Table 2 Description of included studies
From: Characteristics that influence purchase choice for cannabis products: a systematic review
Author, year | Method (hypothetical/revealed)* | Attributes | Population Non-medical legalization status | Sex (% female) Mean age (SD) | Time period | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Amlung, 2019 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity Substitutability | 289—adult cannabis users; Immediately before cannabis legalization | 40.1% 31.7 (9.9) | November 2017 to February 2018 | Hamilton, ON, Canada |
Amlung, 2019 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity Substitutability | 724—adult cannabis users (> 21 years); States where cannabis is legalized | 52% 34.13 (10.02) | September to December 2017 | Alaska, California, Colorado, Massachusetts, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, USA |
Aston, 2015 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 99—frequent cannabis users (18–44 years); cannabis not legalized | 37.4% 21.4 (4.4) | 2010–2011 | Rhode Island, USA |
Aston, 2016 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 83—frequent cannabis users (18–44 years); cannabis not legalized | 34.9% 21.6 (4.7) | 2010–2011 | USA |
Cole, 2008 | MPT (hypothetical) | Quality elasticity | 80—polydrug users 18–44 years; cannabis not legalized | Polydrug users: 36.3% 21.0 (1.2) Cannabis users: 36.3% 21.0 (1.2) | 2006 | England |
Collins, 2014 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 59—young participants (18–25 years) who regularly used cannabis; cannabis not legalized | 46% 21.64 (1.98) | Unknown | Buffalo, USA |
Goudie, 2007 | MPT (hypothetical) | Income elasticity Quality | 40—polysubstance users. 38—reported at least a single lifetime use of cannabis; cannabis not legalized | Polysubstance users: 27.5% 23.8 (4.9 Cannabis users: unknown | 2005 | England |
Hindocha, 2017 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 24—non-dependent cannabis and tobacco smokers (18–60 years); cannabis not legalized | 50% 24.46 (3.96) | Unknown | London, UK |
Nisbet, 1972 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity, expenditure elasticity | 926 UCLA students (437 users of cannabis); cannabis not legalized | Unknown | Unknown | Los Angeles, California, USA |
Patel, 2019 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 749—adults with cannabis use in the previous 6 months; states where cannabis is legalized | 53.2% 37.7 (10.2) | September to December 2017 | USA |
Peters, 2017 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 82—frequent cannabis users, 18 years or older (use 20+ days in past month); unknown legalization status | 54.9% 32.4 (8.8) | Unknown | USA |
Strickland, 2017 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 78—frequent cannabis users, who consumed at least once in the previous 2 weeks, and at least 50 lifetime uses; unknown legalization status | 51.6% 30.2 (7.3) | Unknown | USA |
Strickland, 2019 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 83—non-medical prescription opioid users > 18 years of age; unknown legalization status | 63.9% 34.0 (8.0) Cannabis users: unknown | May to September 2018 | USA |
Teeters, 2019 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 132—college students who reported use on 4 or more days in past month; unknown legalization status | 46.2% 19.94 (3.23) | 2014–2016 | USA |
Vincent, 2017 | MPT (hypothetical) | Price elasticity | 683—young adult (18–25 years) non-medicinal cannabis users; unknown legalization status | 16% 21.2 (2.2) | Unknown | USA |
Aston, 2019 | Qualitative interviews (revealed) | Route of administration | 25—medical cannabis registration card holders; cannabis not legalized | 60% 47 (12) | 2016 | Rhode Island, USA |
Ben Lakhdar, 2016 | Secondary analysis of data from the French National Identification System for Drugs and Other Substances (SINTES) and TREND system (both surveys) (Revealed) | Price elasticity, quantity discount | 268 cannabis users (249 for the elasticity calculation); cannabis not legalized | 23.1% 27 (7.234) | 2005 | Mainland France (Lyon, Marseille, Metz, Paris, Rennes, Toulouse) |
Caulkins, 2006 | Secondary analysis of survey data from the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (revealed) | Price discounts | National probability sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized population (> 12 years of age). 8339 respondents reported using cannabis in the past 12 months; cannabis not legalized | Unavailable | 2001 | USA |
Davis, 2016 | Secondary analysis Crowdsource platform PriceOfWeed.com (revealed) | Price elasticity | 23,000 actual cannabis transactions where price, quantity, and quality are reported; mixed legalization status | N/A | Between September 2, 2010, and August 29, 2011 | USA (excluding Alaska and Hawaii) |
Desimone, 2003 | Secondary analysis of data from the National Household Surveys on Drug Abuse (revealed) | Price elasticity | 92,784 individuals aged 18 to 39 43,147 individuals aged 12–17; cannabis not legalized | Individuals aged 18–39: 50.9% 29.05 (6.28) Individuals aged 12–17: 48.8% 14.49 (1.68) | 1990–1997 | USA |
