PHL-111 Entire Online Class Help SHNU

PHL-111 1-1Discussion Introduction to Critical Thinking.docx PHL-111 1-2 Journal Barriers to Critical Thinking.docx PHL-111 2-1 Discussion Foundations of Logic and Reasoning.docx PHL-111 2-2 Journal Final Project Topic MARIJUANA BENEFICIAL OR HARMFUL.docx PHL-111 3-1 Discussion Credibility in the Media.docx PHL-111 3-2 Milestone One Primary Argument.docx PHL-111 4-1 Discussion Assess Your Final Project Article.docx PHL-111 4-2 Journal Effects of Bias.docx PHL-111 5-1 Discussion Informal Fallacies.docx PHL-111 5-2 Milestone Two Counterargument.docx PHL-111 6-1 Discussion Using Critical Thinking to Recognize Astroturfing and False Advertising.docx PHL-111 6-2 Journal Misinformation and Personal Responsibility.docx PHL-111 7-1 Final Project Critical Essay.docx PHL-111 7-2 Discussion Assistance With the Critical Essay (Optional).docx PHL-111 8-1 Discussion Dealing With Personal Bias.docx PHL-111 Milestone One Primary Argument.docx PHL-111-Syllabus Intro to Critical Thinking- SNHU.docx

PHL-111 1-2 Journal Barriers to Critical Thinking

Introduction

Critical thinking is a crucial skill in both academic and real-world contexts. It allows individuals to analyze information, assess evidence, and make reasoned judgments. However, the development and application of critical thinking can be hindered by various barriers. These barriers can distort thinking, lead to poor decision-making, and prevent individuals from achieving their full intellectual potential. This essay explores the most common barriers to critical thinking, their impact, and strategies for overcoming them.

Understanding Barriers to Critical Thinking

Barriers to critical thinking are obstacles that impede the ability to think clearly, logically, and independently. These barriers can be cognitive, emotional, social, or environmental, and they can affect individuals in both academic and real-world contexts. Some of the most prevalent barriers include:

1. Fear of Failure and Judgment: One of the most significant barriers to critical thinking is fear—fear of failure, fear of making mistakes, or fear of judgment from others. This fear can lead to paralysis in decision-making or avoidance of complex issues altogether. For instance, in academic settings, students may shy away from challenging courses or discussions for fear of appearing incompetent. Similarly, in the workplace, employees might avoid proposing innovative ideas due to fear of criticism or failure (Saleh, 2019).
2. Egocentrism and Sociocentrism: Egocentrism is the tendency to view everything in relation to oneself, often leading to self-centered thinking. Sociocentrism, on the other hand, involves prioritizing the beliefs and values of one’s social group over others. Both forms of bias can prevent individuals from considering alternative perspectives and lead to narrow-mindedness. For example, an individual who is egocentric may dismiss others' opinions simply because they differ from their own, while a sociocentric person may reject viewpoints that do not align with their group’s beliefs (Paul & Elder, 2019).
3. Confirmation Bias: Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek out, interpret, and remember information that confirms one’s pre-existing beliefs while ignoring or dismissing evidence that contradicts them. This cognitive bias can lead to selective thinking and hinder the ability to evaluate information objectively. For example, a person who believes that a particular political party is corrupt may only focus on news stories that confirm this belief, while disregarding any evidence to the contrary (Nickerson, 1998).
4. Assumptions and Stereotypes: Assumptions and stereotypes are preconceived notions that individuals hold about people, events, or situations. These assumptions can lead to biased thinking and prevent individuals from fully engaging in critical thinking. For instance, assuming that a particular outcome will occur because it has happened before can lead to a lack of exploration of other possible outcomes. Similarly, stereotypes about certain groups of people can lead to unfair judgments and hinder the ability to think critically about individuals from those groups (Durnali, 2022).
5. Groupthink: Groupthink occurs when individuals conform to the opinions or decisions of a group, even if they personally disagree. This barrier is particularly prevalent in organizational settings, where the desire for consensus can lead to poor decision-making. In such scenarios, individuals may suppress their doubts or opinions to avoid conflict, leading to suboptimal outcomes (Paul & Elder, 2019).
6. Overreliance on Authority: Some individuals may uncritically accept information from perceived authority figures, such as experts, leaders, or institutions, without questioning its validity. This can result in the acceptance of false or misleading information and undermine critical thinking. For example, during public health crises, people may follow the advice of certain figures without scrutinizing the evidence behind their recommendations (Halpern, 2014).
7. Past Experiences: Past experiences, while valuable, can also become a barrier to critical thinking when they are over-relied upon. Individuals may base their decisions on past experiences without considering whether those experiences are relevant to the current situation. This can lead to a failure to adapt to new circumstances or to consider alternative solutions (Durnali, 2022).

Impact of Barriers on Decision-Making

The barriers to critical thinking can have profound effects on decision-making. When individuals are influenced by egocentrism, confirmation bias, or emotional reasoning, they are more likely to make decisions based on incomplete or distorted information. This can lead to poor outcomes, such as the reinforcement of prejudices, the perpetuation of misinformation, and the inability to solve problems effectively. In professional settings, these barriers can result in unethical decisions, failed projects, and conflicts within teams (Facione, 2015).

For example, in healthcare, a practitioner who allows personal biases to influence their judgment may fail to consider all possible diagnoses or treatment options, leading to suboptimal patient care. In business, groupthink can lead to the adoption of strategies that are not fully vetted, resulting in financial losses or missed opportunities.

