Research into cognitive performance impairments related to the use of ‘ecstasy’ (MDMA) and cannabis effects professional opinions and media debate.
Submitting Institution
Edge Hill UniversityUnit of Assessment
Psychology, Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSummary Impact Type
SocietalResearch Subject Area(s)
Medical and Health Sciences: Public Health and Health Services
Psychology and Cognitive Sciences: Psychology
Summary of the impact
Research into impaired cognitive performance related to drug misuse began
at Edge Hill
University (EHU) in 1998. It has predominantly concentrated upon
impairments related to use of
the illegal drug `ecstasy' (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine: MDMA),
although some has
focussed upon cannabis related impairments in order to identify which of
these drugs was related
to a specific performance decrement. The impacts presented arise from
contributions to policy
development through the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD),
the consultation
response team of the British Psychological Society (BPS), media debate
drawing upon our
research, and through informing the design of a drug use prevention
campaign.
Underpinning research
The underpinning research was undertaken by Murphy, who joined Edge Hill
in September 1998,
where he remains as a Professor and Head of Department. The impacts
reported flow from the
investigation of ecstasy and cannabis related performance impairments upon
a range of
psychological functions (cognition and mood). These include, the executive
processes of working
memory [1, 2] and visuospatial working memory functioning [3, 4].
Associated impairments of
mood [5] and sleep [6] have also been investigated, together with the
beliefs of ecstasy users
concerning the risks associated with using this drug, and the precautions
they consequently take
[7]. In total, this research programme has so far produced between 2000
and 2013, 19 published
journal articles, 9 papers presented at international conferences outside
the UK, and a further 22
papers presented at scientific conferences within the UK.
This programme of research began at EHU in 1998 with a study of
information processing and
working memory executive deficits related to ecstasy use, published in
2000, under the
supervision of Professor John Fisk and Professor Philip Murphy. Much of
the subsequent
published research emerged from the doctoral work completed in 2005 by Dr.
Michelle Wareing,
who was registered at EHU. Collaboration with Wareing continued during her
time as a researcher
within the Centre for Public Health at Liverpool John Moores University
(LJMU) from 2005 to 2010,
and continues now with her in another research role at EHU. Murphy, who
has been at EHU
throughout this period, was Wareing's doctoral Director of Studies, and
Fisk was her co-supervisor
[1 - 3]. Murphy has further developed the focus upon mood [5] and
visuospatial functioning [3, 4]
following Wareing's doctoral completion. Murphy also took the lead in the
analysis and publication
of survey data gathered in the course of Wareing's doctoral research,
which was not included in
her thesis. This data formed the basis for the study of ecstasy users'
perceptions of risks
associated with the drug [7]. Murphy's collaboration with Fisk remains
ongoing, having continued
in Fisk's subsequent posts at LJMU and the University of Central
Lancashire where he has been
based since 2006. Dr. Cathy Montgomery at LJMU became involved in this
work in 2001 and
continues to collaborate with both Murphy and Fisk.
This research has identified those areas of psychological functioning
vulnerable to ecstasy
(MDMA) and cannabis related impairments, and those which are not
vulnerable to such
impairments. For example, regarding working memory executive functioning,
updating processes
and visuospatial working memory appear to be vulnerable to ecstasy related
impairments, whilst
attention shifting and the inhibition of responses do not [1, 3, 4, 6].
Mood disturbances amongst
ecstasy users are independent of other drug use, although they are
exacerbated by the
concomitant use of alcohol with ecstasy [5]. Furthermore, ecstasy users
are not naive regarding
the cognitive and mood related effects of the drug, but make conscious
decisions to accept the
risks associated with its use whilst, in some cases, taking precautions to
mitigate such risks (e.g.
monitoring fluid intake). Systematic efforts have been made to allow for
the potentially confounding
effects of other drug use, intelligence, and personality, in relating the
use of specific drugs to
psychological effects.
References to the research
Output 4 and 5 are returned to REF 2. All items appear in peer reviewed
journals and are available
on request. All journal impact and 2012 impact factor ranking data from
ISI Web of Knowledge:
Journal Citation Reports © (2012, sourced November 2013), citation data
from Google Scholar
(November 2013).
[1] Journal Article: Montgomery, C., Fisk, J.E., Newcombe, R., and
Murphy, P.N. (2005). The
differential effects of MDMA ("ecstasy") on executive components:
shifting, inhibition, updating,
and access to semantic memory. Psychopharmacology, 182, 262-276. DOI
10.1007/s00213-005-0065-9
(59 citations, Impact Factor 4.061, 5 Year Impact Factor 4.285,
ranked 42/261 in
Pharmacology and Pharmacy, 28/135 in Psychiatry, 67/252 in
Neurosciences)).