Halcoussis, 2017 | Secondary analysis of crowdsourced data on prices (PriceOfWeed.com) (revealed) | Price elasticity, quality | 29,461 transactions; mixed legalization status | N/A | September 2010 through March 2012 | USA |
Hansen, 2017 | Administrative data Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (revealed) | Tax reform (i.e., price) | Cannabis legalized | N/A | Washington, USA | |
Reed, 2020 | Qualitative interviews (revealed) | Price, source | 60 individuals who consumed cannabis; cannabis legalized | 64% 21.8 (2.53) | 2014–2016 | California, USA |
Reinarman, 2009 | Survey and Interviews in Amsterdam and San Francisco (revealed) | Source, price, potency, accessibility | Experienced users (at least 25 occasions in their life); cannabis not legalized (California), Decriminalized (Amsterdam) | Amsterdam: 41% 34.2 (standard deviation not reported) San Francisco: 47% 37.1 (standard deviation not reported) | Amsterdam 1995/1996 San Francisco 1997 | Amsterdam (216), San Francisco (266) |
Riley, 2020 | Cross-sectional survey (revealed) | Price elasticity, quantity discount, quality | 1961 cannabis consumers; cannabis not legalized | 27.2% Mean age not reported | August and September 2017 | South Africa |
Smart, 2017 | Secondary analysis of administrative data from Washington State’s cannabis traceability system | Price elasticity, potency on price, quantity discount | A total of 44,482,176 million cannabis purchases, including 31,052,123 cannabis flower purchases; cannabis legalized | N/A | July 2014–September 2016 | USA (Washington) |
Wadsworth, 2019 | Survey - International Cannabis Policy Study (ICPS) (revealed) | Quantity discount, source | 1227 Canadians aged 16–65 years who reported purchasing dried cannabis in the past 12 months; immediately before cannabis legalization | Unweighted sample: 48.8% Mean age not reported Weighted sample: 39.8% Mean age not reported | August–October 2018 | Canada |
Boehnke, 2019 | Survey (revealed) | Cannabinoid content, cannabis strain, potency, administration routes, dispensary/friend recommendation, smell, visual properties, described effects, name | Medical cannabis patients (≥ 18 years) with chronic pain (1321) 715—medicinal only 606—used both non-medicinally and medicinally (dual); in states with cannabis legalization | 781, 59% 49.8 (13.9) | January and August 2018 | USA and Canada |
Capler, 2017 | Secondary analysis of survey data Cannabis Access for Medical Purposes Study (revealed) | Quality, safety, availability, efficiency, cost, feeling respected, product type | 445 Adult medical cannabis users (215 accessed from dispensaries; 230 from other sources); cannabis legalized for medical purposes | 33% (dispensary 32%; non-dispensary 34%) 39.3 (dispensary 45.5 Non-dispensary 36.3) | 2011–2012 | Canada |
Chait, 1994 | Choice blinded trials (two independent choice trial—with low (0.63% THC) and high (1.95% THC) potency cannabis) (revealed) | Potency | 12 volunteers judged to be healthy with no history of substance use disorder; cannabis not legalized | 25% 23 (standard deviation not reported) | Unknown | Chicago, USA |
Gilbert, 2018 | Rating of 13 samples using standard sensory evaluation techniques with untrained consumers (revealed) | Aroma | 61 adults 21 years of age or older (current, former and non-users) Female: 46% (29) Age: 28.2 (8.4); cannabis is legalized | 45.9% 28.2 (8.4) | Unknown | Colorado, USA |
Goodman, 2019 | An experimental choice task Part of the online International Cannabis Policy Study (hypothetical) | Packaging, warnings | Participants aged 16–65 from Canada (n = 9987) and US states with “legal” (n = 7376) and “illegal” (n = 9682); Canada pre-cannabis legalization, USA a mix of legal and illegal states | 61.5% 44.5 (15.5) | August–October 2018 | Canada and USA |
Shi, 2019 | Online cross-sectional survey with discrete choice experiment Survey performed (hypothetical) | THC concentration, CBD concentration, warning message, price (WTP) | 2345 adults aged 21 and over (1186 past-year nonusers and 1159 past-year users); cannabis legalized in included states | Past-year nonusers: 67.96% Mean age and standard deviation not reported Past-year users: 68.51% Mean age and standard deviation not reported | October 2017 | USA (California, Colorado, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington) |
Shukla, 2003 | Key informant interviews (revealed) | Illegal market considerations, availability, cost | 51—purposeful sampling of individuals who made choice about cannabis use; cannabis not legalized | 47% 31.52 (standard deviation not reported) | Unknown | USA |
Williams, 2004 | Australian National Drug Strategy’s Household Surveys (NDSHS) (revealed) | Price, price elasticity Legal status | 5468 observations from non-institutionalized population aged 14 years and older; cannabis not legalized (one region with decriminalized status) | 54% Mean age and standard deviation not reported | 1988–1998 | Australia |