Strategies to Overcome Barriers

To overcome the barriers to critical thinking, individuals must adopt strategies that promote open-mindedness, self-awareness, and intellectual humility. Some effective strategies include:

1. Cultivating Open-Mindedness: To counteract egocentrism and sociocentrism, individuals should make a conscious effort to consider alternative viewpoints and challenge their own assumptions. Engaging in discussions with people who hold different perspectives can help broaden one’s understanding of complex issues (Brookfield, 2012).
2. Challenging Confirmation Bias: To overcome confirmation bias, individuals should actively seek out information that challenges their beliefs and be willing to revise their opinions based on new evidence. Critical thinkers should also practice skepticism, questioning the validity of information before accepting it as true (Nickerson, 1998).
3. Encouraging Independent Thinking: To mitigate the effects of groupthink, organizations should encourage independent thinking by creating environments where diverse opinions are valued and dissent is not only tolerated but encouraged. This can be achieved through structured decision-making processes that require individuals to present their reasoning and evidence before reaching a consensus (Halpern, 2014).
4. Improving Emotional Intelligence: Developing emotional intelligence can help individuals manage their emotions and prevent them from interfering with critical thinking. Techniques such as mindfulness, stress management, and reflective practice can help individuals remain calm and focused in challenging situations (Goleman, 1995).
5. Continuous Learning: To overcome a lack of knowledge or skills, individuals should engage in continuous learning and practice critical thinking regularly. Educational programs, workshops, and reading materials on critical thinking can help individuals develop the necessary skills to think clearly and make informed decisions (Facione, 2015).

Conclusion

Barriers to critical thinking can significantly impede an individual’s ability to think clearly, make informed decisions, and solve problems effectively. By recognizing and addressing these barriers, individuals can enhance their critical thinking skills and improve their decision-making processes. Cultivating open-mindedness, challenging biases, managing emotions, and engaging in continuous learning are key strategies for overcoming these obstacles and achieving intellectual growth.

References

Brookfield, S. D. (2012). Teaching for Critical Thinking: Tools and Techniques to Help Students Question Their Assumptions. Jossey-Bass. Durnali, M. (2022). ‘Destroying barriers to critical thinking’ to surge the effect of self-leadership skills on electronic learning styles. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 46, 101130. Facione, P. A. (2015). Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts. Insight Assessment. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bantam Books. Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. Psychology Press. Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2019). Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools. Foundation for Critical Thinking Press. Saleh, S. E. (2019). Critical thinking as a 21st-century skill: Conceptions, implementation, and challenges in the EFL classroom. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 4(2).

PHL-111 2-2 Journal Final Project Topic MARIJUANA BENEFICIAL OR HARMFUL.docx

Marijuana: Weighing the Benefits and Harms

Introduction

The debate surrounding the legalization and use of marijuana has been ongoing for decades, with strong arguments both for and against its use. Marijuana has been recognized for its medicinal properties, but concerns about its potential harms persist. As more states and countries move toward legalization, it is crucial to critically examine the evidence regarding the benefits and risks associated with marijuana. This essay explores the current research on marijuana, evaluating its therapeutic benefits while also addressing the potential negative impacts.

Medicinal Benefits of Marijuana

Marijuana has been used for medicinal purposes for centuries. In recent years, scientific research has validated many of the traditional uses of marijuana, particularly its role in pain management and the treatment of certain medical conditions. The active compounds in marijuana, known as cannabinoids, interact with the body’s endocannabinoid system, which plays a role in regulating various physiological processes, including pain, appetite, and mood (Whiting et al., 2015).

Pain Management: One of the most well-established medicinal uses of marijuana is for the management of chronic pain. Studies have shown that cannabinoids can effectively reduce pain in conditions such as neuropathic pain, multiple sclerosis, and arthritis. For example, a review of studies published in the Journal of Pain found that patients using medical marijuana experienced significant pain relief compared to those who used a placebo (Hill, 2015).

Nausea and Vomiting: Marijuana has also been found to be effective in alleviating nausea and vomiting, particularly in patients undergoing chemotherapy. The antiemetic properties of cannabinoids make marijuana a valuable option for cancer patients who experience severe nausea as a side effect of their treatment (Devinsky et al., 2017).

Neurological Disorders: Emerging research suggests that marijuana may have neuroprotective properties, making it a potential treatment for neurological disorders such as epilepsy and Parkinson’s disease. For instance, cannabidiol (CBD), a non-psychoactive compound in marijuana, has been shown to reduce seizures in individuals with drug-resistant epilepsy. In 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Epidiolex, a CBD-based medication, for the treatment of two rare forms of epilepsy (Devinsky et al., 2017).

Recreational Use and Its Impacts

In addition to its medicinal uses, marijuana is widely used for recreational purposes. Many users report that marijuana helps them relax, reduce stress, and enhance creativity. While these effects may be beneficial for some individuals, the recreational use of marijuana also raises concerns about its potential harms.

Cognitive Impairment: One of the primary concerns regarding recreational marijuana use is its impact on cognitive function. Research has shown that marijuana use can impair cognitive functions such as memory, attention, and decision-making, particularly in heavy users. These impairments may persist even after cessation of use, raising concerns about the long-term effects of marijuana on brain function (Crean, Crane, & Mason, 2011).

Mental Health Risks: Another significant concern is the potential link between marijuana use and mental health disorders. Studies have found that regular marijuana use, particularly during adolescence, is associated with an increased risk of developing mental health issues such as anxiety, depression, and psychosis. Individuals with a genetic predisposition to these conditions may be particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of marijuana (Volkow et al., 2014).

Addiction and Dependence: While marijuana is often perceived as less addictive than other substances, research indicates that approximately 9% of users may develop cannabis use disorder (CUD), a condition characterized by dependence on the drug. The risk of developing CUD is higher among individuals who start using marijuana at a young age or use the drug frequently (Anthony, Warner, & Kessler, 1994).

The Legal and Social Implications

The legalization of marijuana has significant legal and social implications. Proponents of legalization argue that it can reduce the burden on the criminal justice system, generate tax revenue, and regulate the safety of marijuana products. In states where marijuana has been legalized, there has been a shift in law enforcement priorities, with resources being redirected away from prosecuting marijuana offenses and toward addressing more serious crimes (Caulkins, Kilmer, & Kleiman, 2016).

Economic Impact: Legalization has also led to the creation of a legal marijuana industry, which has generated significant economic benefits in terms of job creation and tax revenue. For example, the state of Colorado, which legalized recreational marijuana in 2012, has seen substantial tax revenue from marijuana sales, which has been used to fund education, public health, and infrastructure projects (Langley, 2019).

Public Health Concerns: Despite the economic benefits, opponents of legalization raise concerns about the potential for increased marijuana use among adolescents and the general population. Studies have shown that marijuana use among adolescents can negatively affect brain development, leading to long-term cognitive and behavioral issues. Additionally, the normalization of marijuana use may lead to increased acceptance and use among young people, which could have public health implications (Hall & Lynskey, 2016).

