Gieringer 2007; Musgrave and Wilcox 2013) that has shown conservative or liberal political attitudes differentiate between those who support and oppose marijuana legalization. Our findings suggest that adults who are unsure about marijuana legalization may be more similar, in terms of political orientation, to those who support marijuana legalization, as being left of center or center was associated with supporting or being unsure about marijuana legalization. A notable minority of politically conservative adults in our sample (31.5%) supported legalization. This may reflect some ideological and partisan crossover, where conservatives are increas- ingly supporting legalization because they favor states’ rights and are suspicious of federal enforcement (Galston and Dionne 2013).

Recent work found gender was significantly associated with opinions regarding marijuana legalization, while other demographic factors such as race, income, educa- tion, and geography had only small relationships with attitudes toward legalization (Galston and Dionne 2013). The present study also suggested that women were more likely than men to oppose legalization. The gender differ- ences observed in the present study are notable in that women, as a group, are more likely to vote left-of-center, but are more aligned with political conservatives on this issue (Galston and Dionne 2013). Interestingly, in the present study, the bivariate results replicated previous findings that higher education level is associated with lower likelihood of favoring legalization, but this finding disappeared when we controlled for other relevant factors. Future research into demographic factors most strongly associated with attitudes towards legalization, and poten- tial reasons for these beliefs, may be beneficial.

The present study is only one of a few that has exam- ined rates of supporting legalization among recent mar- ijuana users. Those who were recent marijuana users were more likely to support legalization compared to those who had never used. It should also be noted that recent marijuana users were not more likely to be unsure than to be opposed to legalization, and rates of being unsure about or opposing legalization were low among past year users. This finding is in line with previous studies (e.g., Cohn et al. 2017; Cruz, Queirolo, and Boidi 2016; Williams, Van Ours, and Grossman 2011) that have shown personal experiences with marijuana, and one’s own use of marijuana, in particular (e.g., Cohn et al. 2017; Cruz, Queirolo, and Boidi 2016; Trevino and Richard 2002), is one of the strongest predictors of supporting marijuana legalization.

Table 3. Multinomial logistic regression analysis predicting atti- tudes toward legalization of marijuana for recreational use in Michigana.

Variable B SE Wald p-value OR 95%CI

Yes, Legal Age −0.03 0.01 25.35 < .001 0.97 0.96–0.98 Female Gender

−0.79 0.17 20.72 < .001 0.46 0.32–0.64

Has children −0.16 0.16 1.05 .305 0.85 0.63–1.16 Raceb

African American

−0.23 0.35 0.43 .515 0.80 0.40–1.58

Other −0.01 0.34 0.001 .974 0.99 0.51–1.92 Political Orientationc

Left of Center

1.05 0.20 28.80 < .001 2.86 1.95–4.20

Center 0.63 0.20 10.14 .001 1.87 1.27–2.76 Education Leveld

Bachelor’s Degree

0.10 0.21 0.24 .623 1.11 0.74–1.66

Graduate Degree

0.03 0.21 0.02 .894 1.03 0.68–1.55

Marijuana usee

Past year 2.32 0.36 41.30 < .001 10.13 5.00–20.53 Lifetime 1.15 0.16 54.19 < .001 3.15 2.32–4.28 Perceived risk

−2.85 0.13 486.56 < .001 0.06 0.05–0.08

Unsure Age −0.03 0.01 14.43 < .001 0.98 0.96– 0.99 Female Gender

−0.10 0.20 0.26 .610 0.90 0.61–1.34

Has children −0.14 0.17 0.72 .397 0.87 0.62–1.21 Raceb

African American

−0.24 0.38 0.39 .531 0.79 0.37–1.66

Other −0.02 0.37 0.003 .954 0.98 0.48–2.01 Political Orientationc

Left of Center

1.03 0.22 21.35 < .001 2.81 1.81–4.35

Center 0.86 0.22 14.99 < .001 2.37 1.53–3.67 Education Leveld

Bachelor’s Degree

−0.38 0.22 2.92 .088 0.68 0.44–1.06

Graduate Degree

−0.24 0.22 1.21 .271 0.79 0.51–1.21

Marijuana usee

Past year 0.46 0.48 0.92 .337 1.58 0.62–4.00 Lifetime 0.94 0.17 31.26 < .001 2.56 1.84–3.56 Perceived risk

−1.51 0.13 138.37 < .001 0.22 0.17–0.28

Nagelkerke Pseudo Rb = 0.645 aNo, does not support legalization was the reference group for the multi- nomial logistic regression.

b Caucasian/White was used as the reference group for Race. c Right of Center was the reference group for the Political Orientation variable.

d High School education was the reference group for the Education Level variable.

e Never Used Marijuana was the reference group for the Marijuana Use variable.