[2] Journal Article: Murphy, P.N., Erwin, P.G., MacIver, L., Fisk, J.E,
Larkin, D., Wareing, M.,
Montgomery, C., Hilton, J., Tames, F.J., Bradley, B., Yanulevitch, K. and
Ralley, R. (2011). The
relationships of `ecstasy' (MDMA) and cannabis use to impaired executive
inhibition and access
to semantic long term memory. Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical and
Experimental, 26(7),
460-469. DOI 10.1002/hup.1228 (Impact Factor 2.097, 5 Year Impact Factor
2.721, ranked 33/75
(Psychology)).
[3] Journal Article: Wareing, M., Fisk, J.E., Murphy, P.N. and
Montgomery, C. (2005). Visuo-spatial
working memory deficits in current and former users of MDMA ('ecstasy').
Human
Psychopharmacology: Clinical and Experimental, 20, 115-123. DOI
10.1002/hup.670 (Impact
Factor 2.097, 5 Year Impact Factor 2.721)
[4] Journal Article: Murphy, P.N., Bruno, R., Wareing, M., Ryland, I.,
Fisk, J.E., and Montgomery,
C. (2012). The effects of ecstasy (MDMA) on visuospatial memory
performance: Findings from a
systematic review with meta-analysis. Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical
and Experimental,
27(2), 113-138. DOI 10.1002/hup.1270 (Impact Factor 2.097, 5-Year impact
factor 2.721)
[5] Journal Article: Fisk, J.E., Murphy, P.N., Montgomery C., &
Hadjiefthyvoulou, F. (2011).
Modelling the adverse effects associated with ecstasy use. Addiction, 106,
798-805. DOI
10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03272.x (Impact Factor 4.746, 5 Year Impact
Factor 5.021, ranked
20/135 in Psychiatry (Science), 2/16 in Substance Abuse (Science), 1/30 in
Substance Abuse
(Social Science)).
[6] Journal Article: Montgomery, C., Fisk, J.E., Wareing, M., and Murphy,
P.N. (2007). Self-
reported sleep quality and cognitive performance in ecstasy users. Human
Psychopharmacology:
Clinical and Experimental, 22, 537-548. DOI 10.1002/hup.879 (Impact Factor
2.097, 5-Year
Impact Factor 2.721)
[7] Journal Article: Murphy, P.N., Wareing, M. and Fisk, J.E. (2006).
Users' perceptions of the risks
and effects of taking MDMA (Ecstasy). Journal of Psychopharmacology, 20,
447-455. DOI
10.1177/0269881106063270 (Impact Factor 3.374, 5-Year impact factor 3.441,
ranked 46/193
(Clinical Neurology), 96/252 (Neurosciences), 63/261 (Pharmacology &
Pharmacy), 36/135
(Psychiatry)).
[8] Journal Article: Murphy, P., Wareing, M, Fisk, JE, Montgomery, C.
(2009). Executive Working
Memory Deficits in Abstinent Ecstasy/MDMA Users: A Critical Review.
Neuropsychobiology, 60,
159-175. DOI 10.1159/000253552 (Impact Factor 2.371, 5 Year 2.668, ranked
62/135
(Psychiatry), 31/75 (Psychology)).
Details of the impact
The four examples of impact cited concern contributions to the decision
by the UK government to
maintain the Class A status of ecstasy in 2009; the British Psychological
Society (BPS) submission
to a Department for Education (DfE) consultation in 2011; the media
debates concerning the
dangers of ecstasy; and the development of a drug misuse support service
on Merseyside since
2008. All impacts occurred between January 2008 and July 2013.
At an open meeting of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD)
on Friday 19th
September 2008, the Council presented its recommendations regarding the
legal classification of
`ecstasy' (MDMA). The preliminary findings presented cited 12 studies from
this research
programme. The scientific basis for these recommendations came from a
meta-analysis of
empirical findings concerning the effects of ecstasy [Other Source 1],
conducted by the Peninsula
Technology Assessment Group of the Peninsula Medical School. The published
systematic review
cited 11 studies from this programme of research overall [e.g. Outputs 1,
3, 6, Section 3], with 8
of these citations having direct EHU authorship. These studies emphasised
harms arising from
ecstasy use, and contributed to six of the meta-analyses reported. These
findings were
incorporated into the ACMD report [Other Source 2] submitted to the Home
Office. Despite the
overall ACMD recommendation for the legal status of ecstasy to be changed
to Class B, sufficient
evidence was presented concerning the dangers of the drug for the Home
Office to maintain its
Class A status, with the aim of minimising drug related harms to the
public.
In August 2011 the DfE launched a review of personal, social, health and
economics (PSHE)
education in schools [Other Source 3]. The BPS contribution to this
consultation cited 14 published
research studies in the substance misuse section of its submission,
including 3 studies from our
research highlighting the dangers to cognitive functioning and mood
stability arising from ecstasy
and cannabis use, respectively [see Outputs 2, 5, 8, Section 3]. These
citations helped to underpin
the BPS recommendation that consideration be given to making education
regarding the dangers
of substance misuse a compulsory element within PSHE education. The BPS
consultation
submission was published on the society's web site [Other Source 4], and a
formal response was
published by the DfE in March 2013 [Other Source 5]. This response stated
that cited evidence
was being considered by Ofsted with the aim of revising PSHE teaching
practice. The current
beneficiaries of this impact are the DfE and Ofsted policy makers, with
further benefits following
to the teachers developing and delivering the PHSE curriculum, and
ultimately the children they
teach.