The Need for Further Research

While the current body of research provides valuable insights into the benefits and harms of marijuana, there is still much that remains unknown. Long-term studies are needed to fully understand the effects of marijuana on cognitive function, mental health, and physical health. Additionally, more research is needed to explore the potential therapeutic benefits of marijuana for various medical conditions, as well as the risks associated with recreational use.

Conclusion

The debate over the benefits and harms of marijuana is complex and multifaceted. While marijuana has demonstrated therapeutic benefits and potential for recreational use, it also poses risks to mental health, cognitive function, and the development of dependence. As more states and countries consider marijuana legalization, it is crucial to carefully weigh the evidence on both sides and implement policies that maximize benefits while minimizing harm. Ongoing research and public health education will be essential in guiding informed decision-making and ensuring that the potential risks of marijuana use are mitigated.

References

Anthony, J. C., Warner, L. A., & Kessler, R. C. (1994). Comparative epidemiology of dependence on tobacco, alcohol, controlled substances, and inhalants: Basic findings from the National Comorbidity Survey. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 2(3), 244-268. Caulkins, J. P., Kilmer, B., & Kleiman, M. A. (2016). Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press. Crean, R. D., Crane, N. A., & Mason, B. J. (2011). An evidence-based review of acute and long-term effects of cannabis use on executive cognitive functions. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 5(1), 1-8. Devinsky, O., Cross, J. H., Laux, L., Marsh, E., Miller, I., Nabbout, R., … & Scheffer, I. E. (2017). Trial of cannabidiol for drug-resistant seizures in the Dravet syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 376(21), 2011-2020. Hall, W., & Lynskey, M. (2016). Evaluating the public health impacts of legalizing recreational cannabis use in the United States. Addiction, 111(10), 1764-1773. Hill, K. P. (2015). Medical marijuana for treatment of chronic pain and other medical and psychiatric problems: A clinical review. JAMA, 313(24), 2474-2483. Langley, T. (2019). The economic impact of legalizing marijuana. American Journal of Public Health, 109(8), 1087-1092. Volkow, N. D., Baler, R. D., Compton, W. M., & Weiss, S. R. B. (2014). Adverse health effects of marijuana use. New England Journal of Medicine, 370(23), 2219-2227. Whiting, P. F., Wolff, R. F., Deshpande, S., Di Nisio, M., Duffy, S., Hernandez, A. V., … & Kleijnen, J. (2015). Cannabinoids for medical use: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, 313(24), 2456-2473.

---

PHL-111 3-2 Milestone One Primary Argument.docx

Primary Argument: The Case for Marijuana Legalization

Introduction

The legalization of marijuana is a topic that has sparked intense debate in recent years, with arguments both for and against its use. While some advocate for its legalization due to its medicinal benefits and potential economic advantages, others express concerns about its impact on public health and safety. This essay presents a primary argument in favor of marijuana legalization, supported by evidence from scientific research and real-world examples.

The Medicinal Benefits of Marijuana

One of the most compelling arguments for the legalization of marijuana is its potential medicinal benefits. Marijuana has been shown to be effective in treating a variety of medical conditions, including chronic pain, nausea, and epilepsy. The active compounds in marijuana, known as cannabinoids, interact with the body’s endocannabinoid system, which plays a role in regulating pain, mood, and appetite (Whiting et al., 2015).

Chronic Pain Relief: Chronic pain is one of the most common reasons for the use of medical marijuana. Studies have demonstrated that marijuana can effectively reduce pain in patients with conditions such as multiple sclerosis, arthritis, and neuropathic pain. For example, a review of studies published in the Journal of Pain found that patients using medical marijuana experienced significant pain relief compared to those who used a placebo (Hill, 2015).

Nausea and Vomiting: Marijuana has also been found to be effective in alleviating nausea and vomiting, particularly in patients undergoing chemotherapy. The antiemetic properties of cannabinoids make marijuana a valuable option for cancer patients who experience severe nausea as a side effect of their treatment (Devinsky et al., 2017).

Epilepsy Treatment: Emerging research suggests that marijuana may have neuroprotective properties, making it a potential treatment for neurological disorders such as epilepsy. Cannabidiol (CBD), a non-psychoactive compound in marijuana, has been shown to reduce seizures in individuals with drug-resistant epilepsy. In 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Epidiolex, a CBD-based medication, for the treatment of two rare forms of epilepsy (Devinsky et al., 2017).

The Economic Benefits of Legalization

In addition to its medicinal benefits, the legalization of marijuana has significant economic advantages. The creation of a legal marijuana industry has the potential to generate substantial tax revenue, create jobs, and stimulate economic growth. For example, the state of Colorado, which legalized recreational marijuana in 2012, has seen substantial tax revenue from marijuana sales, which has been used to fund education, public health, and infrastructure projects (Langley, 2019).

Job Creation: The legalization of marijuana has led to the creation of thousands of jobs in the cultivation, processing, and retail sectors. In states where marijuana is legal, the industry has become a significant employer, providing opportunities for workers in a variety of fields, from agriculture to retail to research (Caulkins, Kilmer, & Kleiman, 2016).

Tax Revenue: The legal marijuana industry generates significant tax revenue for states that have legalized the drug. For example, in 2018, the state of California collected over $345 million in tax revenue from marijuana sales. These funds have been used to support public services such as education, healthcare, and law enforcement (Langley, 2019).

Public Health and Safety Benefits

Proponents of marijuana legalization also argue that it can improve public health and safety by reducing the burden on the criminal justice system and providing a safer alternative to other substances such as alcohol and opioids.

Reduction in Criminal Justice Costs: The enforcement of marijuana prohibition laws has been a significant burden on the criminal justice system, leading to the arrest and incarceration of millions of individuals, particularly in communities of color. Legalizing marijuana would reduce the number of arrests and convictions for marijuana-related offenses, freeing up resources for law enforcement to focus on more serious crimes (Caulkins, Kilmer, & Kleiman, 2016).