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOACTIVE DRUGS 339

Our findings regarding perceived risk associated with marijuana extend earlier research that has focused on adolescent samples. Campbell, Twenge and Carter’s (2017) analysis of twelfth-graders in the Monitoring the Future dataset, for example, found perceptions of risk and support for legalization appear in tandem, with higher perceived risk linked to low support for legaliza- tion and lower perceived risk linked to strong support for legalization. The current findings suggest a similar pattern for adults. Those who supported or were unsure about marijuana legalization had lower levels of per- ceived risk compared to those who were opposed to legalization. As perceived risk associated with mari- juana use declines (Okaneku et al. 2015), findings on personal experiences and risk perception may have implications for the messaging of marijuana preven- tion. Prevention messages that are designed to increase risk perception may help to reduce marijuana use among some, but also could potentially backfire for those who perceive marijuana use to be benign.

The present study brings needed attention to people who are undecided about marijuana legalization. Future research may also benefit from examining what might change decisions for individuals who have already formed an opinion about marijuana legalization. Looby, Earleywine, and Gieringer (2007), for example, found that adults were more likely to support legalization if a reliable roadside test could be administered. Additional research is needed on how state regulations for marijuana, including tax rates or limitations on who may grow and distribute marijuana, may shape voting. Regulations vary considerably from state to state and evidence suggests they have already played a part in recent elections. Legalization initiative that failed to pass, for example, included a limit of 10 facilities given exclusive commercial rights to grow marijuana in that state. This regulation divided those who advocated for marijuana legalization and is likely one of the reasons the initiative failed (Graham 2015).

Additional research on the reasons people support, oppose or are unsure about legalization is also needed as attitudes toward marijuana continue to shift (Kilmer and MacCoun 2017; Resko et al. 2019). Many people who support marijuana legaliza- tion do so despite recognition of potential negative consequences (Resko et al. 2019). As more states move to legalize recreational marijuana, understand- ing the influence of marijuana policy changes on public attitudes is increasingly important. Some indi- viduals may consider marijuana legalization as a governmental endorsement that marijuana is safe for recreational use (Moreno et al. 2016). Prevention and education efforts may be needed to inform the

public that state-level marijuana legalization does not imply governmental endorsement, nor does it suggest that marijuana products have been deemed safe (Moreno et al. 2016).

The results of this study should be considered in the context of their limitations. First, the study was cross- sectional. Given the ever-changing nature of public opinion on marijuana (Kilmer and MacCoun 2017), future studies may benefit from conducting longitudi- nal analyses examining how attitudes toward legaliza- tion change with time, and particularly whether these attitudes change after legalization. The Michigan Prevention Association opposes marijuana legalization, and prevention providers distributed the survey, which may have resulted in a sample that over-represents adults with lower levels of support for marijuana lega- lization. Additionally, the sample was not representa- tive of the state of Michigan as a whole, and a yielded a disproportionately high rate of White and female respondents. Recruitment techniques that would yield more representative and diverse samples, or use of existing national datasets, may be ideal in the future. For example, future studies could consider analyzing data from a nationally representative sample, such as the General Social Survey. Additionally, future studies may want to consider oversampling among historically underrepresented groups to ensure adequate represen- tation of perspectives of those groups who have not been well represented (e.g., racial-ethnic minorities and those who identify as transgender or non-binary). Recruiting a diverse sample may be particularly impor- tant, as criminalization of marijuana and of substance use more broadly has disproportionately impacted low- income people of color (Koch, Lee, and Lee, 2016). While evidence of racial or ethnic differences in atti- tudes toward legalization has been mixed (e.g., Cohn et al. 2017), future studies may benefit from further exploring the reasons why some minorities support and some oppose marijuana legalization.

Despite these limitations, the present study high- lights that a sizable minority of adults are still unde- cided about legalization. In addition to replicating previously observed differences between those who support and who oppose legalization, the present study suggests that individuals who are unsure about legalization are more likely to be younger and politi- cally left of center or center than those who are opposed. Additionally, those who are unsure were more likely to report lifetime marijuana use and lower levels of perceived risk of marijuana than those who were opposed. These findings have important implica- tions for advocacy groups as well as prevention efforts in the evolving political climate.

