Question:
Do stimulants increase academic performance among university students?
The issue of non-medical utilization of stimulants for exclusive academic performance improvement purpose is virally being a popular practice between university and college learners. Recent publications and research findings have pointed out that these drugs are technically highly available on campus and the drugs are particularly sought out by students who struggle academically. The problem, however, is far from solved, the reduction of nonmedical use of drugs in university requires particular attention to other third-party variables like heavy drinking and the possible involvement in another drug abuse. Also, at the national level, the prescription drugs for non-medical purposes is becoming a more significant aspect pf illegal drug utilization cases among college students (Singh, Bard & Jackson, 2014). In relation, the paper is a comprehensive review whose primary objective is to gain an in-depth understanding the intention of learners to utilize stimulant medication to enhance academic achievement (Ponnet, et al., 2015). The case study is analyzed from the perspective of Wasim who is a 29-year-old male Arts student at one of the Australian Universities. The main points of the paper will be examined through an analysis of two research articles: “Life context of pharmacological academic performance enhancement among university students by Hildt &Franke and the relationship between nonmedical use of prescription stimulants, executive functioning and academic outcomes by Munro, et al., 2017”.
Hildt, Lieb and Franke are renowned scholars particularly in regards to psychology. The three participated in the conception as well as the design of the study. Also, all of the three authors actively took part in the process of drafting and interpreting data and manuscript revision. Franke and Lieb are affiliated with the Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy (DPP) at the University Medical Center Mainz (UMCM) in Germany. Lieb is also an HOD. Franke technically is a department’s trainee. Hildt is from the Department of Philosophy (DoP) and is a renowned expert in the field of Neuroethics.
With the increasing attention that academic performance enhancement also known as cognitive enhancement through the use of stimulant drugs has established, the main study objective was to scrutinize in a broader perspective the pharmacological academic-performance improvement phenomenon via illicit stimulant alongside prescription. More specifically, it aimed at understanding the experiences of students, the effect of these drug usage on learners and related variables like compression to excel in private as well as academic lives.
The method or the design of the study was embedded on a sample of approximately 18 very healthy university learners with non-medical utilization of drug prescription and other illegal stimulants that aim at academic-performance improvement. The 18 selected partakers stood interviewed. The interviews were based on one to one context. The lead queries remained associated with context alongside situation whereby campus learners decided to use the non-medical stimulants after a well-thought-out decision.
From the resulting transcription, 2 of the autonomous raters acknowledged 6 vital groups. The categories were related to life context of stimulant usage for technically exclusive purposes of enhanced academic achievement. The six stated categories were: the context that stimulate the use of the drugs beyond enhancement of academic-performance, the pressure to perform, the consumption timing, and subjective experiences particularly of the enhancement, side effects and the objective academic results that are expected. Also, from an analysis of the conclusion, enhancement of academic-performance via channeled nonmedical stimulants utilization is stemmed deep into the problem. The participants did not only consider the experience to be advantageous but also considered the act a leading agent in creating a suitable balance between two concepts: studying as well as time off. Common reasons attributed to the use of these stimulants include: increase motivation, cope with memorizing and to maximize on time. In relation, the study acknowledged substantial inconsistency between objective academic outcomes and subjective experiences.
Regarding weaknesses, the book acknowledges that there exists limited scientific research and evidence that back up pro-cognitive properties among individuals who are considered healthy. Data presented also show inconsistency particularly in regards to cognitive effects particularly on solely simple as well as heightened cognitive domains on subjects with sleep-deprived pro-cognitive attributes or effects. Beyond that, however, the book provides comprehensive reviews of the use of smart drugs and how exactly this use has impacted the lives of university students which was the primary objective of the research.
The book’s multiple authorship gives it a unique sense as well as uniformity of style and an extensive balance of the contexts. The authorship is also embedded on the substantial contribution of the acquisition, analysis and the interpretation of the data used in the text. Additionally, Munro, Weyandt, Marraccini & Oster are all renowned experts in the field of psychology and social sciences and have technically extensively contributed to the area of study.
The study’s primary objective is the analysis of the concept of nonmedical use of prescription stimulants (NMUPS) among university students. The study in an in-depth analysis examines the concept of Executive functioning, self-regulation, cognitive flexibility and goal-directed behaviors. The study just as the previous analyzed article also aims at understanding the experiences of students and how these experiences shape decisions especially those embedded on academic achievements.
Samples were derived from 308 students. The students were from diverse public universities around the United States. The procedures employed in the research included GPA, SSQ and BDEFS.
It was exposed that approximately 18.6% of the sampled students reported the NMUPS utilization. Partakers with clinical EF-deficits showed advanced NMUPS levels weighed against those with no deficits in EF. However, it is important to point out that NMUPS did not extensively influence the association between GPA and EF.
