Cannabis products have become increasingly integrated into college culture, with recent legalization changes and product innovations introducing new hemp-derived and cannabis-derived THC formulations that present challenges for campus health professionals. Prior research has demonstrated significant impacts following cannabis legalization, specifically studies revealed that cannabis vaping patterns are influenced by peer acceptance, perceived benefits, and social norms, with students viewing these products as normal despite recognizing health effects. However, existing research has primarily focused on traditional cannabis products in isolation, leaving gaps in understanding how the rapidly expanding marketplace of novel THC products—particularly hemp-derived alternatives available even in restrictive states—affects usage patterns and outcomes among college populations. Therefore, the current study aims to examine how the proliferation of these new THC product categories influences college students’ consumption behaviors, risk perceptions, and academic outcomes.
This study was conducted following Minnesota’s 2022 legalization of hemp-derived THC products, using the KAP (Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices) framework integrated with product packaging perceptions to understand THC product diffusion on campus. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 undergraduate students (age 18+) in Spring and Summer 2024, exploring their knowledge about THC products and regulation, attitudes toward usage and appeal among college students, practices regarding consumption patterns and purchasing behaviors, and perceptions of three commercial THC product packages (drinks and gummies) available in local vape stores. Data were analyzed using constant comparative method with iterative coding by two researchers to examine how visual packaging cues influence student perceptions of these newly legal products.
The study revealed that college students’ knowledge, attitudes, practices, and perceptions around THC use as shaped largely by peers, social media, and accessibility, with terminology like “weed,” “cannabis,” or “smoking” used rather than “THC.” While students understood product types, they showed confusion about legality and regulation, often equating THC with cannabis and undervaluing risks compared to alcohol or nicotine. THC was typically framed as a functional, personal choice for relaxation, focus, sleep, pain relief, or social connection, with awareness of negative experiences such as “greening out” and concerns mainly focused on product lacing and driving under the influence. Attitudes were mixed, with many viewing use as socially acceptable but expressing strong judgments about heavy use; legality was seen as a “stamp of approval” though not proof of safety. Practices reflected variety and discretion—students favored vapes and gummies, purchased mainly from vape shops, peers, or dealers, often shared among friends, and used in small groups or on weekends as an alternative to alcohol. Some students took breaks due to tolerance, cost, or work requirements, but generally rejected the idea of cannabis addiction. Perceptions of product packaging varied: visually appealing designs were seen as attractive to youth, confusing labeling raised concerns about dosing, and sealed packages seemed safer, though not always appealing to college students.
Takeaway: College students’ THC use patterns are influenced by peer networks, social media, and product accessibility, with students demonstrating varied knowledge levels regarding legality and regulation, suggesting implications for campus health education approaches.