340 J. D. ELLIS ET AL.

Disclosure statement

Dr. Stella Resko worked with the Michigan Prevention Association to design and distribute the survey described in this study. She does not have a financial relationship with the Michigan Prevention Association, and the Michigan Prevention Association was not involved in the writing of this manuscript.

Funding

This project was unfunded.

ORCID

Stella M. Resko http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3323-0190

References

Berg, C. J., E. Stratton, G. L. Schauer, M. Lewis, Y. Wang, M. Windle, and M. Kegler. 2015. Perceived harm, addic- tiveness, and social acceptability of tobacco products and marijuana among young adults: Marijuana, hookah, and electronic cigarettes win. Substance Use & Misuse 50 (1):79–89. doi:10.3109/10826084.2014.958857.

Campbell, W., J. Twenge, and N. Carter. 2017. Support for marijuana (cannabis) legalization: Untangling age, period, and cohort effects. Collabra: Psychology 3 (1), 1–9.

Caulkins, J. P., B. Kilmer, and M. A. Kleiman. 2016. Marijuana legalization: What everyone needs to know. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Caulkins, J. P., C. Coulson, C. Farber, and J. V. Vesely. 2012. Marijuana legalization: Certainty, impossibility, both, or neither? Journal of Drug Policy Analysis 5 (1):1–27. doi:10.1515/1941-2851.1035.

Cohn, A. M., A. L. Johnson, S. W. Rose, J. M. Rath, and A. C. Villanti. 2017. Support for marijuana legalization and predictors of intentions to use marijuana more often in response to legalization among US young adults. Substance Use and Misuse 52 (2):203–13. doi:10.1080/ 10826084.2016.1223688.

IBM Corp. 2017. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.

Cruz, J. M., R. Queirolo, and M. F. Boidi. 2016. Determinants of public support for marijuana legalization in Uruguay, the United States, and El Salvador. Journal of Drug Issues 46 (4):308–25. doi:10.1177/0022042616649005.

Danseco, E. R., P. M. Kingery, and M. B. Coggeshall. 1999. Perceived risk of harm from marijuana use among youth in the USA. School Psychology International 20 (1):39–56. doi:10.1177/0143034399201004.

Furnham, A., and L. Thomson. 1996. Lay theories of heroin addiction. Social Science and Medicine 43 (1):29–40.

Galston, W. A., and E. J. Dionne Jr. 2013. The new politics of marijuana legalization: Why opinion is changing. Governance Studies at Brookings, 1–17. https://www.brook ings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Dionne-Galston _NewPoliticsofMJLeg_Final.pdf

Geiger, A. 2016. Support for marijuana legalization continues to rise. Pew Research Center, https://www.pewresearch.

org/fact-tank/2016/10/12/support-for-marijuana-legaliza tion-continues-to-rise/

Graham, D. A. (2015, November 3). Why did Ohio‘s mar- ijuana-legalization push fail? The Atlantic. Retrieved from: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/ where-did-ohios-marijuana-legalizers-go-wrong/414061/

Hilton, M. E., and L. Kaskutas. 1991. Public support for warning labels on alcoholic beverage containers. Addiction 86 (10):1323–33.

Kilmer, B., and R. J. MacCoun. (2017). How medical mar- ijuana smoothed the transition to marijuana legalization in the United States. Annual Review Of Law and Social Science 13:181–202. doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci- 110615-084851.

Koch, D. W., J. Lee, and K. Lee. (2016). Coloring the war on drugs: Arrest disparities in black, brown, and white. Race and Social Problems 8 (4):313–325. doi:10.1007/s12552- 016-9185-6.

Latimer, W. W., E. M. Harwood, M. D. Newcomb, and A. C. Wagenaar. 2001. Sociodemographic and individual predictors of alcohol policy attitudes: Results from a US probability sample. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research 25 (4):549–56. doi:10.1111/acer.2001.25.issue-4.

Looby, A., M. Earleywine, and D. Gieringer. 2007. Roadside sobriety tests and attitudes toward a regulated cannabis market. Harm Reduction Journal 4 (1):4–10. doi:10.1186/ 1477-7517-4-4.