Safer Alternative to Alcohol and Opioids: Research has shown that marijuana is less harmful than other substances such as alcohol and opioids. For example, a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that states with legal medical marijuana had lower rates of opioid overdose deaths compared to states where marijuana was illegal (Bachhuber et al., 2014). Additionally, marijuana has a lower risk of addiction and overdose compared to other substances, making it a safer option for recreational use.

Counterarguments and Rebuttals

While there are many compelling arguments in favor of marijuana legalization, it is important to address the counterarguments and provide evidence-based rebuttals.

Public Health Concerns: Opponents of marijuana legalization often cite concerns about the potential negative impact on public health, particularly the risk of addiction and the potential for impaired cognitive function. However, research indicates that the risk of addiction to marijuana is relatively low compared to other substances, such as alcohol and tobacco. Additionally, while heavy marijuana use has been associated with cognitive impairments, these effects are generally reversible and less severe than those associated with other substances (Volkow et al., 2014).

Impact on Youth: Another common concern is the potential for increased marijuana use among adolescents. However, studies have shown that in states where marijuana is legal, there has not been a significant increase in marijuana use among adolescents. In fact, some studies suggest that legalization may lead to a decrease in adolescent marijuana use, as legal markets reduce access to the drug for minors (Anderson et al., 2019).

Conclusion

The case for marijuana legalization is supported by a growing body of evidence that highlights its medicinal benefits, economic advantages, and potential to improve public health and safety. While there are valid concerns about the potential risks associated with marijuana use, these risks are generally lower than those associated with other legal substances, such as alcohol and tobacco. As more states and countries consider marijuana legalization, it is essential to continue to study the impacts of legalization and develop policies that maximize the benefits while minimizing the risks.

References

Anderson, D. M., Hansen, B., Rees, D. I., & Sabia, J. J. (2019). Association of marijuana laws with teen marijuana use: New estimates from the youth risk behavior surveys. JAMA Pediatrics, 173(9), 879-881. Bachhuber, M. A., Saloner, B., Cunningham, C. O., & Barry, C. L. (2014). Medical cannabis laws and opioid analgesic overdose mortality in the United States, 1999-2010. JAMA Internal Medicine, 174(10), 1668-1673. Caulkins, J. P., Kilmer, B., & Kleiman, M. A. (2016). Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press. Devinsky, O., Cross, J. H., Laux, L., Marsh, E., Miller, I., Nabbout, R., … & Scheffer, I. E. (2017). Trial of cannabidiol for drug-resistant seizures in the Dravet syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 376(21), 2011-2020. Hill, K. P. (2015). Medical marijuana for treatment of chronic pain and other medical and psychiatric problems: A clinical review. JAMA, 313(24), 2474-2483. Langley, T. (2019). The economic impact of legalizing marijuana. American Journal of Public Health, 109(8), 1087-1092. Volkow, N. D., Baler, R. D., Compton, W. M., & Weiss, S. R. B. (2014). Adverse health effects of marijuana use. New England Journal of Medicine, 370(23), 2219-2227. Whiting, P. F., Wolff, R. F., Deshpande, S., Di Nisio, M., Duffy, S., Hernandez, A. V., … & Kleijnen, J. (2015). Cannabinoids for medical use: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, 313(24), 2456-2473.

---

PHL-111 4-2 Journal Effects of Bias

The Effects of Bias on Critical Thinking and Decision-Making

Introduction

Bias is an inherent part of human cognition, influencing the way individuals perceive, interpret, and respond to information. While bias can be a natural byproduct of our cognitive processes, it can also distort thinking and lead to flawed decision-making. Understanding the various forms of bias and their impact on critical thinking is essential for improving judgment and making more informed decisions. This essay explores the different types of bias, their effects on critical thinking, and strategies for mitigating their influence.

Understanding Bias

Bias refers to a systematic deviation from objective judgment, often influenced by personal beliefs, experiences, or preferences. Bias can manifest in various forms, including cognitive biases, emotional biases, and social biases, each of which can affect critical thinking and decision-making in different ways (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974).

Cognitive Biases: Cognitive biases are mental shortcuts or heuristics that individuals use to process information quickly and efficiently. While these shortcuts can be helpful in certain situations, they can also lead to errors in judgment. Common cognitive biases include confirmation bias, anchoring bias, and availability heuristic (Nickerson, 1998).

Emotional Biases: Emotional biases occur when an individual’s emotions influence their decision-making process. For example, fear, anger, or desire can cloud judgment and lead to irrational decisions. Emotional biases can also result in selective perception, where individuals focus on information that aligns with their emotional state while ignoring contradictory evidence (Slovic, Finucane, Peters, & MacGregor, 2002).

Social Biases: Social biases are influenced by social factors such as group dynamics, cultural norms, and social identity. These biases can lead individuals to conform to the opinions or behaviors of others, even when they are objectively incorrect. Examples of social biases include groupthink, stereotyping, and the bandwagon effect (Janis, 1982).

The Impact of Bias on Critical Thinking

Bias can have a significant impact on critical thinking by distorting the way individuals process information and make decisions. When bias is present, individuals may be more likely to overlook important evidence, make hasty judgments, or cling to preconceived notions, even in the face of contradictory evidence (Paul & Elder, 2019).

Confirmation Bias: One of the most well-known cognitive biases, confirmation bias, occurs when individuals seek out information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs while ignoring or dismissing evidence that contradicts them. This bias can lead to selective thinking and hinder the ability to evaluate information objectively. For example, a person who believes that a particular diet is effective may only focus on studies that support this belief while disregarding research that suggests otherwise (Nickerson, 1998).

Anchoring Bias: Anchoring bias occurs when individuals rely too heavily on the first piece of information they encounter when making decisions. This initial piece of information, known as the “anchor,” can disproportionately influence subsequent judgments, even if it is irrelevant or misleading. For example, in negotiations, the initial offer can serve as an anchor, leading to outcomes that are skewed in favor of the party who made the first offer (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974).

Availability Heuristic: The availability heuristic is a cognitive bias in which individuals estimate the likelihood of an event based on how easily examples of that event come to mind. This bias can lead to distorted perceptions of risk, as individuals may overestimate the probability of dramatic or recent events while underestimating more common but less salient risks. For instance, people may perceive air travel as more dangerous than car travel due to the vividness of plane crashes in the media, despite statistics showing that flying is safer (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974).