The third impact area concerns contributions to the media debate
concerning the risks of the drug
ecstasy. Two major contributions will be noted here. The first occurred on
Friday 19th September
2008, when Murphy appeared on both BBC Breakfast television, and on the
Radio 4 Today
programme. Both interviews involved `head to head' debate with Prof Colin
Blakemore, a former
Director of the Medical Research Council, and coincided with the open
meeting of the ACMD on
this topic described above [see also Other Sources 1 and 2]. The second
contribution occurred on
Thursday 27th September 2012 with Murphy's appearance on the Channel 4
programme `Drugs
Live- the Ecstasy Trial' where he faced Professor David Nutt (formerly
Chair of the ACMD) in a
discussion about the dangers of this drug. This programme, broadcast in
two parts on successive
nights, averaged 1.6 million viewers and claimed 41% of the 16-34 year old
viewing audience
[Factual Statement 1]. Murphy's invitations to participate in these
debates arose, directly from his
record of research publication (Section 3 above), with his contributions
to these debates drawing
upon the findings of this research programme. On these occasions there was
direct impact upon
the content of the public debate by virtue of Murphy's invitation, and
also upon the general public
who were beneficiaries of the specific information they received with
regard to the dangers
associated with ecstasy. A post-broadcast survey by the production company
highlighted that
viewers had learned of the dangers of experimenting with ecstasy [Factual
Statement 1]. The
impact claimed here is distinct from claiming impact upon changes in the
behaviour of the general
public, which would be very difficult to link with one research programme.
The final example of impact arises from a report produced by the Centre
for Public Health at LJMU
in June 2007 into the perceptions held by young people on Merseyside aged
18 to 25 years of
their treatment needs for drug related problems [14]. Wareing was the lead
author for this report
which drew upon the findings published as part of this research programme
concerning ecstasy
users' beliefs regarding the risks and benefits of using the drug, and the
precautions they took
when using it [Output 7, Section 3]. The manager of the national addiction
charity Addaction for
Liverpool acknowledges the role of this report in the development of a
specialist service for 18 to
25 year olds, and has submitted a brief written statement to this effect.
In some cases this service
cares for clients under the age of 18 years. Our research particularly
contributed to a publicity
campaign about the risks of ecstasy use, and also to the responses
Addaction counsellors were
able to make to individuals who approached them for help with ecstasy
related problems [Factual
Statement 2]. Statistical data from Addaction on service uptake within the
relevant age range
shows a marked increase throughout this assessment period, with client
numbers being 134 for
2008, 278 for 2009, 412 for 2010, 420 for 2011, and 433 for 2012 [Other
Source 7]. The
beneficiaries of this impact may be identified as both the staff and
clientele of Addaction on
Merseyside, as well as the broader population of ecstasy users who will
have been better informed
regarding the drug.
Sources to corroborate the impact
Factual Statements (all available on request)
[Factual Statement 1] Renegade Pictures (2013). Personal Communication.
London: Renegade
Pictures — provides viewing figures for Drugs Live, viewer survey
information, website and social
media reaction
[Factual Statement 2] Addaction (2013) Personal communication. Liverpool:
Addaction. —
addresses influence on services provided to young people.
Other Sources (all available on request)
[Other Source 1] Rogers G, Elston J, Garside R, Roome C, Taylor R,
Younger P, Zawada A,
Somerville M. (2009). The harmful health effects of recreational ecstasy:
a systematic review of
observational evidence. Health Technology Assessment 13, Part 6.
[Other Source 2] Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (2009). MDMA
(`ecstasy'): a review of
its harms and classification under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
London: Crown Copyright.
[Other Source 3] Department for Education (2011). Review of Personal,
Social, Health and
Economics (PSHE) Education.
http://www.education.gov.uk/consultations/index.cfm?action=consultationDetails&consultationId=1759&external=no&menu=1
Accessed October 2011.
[Other Source 4] British Psychological Society (2012).
http://apps.bps.org.uk/_publicationfiles/consultation-
responses/Review%20of%20PSHE%20Education%20-%20BPS%20response.pdf
Accessed November 2013.
[Other Source 5] Department for Education (2013). Consultation on PSHE
Education. March
2013. Crown Copyright.
[Other Source 6] Wareing, M., Sumnall, H., and Mcveigh, J. (2007). Young
People and Substance
Misuse: Characteristics, Needs and Perception of Treatment Services of
Drug Users Aged 18 to
25 in Liverpool. Liverpool John Moores University, Centre for Public
Health.
[Other Source 7] Addaction (2012). Annual Report 2012. Available
from the Merseyside Youth
Association.