McCarthy, J. 2017. Record-high support for legalizing mar- ijuana use in U.S. Accessed April 1, 2018. http://news. gallup.com/poll/221018/record-high-support-legalizing- marijuana.aspx

McGinty, E. E., J. Niederdeppe, K. Heley, and C. L. Barry. (2017). Public perceptions of arguments supporting and opposing recreational marijuana legalization. Preventive Medicine 99:80–86. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.01.024.

Menard, S. 2001. Applied logistic regression analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Millhorn, M., M. Monaghan, D. Montero, M. Reyes, T. Roman, R. Tollasken, and B. Walls. 2009. North Americans’ attitudes toward illegal drugs. Journal Of Human Behavior In The Social Environment 19:125–41. doi:10.1080/10911350802687075.

Moreno, M. A., J. M. Whitehill, V. Quach, N. Midamba, and I. Manskopf. 2016. Marijuana experiences, voting beha- viors, and early perspectives regarding marijuana legaliza- tion among college students from 2 states. Journal of American College Health 64 (1):9–18. doi:10.1080/ 07448481.2015.1062769.

Musgrave, P, and C Wilcox. The highs and lows of support for marijuana legalization among white Americans. In Something's in the Air: Race, Crime, and the Legalization of Marijuana 2013 Aug 15. Routledge New York.

Nielsen, A. L. 2010. Americans’ attitudes toward drug-related issues from 1975–2006: The roles of period and cohort effects. Journal of Drug Issues 40:461–93. doi:10.1177/ 002204261004000209.

Okaneku, J., D. Vearrier, R. G. McKeever, G. S. LaSala, and M. I. Greenberg. 2015. Change in perceived risk associated with marijuana use in the United States from 2002 to 2012. Clinical Toxicology 53 (3):151–55. doi:10.3109/ 15563650.2015.1004581.

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOACTIVE DRUGS 341

Quinnipiac University/Poll. 2018. Dreamers should stay, American voters say 8–1, Quinnipiac university national poll finds; Do not enforce federal pot laws, U.S. voters say 3–1. Accessed April 1, 2018. https://poll.qu.edu/images/ polling/us/us01112018_ubn985.pdf/

Resko, S. M. 2014. Public perceptions and attitudes toward adolescent marijuana use: Results of a statewide survey. Sage Open 4 (1). doi:10.1177/2158244013518055.

Resko, S. M., J. D. Ellis, T. J. Early, K. Szechy, B. Rodriguez, and E. Agius. (2019). Understanding pub- lic attitudes toward cannabis legalization. Substance Use and Misuse, 1–3.

Schuermeyer, J., S. Salomonsen-Sautel, R. K. Price, S. Balan, C. Thurstone, S. J. Min, and J. T. Sakai. 2014. Temporal trends in marijuana attitudes, availability and use in Colorado compared to non-medical marijuana states: 2003–11. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 140:145–55. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.04.016.

Stringer, R. J., and S. R. Maggard. 2016. Reefer madness to Marijuana legalization: Media exposure and American atti- tudes toward Marijuana (1975–2012). Journal of Drug Issues 46 (4):428–45. doi:10.1177/0022042616659762.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. 2016. Results from the 2015. National Survey on Drug Use

and Health: Summary of national findings, NSDUH Series H-48, HHS Publication No. (SMA) 14–4863. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

Sznitman, S. R., and A. L. Bretteville-Jensen. 2015. Public opinion and medical cannabis policies: Examining the role of underlying beliefs and national medical cannabis policies. Harm Reduction Journal 12 (1):46–55. doi:10.1186/s12954-015-0082-x.

Trevino, R. A., and A. J. Richard. 2002. Attitudes towards drug legalization among drug users. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse 28 (1):91–108.

Wagenaar, A. C., E. M. Harwood, T. L. Toomey, C. E. Denl, and K. M. Zander. 2000. Public opinion on alcohol policies in the United States: Results from a national survey. Journal of Public Health Policy 21:303–27.

Wilkinson, S. T., G. I. van Schalkwyk, L. Davidson, and D. C. D’Souza. 2016. The formation of marijuana risk perception in a population of substance abusing patients. Psychiatric Quarterly 87 (1):177–87. doi:10.1007/s11126- 015-9369-z.

Williams, J., J. C. Van Ours, and M. Grossman. 2011. Why do some people want to legalize cannabis use? NBER Working paper No. 16795.

342 J. D. ELLIS ET AL.

Copyright of Journal of Psychoactive Drugs is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.