Stereotyping: Stereotyping is a form of social bias in which individuals make assumptions about others based on their membership in a particular group. Stereotypes can lead to unfair judgments and discriminatory behavior, as individuals may overlook the unique qualities of others and instead rely on generalized beliefs. For example, a hiring manager who holds stereotypes about a particular ethnic group may unfairly judge a job candidate based on their group membership rather than their qualifications (Fiske, 1998).

Strategies for Mitigating Bias

To improve critical thinking and decision-making, it is essential to recognize and mitigate the influence of bias. Several strategies can help individuals reduce the impact of bias on their thinking:

1. Awareness and Reflection: The first step in mitigating bias is to become aware of its presence and reflect on how it may be influencing one’s thinking. Individuals can achieve this by regularly questioning their assumptions, considering alternative perspectives, and seeking feedback from others (Paul & Elder, 2019).
2. Deliberative Thinking: Deliberative thinking involves slowing down the decision-making process and carefully considering all available information before making a judgment. This approach can help counteract the influence of cognitive biases, such as anchoring and availability heuristic, by encouraging individuals to take a more systematic and evidence-based approach to decision-making (Kahneman, 2011).
3. Diverse Perspectives: Encouraging diversity of thought and opinion can help reduce the influence of social biases, such as groupthink and stereotyping. By engaging with individuals who have different backgrounds, experiences, and viewpoints, individuals can broaden their understanding of complex issues and challenge their preconceived notions (Janis, 1982).
4. Emotional Regulation: Managing emotions is essential for reducing the impact of emotional biases on decision-making. Techniques such as mindfulness, stress management, and reflective practice can help individuals remain calm and focused, allowing them to make more rational and objective decisions (Slovic et al., 2002).
5. Critical Thinking Training: Formal training in critical thinking can help individuals develop the skills needed to recognize and mitigate bias. Educational programs that emphasize logical reasoning, evidence evaluation, and ethical decision-making can provide individuals with the tools they need to think critically and make informed decisions (Facione, 2015).

Conclusion

Bias is an inherent part of human cognition, but it can have a significant impact on critical thinking and decision-making. By understanding the different types of bias and their effects, individuals can take steps to mitigate their influence and improve their judgment. Strategies such as awareness and reflection, deliberative thinking, and engaging with diverse perspectives can help individuals reduce the impact of bias and make more informed decisions. Ultimately, the ability to recognize and address bias is essential for developing strong critical thinking skills and making sound judgments in both personal and professional contexts.

References

Facione, P. A. (2015). Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts. Insight Assessment. Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In Handbook of Social Psychology (4th ed.), edited by Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T., & Lindzey, G., McGraw-Hill, pp. 357-411. Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes (2nd ed.). Houghton Mifflin. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2019). Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools. Foundation for Critical Thinking Press. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). The affect heuristic. In Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, edited by Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D., Cambridge University Press, pp. 397-420. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.

---

5-2 Milestone Two Counterargument.docx

Counterargument: Addressing the Challenges of Marijuana Legalization

Introduction

The debate over marijuana legalization is a complex and multifaceted issue that involves various social, economic, and public health considerations. While there are strong arguments in favor of legalization, such as the potential medicinal benefits and economic advantages, there are also valid concerns about the potential risks associated with marijuana use. This essay presents a counterargument to the primary argument for marijuana legalization, focusing on the potential negative impacts on public health, youth, and social behavior.

Public Health Concerns

One of the primary concerns associated with marijuana legalization is its potential impact on public health. While marijuana is often perceived as less harmful than other substances, such as alcohol and tobacco, research indicates that it can still pose significant health risks, particularly when used regularly or in high doses.

Mental Health Risks: Regular marijuana use has been linked to an increased risk of mental health disorders, including anxiety, depression, and psychosis. Studies have found that individuals who use marijuana frequently, especially those with a genetic predisposition to mental health issues, are more likely to experience symptoms of anxiety and depression (Volkow et al., 2014). Additionally, there is evidence to suggest that marijuana use can trigger psychotic episodes in individuals who are vulnerable to schizophrenia or other psychotic disorders (Hall & Degenhardt, 2009).

Cognitive Impairment: Another significant concern is the potential for marijuana to impair cognitive function. Research has shown that marijuana use can negatively affect memory, attention, and decision-making abilities, particularly in heavy users. These cognitive impairments may persist even after cessation of use, raising concerns about the long-term effects of marijuana on brain function (Crean, Crane, & Mason, 2011).

Addiction and Dependence: While marijuana is often considered to be less addictive than other substances, such as alcohol and opioids, it is still possible to develop a dependence on the drug. Cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a condition characterized by an inability to control marijuana use despite negative consequences. Studies estimate that approximately 9% of individuals who use marijuana will develop CUD, with the risk being higher for those who start using at a young age or use the drug frequently (Anthony, Warner, & Kessler, 1994).

Impact on Youth

The potential impact of marijuana legalization on youth is another major concern. Adolescents are particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of marijuana, as their brains are still developing. Research has shown that marijuana use during adolescence can interfere with brain development, leading to long-term cognitive and behavioral issues (Volkow et al., 2014).

Academic Performance: Marijuana use has been associated with decreased academic performance among adolescents. Studies have found that students who use marijuana regularly are more likely to have lower grades, higher dropout rates, and reduced motivation to succeed in school (Schuster et al., 2016). The cognitive impairments caused by marijuana use, such as difficulties with memory and attention, can also contribute to poorer academic outcomes.

Risk of Substance Abuse: Adolescents who use marijuana are also at an increased risk of developing substance abuse problems later in life. Research has shown that early exposure to marijuana can increase the likelihood of using other drugs, such as alcohol, tobacco, and opioids. This phenomenon, known as the “gateway effect,” suggests that marijuana use during adolescence may open the door to experimentation with more harmful substances (Hall & Lynskey, 2005).

Social Behavior and Public Safety

Marijuana legalization also raises concerns about its potential impact on social behavior and public safety. While proponents argue that legalization can reduce crime and improve public safety, there are concerns that it may lead to an increase in social problems.

