Observational studyAddiction (Abingdon, England)2026
Cannabis use, affect and emotion regulation in daily life: A 3-week experience sampling method study in people who smoke cannabis almost daily.
Observational study in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cannabis use, affect and emotion regulation in daily life: A 3-week experience sampling method study in people who smoke cannabis almost daily.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsAlthough many people who use cannabis report mood-enhancing effects, affective responses are thought to vary within and between individuals. This study examined the bidirectional associations between momentary affect and cannabis use and the potential moderating role of emotion regulation in this.
designIntensive longitudinal observational study using experience sampling method (ESM).
settingDenmark.
participantsAdults in Denmark who use cannabis near daily (n = 113; Age: mean = 31.57 years, median = 29 years, standard deviation = 10.28, inter-quartile range = 23-36; 60.2% male). METHOD AND MEASUREMENTS: Participants completed a baseline survey (substance use and emotion regulation difficulties) and 21 days of experience sampling (three assessments daily; affect and use). We used multilevel models to assess: (1) the associations between positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA) and subsequent cannabis use, (2) whether cannabis use predicted changes in affect shortly after use (at the same assessment) and (3) whether cannabis use predicted changes in affect at a later moment (at the next assessment). Next, we assessed whether emotion regulation difficulties moderated associations tested in models 1 and 2.
findingsHigher PA predicted a greater likelihood of cannabis use before the next assessment [odds ratio (OR) = 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01-1.09], and cannabis use predicted increased PA at the same assessment (b = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.27-0.92), but not at the next assessment. NA was not related to use or vice versa at group level. Emotion regulation difficulties did not statistically significantly moderate the associations between PA or NA and subsequent cannabis use; however, emotion regulation difficulties moderated short-term effects of cannabis use on NA (b = -0.014, 95% CI = -0.027 to -0.002), with individuals with higher emotion regulation difficulties showing lower NA shortly after use compared with non-use moments.
conclusionsWithin individuals who use cannabis near daily, relatively higher momentary positive affect, but not negative affect, appears to precede and follow cannabis use. Cannabis use appears to be associated with higher positive effect at the time of assessment but does not predict positive affect hours later. Individuals with greater emotion regulation difficulties may experience short-term reductions in negative effect after cannabis use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.