The outcomes showed the existing insinuations for the identification of subpopulations of college leaners at risks for NMUPS engagement. It also gave suggestions for intervention strategies aimed at improving prevention techniques that reduce NMUPS. The book also gave suggestions for future research on the case study. On the other hand, the authors did not effectively address the PICO question since the final remarks do not give a directed answer on whether stimulants increase academic performance among university students. Based on the literature, students with EF discrepancies engage in NMUPS so as to aid them in overcoming academic related challenges hence helps in the academic achievements of such students.
The use of prescription stimulants for nonmedical purposes has turned out to be more common in college students than students in high school. Technically, this creates an extensive foundation for barriers for the application of evidence in practice. Recent studies show that 4.2% to 10.8% of college students use prescription stimulants use in a year (Maier, Liechti, Herzig & Schaub, 2013). The increasing number relatively creates a challenge regarding the application in the evidence of the practice. The following is a representation of students in colleges that use nonmedically prescribed stimulants.
Most often, students who use these drugs obtained them from their colleagues who have a prescription. The pills are often given away to them for free (Bell, Partridge, Lucke & Hall, 2013). The approximation points out that over 61.6% of ADHD-diagnosed college learners divert corresponding stimulants of prescription. Healthcare providers, college administrators, parents as well as the students themselves have the first role responsibility to actively discourage the use of the nonmedical prescription stimulants.
Regarding analyzing how closely the two research studies relate to the PICO question, it is true to say that the two articles point out that many college students use the nonmedical stimulants due to the assumed benefits but the studies lack to support or refute this belief. Simply put, the general argument for the two articles is that nonmedical use of stimulants is not moderated or impacted by the relationship that exists between the GPA and the EF of the students (McCabe et al 2014). In summary, the research studies do not effectively address the case study question and hence leaves open-ended questions for future research and findings.
The paper dispels some of the widespread myths that attempt to rationalize and encourage the nonmedical use of prescription stimulants (Benson, Flory, Humphreys & Lee, 2015). Unfortunately, the myths are perpetuated in media platforms and as a result stabilized its roots into the college culture. It is true to say that the myths have clouded the thought related to the potential harm that can be caused by the nonmedical use of the stimulants (Verdi, Weyandt & Zavras, 2016). However, the much scientific evidence is now available that points out that nonmedical NMUPS is never an isolated, one-time attempt at gaining an advantageous edge but rather, part of a larger constellation of illicit and potentially problematic behaviors that relate to alcohol and drug involvement (Mazanov, Dunn, Connor & Fielding, 2013). A comprehensive plan should, therefore, be established to reduce nonmedical prescription stimulants usage among college students (Jensen, Forlini, Partridge & Hall, 2016). It is vital to dispel myths, encourage new research and technology that aim at learning more about the nature of the issue, disseminate correct information and to identify risk factors associated with the drug use to aid in the attempts towards reducing the NMUPS alongside related controlled substances.
References
Bell, S., Partridge, B., Lucke, J., & Hall, W. (2013). Australian university students’ attitudes towards the acceptability and regulation of pharmaceuticals to improve academic performance. Neuroethics, 6(1), 197-205.
Benson, K., Flory, K., Humphreys, K. L., & Lee, S. S. (2015). Misuse of stimulant medication among college students: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Clinical child and family psychology review, 18(1), 50-76.
Hildt, E., Lieb, K., & Franke, A. G. (2014). Life context of pharmacological academic performance enhancement among university students–a qualitative approach. BMC medical ethics,15(1), 23.
Jensen, C., Forlini, C., Partridge, B., & Hall, W. (2016). Australian university students’ coping strategies and use of pharmaceutical stimulants as cognitive enhancers. Frontiers in psychology, 7.
Maier, L. J., Liechti, M. E., Herzig, F., & Schaub, M. P. (2013). To dope or not to dope: neuroenhancement with prescription drugs and drugs of abuse among Swiss university students.PloS one, 8(11), e77967.
Mazanov, J., Dunn, M., Connor, J., & Fielding, M. L. (2013). Substance use to enhance academic performance among Australian university students. Performance Enhancement & Health, 2(3), 110-118.
McCabe, S. E., West, B. T., Teter, C. J., & Boyd, C. J. (2014). Trends in medical use, diversion, and nonmedical use of prescription medications among college students from 2003 to 2013: Connecting the dots. Addictive behaviors, 39(7), 1176-1182.
Munro, B. A., Weyandt, L. L., Marraccini, M. E., & Oster, D. R. (2017). The relationship between nonmedical use of prescription stimulants, executive functioning and academic outcomes.Addictive behaviors, 65, 250-257.
Ponnet, K., Wouters, E., Walrave, M., Heirman, W., & Van Hal, G. (2015). Predicting students’ intention to use stimulants for academic performance enhancement. Substance use & misuse,50(3), 275-282.
Singh, I., Bard, I., & Jackson, J. (2014). Robust resilience and substantial interest: a survey of pharmacological cognitive enhancement among university students in the UK and Ireland.PloS one, 9(10), e105969.
Verdi, G., Weyandt, L. L., & Zavras, B. M. (2016). Non-medical prescription stimulant use in graduate students: relationship with academic self-efficacy and psychological variables. Journal of attention disorders, 20(9), 741-753.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download