Impaired Driving: One of the most significant public safety concerns associated with marijuana use is the potential for impaired driving. Marijuana can impair motor coordination, reaction time, and judgment, increasing the risk of accidents. Studies have found that drivers who use marijuana are more likely to be involved in traffic accidents, particularly when combined with alcohol (Ramaekers et al., 2004). As marijuana becomes more widely available, there is a risk that impaired driving incidents could increase, posing a threat to public safety.

Increased Crime Rates: While proponents of marijuana legalization argue that it can reduce crime by eliminating the black market for the drug, there are concerns that legalization could lead to an increase in certain types of crime. For example, research suggests that marijuana dispensaries may be associated with higher rates of property crime and violent crime in surrounding areas (Freisthler et al., 2013). Additionally, the commercialization of marijuana could lead to increased competition among illegal drug traffickers, potentially resulting in more violence.

Counterarguments and Rebuttals

While the concerns raised in this counterargument are valid, it is important to consider the evidence that supports marijuana legalization and address these concerns with evidence-based rebuttals.

Public Health Concerns: While marijuana use does carry some health risks, it is important to note that these risks are generally lower than those associated with other legal substances, such as alcohol and tobacco. Additionally, the potential medicinal benefits of marijuana, such as pain relief and the treatment of epilepsy, should not be overlooked. With proper regulation and public health education, the risks associated with marijuana use can be minimized (Hill, 2015).

Impact on Youth: The potential impact of marijuana on youth is a legitimate concern, but it is important to consider that marijuana use among adolescents has not increased significantly in states where it has been legalized. In fact, some studies suggest that legalization may lead to a decrease in adolescent marijuana use, as legal markets reduce access to the drug for minors (Anderson et al., 2019). Additionally, public health campaigns can help educate young people about the risks of marijuana use and encourage responsible behavior.

Social Behavior and Public Safety: The concerns about impaired driving and increased crime rates are valid, but they can be addressed through effective regulation and law enforcement. For example, laws that prohibit driving under the influence of marijuana can help reduce the risk of traffic accidents, while zoning regulations can help prevent crime around marijuana dispensaries (Caulkins, Kilmer, & Kleiman, 2016).

Conclusion

The debate over marijuana legalization is complex, with valid arguments on both sides. While there are legitimate concerns about the potential risks associated with marijuana use, these risks can be mitigated through proper regulation, public health education, and law enforcement. The potential benefits of marijuana legalization, such as its medicinal properties and economic advantages, should not be overlooked. Ultimately, the decision to legalize marijuana should be based on a careful consideration of the evidence, with the goal of maximizing the benefits while minimizing the risks.

References

Anderson, D. M., Hansen, B., Rees, D. I., & Sabia, J. J. (2019). Association of marijuana laws with teen marijuana use: New estimates from the youth risk behavior surveys. JAMA Pediatrics, 173(9), 879-881. Anthony, J. C., Warner, L. A., & Kessler, R. C. (1994). Comparative epidemiology of dependence on tobacco, alcohol, controlled substances, and inhalants: Basic findings from the National Comorbidity Survey. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 2(3), 244-268. Caulkins, J. P., Kilmer, B., & Kleiman, M. A. (2016). Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press. Crean, R. D., Crane, N. A., & Mason, B. J. (2011). An evidence-based review of acute and long-term effects of cannabis use on executive cognitive functions. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 5(1), 1-8. Freisthler, B., Gruenewald, P. J., Johnson, F. W., Treno, A. J., & LaScala, E. A. (2013). An examination of the relationship between marijuana use, medical marijuana dispensaries, and abusive and neglectful parenting. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37(11), 1441-1450. Hall, W., & Degenhardt, L. (2009). Adverse health effects of non-medical cannabis use. Lancet, 374(9698), 1383-1391. Hall, W., & Lynskey, M. (2005). Is cannabis a gateway drug? Testing hypotheses about the relationship between cannabis use and the use of other illicit drugs. Drug and Alcohol Review, 24(1), 39-48. Hill, K. P. (2015). Medical marijuana for treatment of chronic pain and other medical and psychiatric problems: A clinical review. JAMA, 313(24), 2474-2483. Ramaekers, J. G., Berghaus, G., van Laar, M., & Drummer, O. H. (2004). Dose related risk of motor vehicle crashes after cannabis use. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 73(2), 109-119. Schuster, R. M., Crane, N. A., Mermelstein, R., & Gonzalez, R. (2016). Tobacco may act as a gateway drug to cannabis. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 168, 100-108. Volkow, N. D., Baler, R. D., Compton, W. M., & Weiss, S. R. B. (2014). Adverse health effects of marijuana use. New England Journal of Medicine, 370(23), 2219-2227.

---

PHL-111 6-2 Journal Misinformation and Personal Responsibility

Misinformation and Personal Responsibility: Navigating the Information Age

Introduction

In the digital age, information is more accessible than ever before. However, the proliferation of information has also led to the rise of misinformation—false or misleading information that can spread rapidly across social media and other online platforms. Misinformation can have serious consequences, from influencing public opinion to affecting individual decision-making. In this context, it is essential for individuals to take personal responsibility for the information they consume and share. This essay explores the challenges posed by misinformation, the role of personal responsibility in addressing these challenges, and strategies for becoming more discerning consumers of information.

The Rise of Misinformation

Misinformation is not a new phenomenon, but the digital age has amplified its reach and impact. Social media platforms, blogs, and websites allow anyone to publish and share information, often without the checks and balances that exist in traditional media. As a result, false or misleading information can spread rapidly, reaching large audiences in a short amount of time (Vosoughi, Roy, & Aral, 2018).

The Role of Social Media: Social media platforms play a significant role in the spread of misinformation. Algorithms that prioritize engagement over accuracy can amplify sensationalist content, leading to the rapid dissemination of false information. Additionally, the echo chamber effect—where users are exposed primarily to information that aligns with their existing beliefs—can reinforce misinformation and make it more difficult for individuals to recognize falsehoods (Del Vicario et al., 2016).

Consequences of Misinformation: The spread of misinformation can have serious consequences. In the context of public health, for example, misinformation about vaccines has contributed to vaccine hesitancy and the resurgence of preventable diseases such as measles. In the political arena, misinformation can influence elections, undermine trust in democratic institutions, and contribute to polarization and social unrest (Lewandowsky, Ecker, & Cook, 2017).

Personal Responsibility in the Age of Misinformation

Given the challenges posed by misinformation, it is essential for individuals to take personal responsibility for the information they consume and share. Personal responsibility involves critically evaluating the credibility of information, verifying sources, and being mindful of the potential impact of sharing information with others.

Critical Evaluation of Information: One of the most important aspects of personal responsibility is the ability to critically evaluate information. This involves questioning the source of the information, assessing its credibility, and considering whether it is supported by evidence. For example, individuals should be wary of information that comes from unknown or unverified sources, lacks citations, or contains sensationalist language (Paul & Elder, 2019).

Verifying Sources: Verifying the accuracy of information is another key component of personal responsibility. This can be done by cross-referencing information with credible sources, such as academic journals, reputable news outlets, and expert opinions. Fact-checking websites, such as Snopes and FactCheck.org, can also be valuable tools for verifying information and debunking misinformation (Wardle & Derakhshan, 2017).

Mindful Sharing: In the digital age, individuals have the power to share information with large audiences at the click of a button. However, with this power comes the responsibility to ensure that the information being shared is accurate and reliable. Before sharing information on social media or other platforms, individuals should take the time to verify its accuracy and consider the potential impact of spreading false or misleading information (Lewandowsky et al., 2017).

The Role of Education in Combating Misinformation

Education plays a crucial role in equipping individuals with the skills and knowledge needed to navigate the complex information landscape. Media literacy and critical thinking education can help individuals develop the ability to recognize and resist misinformation, as well as make informed decisions based on accurate information.

Media Literacy: Media literacy involves understanding how media works, including the ways in which information is produced, distributed, and consumed. By teaching individuals to critically analyze media messages, media literacy education can help them identify biases, recognize misinformation, and evaluate the credibility of sources (Hobbs, 2010).

Critical Thinking Skills: Critical thinking skills are essential for evaluating information and making informed decisions. Critical thinking involves analyzing information, identifying logical fallacies, and considering alternative perspectives. Educational programs that emphasize critical thinking can help individuals develop the skills needed to assess the credibility of information and make reasoned judgments (Paul & Elder, 2019).

The Role of Technology in Addressing Misinformation

While individuals have a responsibility to critically evaluate information, technology companies also have a role to play in addressing the spread of misinformation. Social media platforms, search engines, and other technology companies can implement measures to reduce the spread of false information and promote the dissemination of accurate information.

Algorithmic Solutions: One approach to addressing misinformation is to modify the algorithms used by social media platforms and search engines to prioritize accuracy over engagement. For example, algorithms could be designed to downrank content that has been flagged as false by fact-checkers or to promote content from credible sources. Additionally, platforms could provide users with more information about the sources of content, such as fact-checking labels or credibility scores (Vosoughi et al., 2018).

Content Moderation: Content moderation is another important tool for combating misinformation. Social media platforms can implement policies to remove or flag content that violates their guidelines, such as false information about public health or elections. However, content moderation must be done carefully to balance the need to address misinformation with the importance of protecting free speech (Wardle & Derakhshan, 2017).

Conclusion

Misinformation is a significant challenge in the digital age, with serious implications for public health, democracy, and social cohesion. As individuals, we have a responsibility to critically evaluate the information we consume and share, verify sources, and be mindful of the impact of our actions. Education in media literacy and critical thinking can equip individuals with the skills needed to navigate the complex information landscape, while technology companies also have a role to play in addressing the spread of misinformation. By working together, we can mitigate the impact of misinformation and promote a more informed and engaged society.

References

Del Vicario, M., Bessi, A., Zollo, F., Petroni, F., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., … & Quattrociocchi, W. (2016). The spreading of misinformation online. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(3), 554-559. Hobbs, R. (2010). Digital and Media Literacy: Connecting Culture and Classroom. Corwin Press. Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 353-369. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2019). Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools. Foundation for Critical Thinking Press. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146-1151. Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Council of Europe.

---

PHL-111 7-1 Final Project Critical Essay.docx

Critical Essay: The Complexities of Marijuana Legalization

Introduction

The debate over marijuana legalization is one of the most contentious issues in contemporary society. Proponents argue that legalization offers significant benefits, including medical relief, economic growth, and social justice. Opponents, however, raise concerns about public health, youth exposure, and potential increases in crime. This critical essay examines both sides of the debate, evaluating the arguments for and against marijuana legalization and exploring the broader implications of this policy shift.

Arguments in Favor of Marijuana Legalization

Medical Benefits: One of the strongest arguments for marijuana legalization is its potential medical benefits. Research has shown that marijuana can be effective in treating a variety of medical conditions, including chronic pain, epilepsy, and multiple sclerosis. Cannabinoids, the active compounds in marijuana, interact with the body’s endocannabinoid system, which plays a role in regulating pain, mood, and appetite (Whiting et al., 2015).

For example, a study published in the Journal of Pain found that patients using medical marijuana experienced significant pain relief compared to those who used a placebo (Hill, 2015). Additionally, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Epidiolex, a cannabidiol (CBD)-based medication, for the treatment of two rare forms of epilepsy (Devinsky et al., 2017). These findings suggest that marijuana has legitimate medical uses and can provide relief to patients who have not responded to other treatments.

Economic Growth: Legalizing marijuana also has the potential to stimulate economic growth. The creation of a legal marijuana industry can generate significant tax revenue, create jobs, and stimulate local economies. For example, the state of Colorado, which legalized recreational marijuana in 2012, has seen substantial tax revenue from marijuana sales, which has been used to fund education, public health, and infrastructure projects (Langley, 2019).

The legal marijuana industry has also created thousands of jobs in cultivation, processing, and retail. In states where marijuana is legal, the industry has become a significant employer, providing opportunities for workers in a variety of fields. This economic impact is particularly important in the context of economic recovery efforts following the COVID-19 pandemic, as the marijuana industry has shown resilience and continued growth (Caulkins, Kilmer, & Kleiman, 2016).

Social Justice: Marijuana legalization is also seen as a social justice issue. The enforcement of marijuana prohibition laws has disproportionately affected communities of color, leading to the arrest and incarceration of millions of individuals for non-violent offenses. Legalizing marijuana would reduce the number of arrests and convictions for marijuana-related offenses, helping to address the racial disparities in the criminal justice system (Alexander, 2010).

In addition, legalization can provide an opportunity for individuals with prior marijuana convictions to have their records expunged, allowing them to access better employment and housing opportunities. This is particularly important in addressing the long-term consequences of the war on drugs, which has had a devastating impact on marginalized communities (Alexander, 2010).

Arguments Against Marijuana Legalization

Public Health Risks: Despite the potential benefits, opponents of marijuana legalization raise concerns about the impact on public health. Regular marijuana use has been linked to a variety of health risks, including mental health disorders, cognitive impairment, and addiction. For example, studies have found that individuals who use marijuana frequently, especially those with a genetic predisposition to mental health issues, are more likely to experience symptoms of anxiety and depression (Volkow et al., 2014).

There is also evidence to suggest that marijuana use can impair cognitive function, particularly in heavy users. These cognitive impairments may persist even after cessation of use, raising concerns about the long-term effects of marijuana on brain function (Crean, Crane, & Mason, 2011). Additionally, cannabis use disorder (CUD) is a condition characterized by an inability to control marijuana use despite negative consequences, with studies estimating that approximately 9% of users will develop CUD (Anthony, Warner, & Kessler, 1994).

Youth Exposure: Another significant concern is the potential impact of marijuana legalization on youth. Adolescents are particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of marijuana, as their brains are still developing. Research has shown that marijuana use during adolescence can interfere with brain development, leading to long-term cognitive and behavioral issues (Volkow et al., 2014).

Marijuana use has also been associated with decreased academic performance among adolescents. Studies have found that students who use marijuana regularly are more likely to have lower grades, higher dropout rates, and reduced motivation to succeed in school (Schuster et al., 2016). These findings suggest that legalizing marijuana could have serious consequences for youth, particularly if it leads to increased accessibility and normalization of the drug.

Public Safety Concerns: Public safety is another key concern for opponents of marijuana legalization. Marijuana can impair motor coordination, reaction time, and judgment, increasing the risk of accidents, particularly impaired driving. Studies have found that drivers who use marijuana are more likely to be involved in traffic accidents, especially when combined with alcohol (Ramaekers et al., 2004).

In addition, there are concerns that marijuana legalization could lead to an increase in crime. While proponents argue that legalization can reduce crime by eliminating the black market for the drug, some studies suggest that marijuana dispensaries may be associated with higher rates of property crime and violent crime in surrounding areas (Freisthler et al., 2013). These findings highlight the potential public safety risks associated with marijuana legalization.

Balancing the Pros and Cons

The debate over marijuana legalization is complex, with valid arguments on both sides. Proponents point to the potential medical, economic, and social justice benefits, while opponents raise concerns about public health, youth exposure, and public safety. Ultimately, the decision to legalize marijuana should be based on a careful consideration of the evidence, with the goal of maximizing the benefits while minimizing the risks.

Regulation and Public Education: One approach to balancing the pros and cons of marijuana legalization is to implement strong regulatory frameworks and public education campaigns. Regulation can help ensure that marijuana products are safe, labeled accurately, and sold only to adults. Public education campaigns can inform the public about the risks associated with marijuana use, particularly for youth, and promote responsible consumption (Caulkins, Kilmer, & Kleiman, 2016).

Ongoing Research: Another important aspect of marijuana legalization is the need for ongoing research. While the current body of evidence provides valuable insights into the benefits and risks of marijuana, there is still much that remains unknown. Long-term studies are needed to fully understand the effects of marijuana on cognitive function, mental health, and public safety. Additionally, more research is needed to explore the potential therapeutic benefits of marijuana for various medical conditions (Hill, 2015).

Conclusion

The debate over marijuana legalization is one of the most complex and multifaceted issues in contemporary society. While there are compelling arguments on both sides, the decision to legalize marijuana should be based on a careful consideration of the evidence and a commitment to maximizing the benefits while minimizing the risks. By implementing strong regulatory frameworks, promoting public education, and supporting ongoing research, society can navigate the complexities of marijuana legalization and create policies that promote public health, safety, and social justice.

References

Alexander, M. (2010). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press. Anthony, J. C., Warner, L. A., & Kessler, R. C. (1994). Comparative epidemiology of dependence on tobacco, alcohol, controlled substances, and inhalants: Basic findings from the National Comorbidity Survey. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 2(3), 244-268. Caulkins, J. P., Kilmer, B., & Kleiman, M. A. (2016). Marijuana Legalization: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press. Crean, R. D., Crane, N. A., & Mason, B. J. (2011). An evidence-based review of acute and long-term effects of cannabis use on executive cognitive functions. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 5(1), 1-8. Devinsky, O., Cross, J. H., Laux, L., Marsh, E., Miller, I., Nabbout, R., … & Scheffer, I. E. (2017). Trial of cannabidiol for drug-resistant seizures in the Dravet syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 376(21), 2011-2020. Freisthler, B., Gruenewald, P. J., Johnson, F. W., Treno, A. J., & LaScala, E. A. (2013). An examination of the relationship between marijuana use, medical marijuana dispensaries, and abusive and neglectful parenting. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37(11), 1441-1450. Hill, K. P. (2015). Medical marijuana for treatment of chronic pain and other medical and psychiatric problems: A clinical review. JAMA, 313(24), 2474-2483. Langley, T. (2019). The economic impact of legalizing marijuana. American Journal of Public Health, 109(8), 1087-1092. Ramaekers, J. G., Berghaus, G., van Laar, M., & Drummer, O. H. (2004). Dose related risk of motor vehicle crashes after cannabis use. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 73(2), 109-119. Schuster, R. M., Crane, N. A., Mermelstein, R., & Gonzalez, R. (2016). Tobacco may act as a gateway drug to cannabis. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 168, 100-108. Volkow, N. D., Baler, R. D., Compton, W. M., & Weiss, S. R. B. (2014). Adverse health effects of marijuana use. New England Journal of Medicine, 370(23), 2219-2227. Whiting, P. F., Wolff, R. F., Deshpande, S., Di Nisio, M., Duffy, S., Hernandez, A. V., … & Kleijnen, J. (2015). Cannabinoids for medical use: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, 313(24), 2456-2473.