Introduction Cigarette smoking disproportionately affects communities of low socioeconomic status where greater smoking prevalence and poorer cessation rates have been observed. Utilizing brief evidence-based interventions to increase cessation attempts may be an effective and easily disseminable means by which to mitigate undue burden in this population. Aims and Methods The current intervention randomized daily smokers (N = 57) recruited from a local community soup kitchen to receive either Brief (eg, 30 m) Motivational Interviewing, Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) sampling, or a Referral-Only intervention. Approximately half of participants (50.9%) reported not completing high school and many reported either just (41.4%) or not (40.4%) meeting basic expenses. Follow-up was completed approximately 1-month postintervention. Results Nonsignificant group differences indicated that participants randomized to the NRT sampling condition were more likely to make a quit attempt (moderate effect size). Approximately 40% of the sample reported making a serious quit attempt at follow-up. Significant differences in cigarettes per day at follow-up, controlling for baseline, were observed, with participants in the Motivational Interviewing condition, only, reporting significant reductions. Participants randomized to the NRT condition were significantly more likely to report using NRT patch and lozenge at follow-up (large effect). There were no differences between groups with respect to seeking behavioral support. Finally, we found that subjective financial strain moderated the effect of condition on change in cigarette consumption where NRT sampling was more effective for participants reporting less financial strain. Conclusions Findings provide initial evidence for personalizing brief interventions to promote quit attempts in low-income smokers. Implications While most clinical research on tobacco use and dependence focuses on successful sustained abstinence, the current study is novel because it examined three brief interventions designed to increase the number of quit attempts made by a nontreatment-seeking group suffering from health disparities (ie, smokers from socioeconomic disadvantage). These data suggest that nontreatment-seeking smokers from socioeconomic disadvantage can be influenced by Brief MIs and these interventions should be used to motivate smokers from socioeconomic disadvantage to make a quit attempt. Future studies should examine combined MIs including pharmacological and behavioral interventions.
Social anhedonia is an important construct that describes individual differences in preferences for interacting in and experiencing pleasure from social interactions and has been a central construct in the schizotypy literature. The description of social anhedonia is very similar to that of social closeness from the personality literature. Yet, no published studies have directly compared associations between social anhedonia and social closeness with an array of other measures of anhedonia, personality, and depression. The present study examined the internal psychometrics of primary measures of social anhedonia and social closeness; the bivariate association between social anhedonia and social closeness; and the associations between these target constructs and measures of individual differences in a large sample of undergraduate students (mean age = 20.53 years; 76.3% were female). We found that (a) social anhedonia and social closeness were strongly correlated; (b) the unidimensional measurement modelfor social closeness was stronger than that for social anhedonia; (c) the pattern of associations for social closeness and social anhedonia with measures of physical anhedonia, personality, and depressive symptoms were substantively identical; and (d) a collection of items from both measures assessed information across a wider range of social anhedonia than either instrument alone. Thus, given the similar patterns of validity against multiple criteria social anhedonia and social closeness appear to be representing very similar constructs. The social closeness scale provides complementary information to the social anhedonia dimension. Our results provide recommendations for instrument selection when normative or elevated levels of social anhedonia are intended to be assessed.
Background: Our aim was to develop a brief cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) protocol to augment treatment for social anxiety disorder (SAD). This protocol focused specifically upon fear of positive evaluation (FPE). To our knowledge, this is the first protocol that has been designed to systematically target FPE. Aims: To test the feasibility of a brief (two-session) CBT protocol for FPE and report proof-of-principle data in the form of effect sizes. Method: Seven patients with a principal diagnosis of SAD were recruited to participate. Following a pre-treatment assessment, patients were randomized to either (a) an immediate CBT condition (n = 3), or (b) a comparable wait-list (WL) period (2 weeks; n = 4). Two WL patients also completed the CBT protocol following the WL period (delayed CBT condition). Patients completed follow-up assessments 1 week after completing the protocol. Results: A total of five patients completed the brief, FPE-specific CBT protocol (two of the seven patients were wait-listed only and did not complete delayed CBT). All five patients completed the protocol and provided 1-week follow-up data. CBT patients demonstrated large reductions in FPE-related concerns as well as overall social anxiety symptoms, whereas WL patients demonstrated an increase in FPE-related concerns. Conclusions: Our brief FPE-specific CBT protocol is feasible to use and was associated with large FPE-specific and social anxiety symptom reductions. To our knowledge, this is the first treatment report that has focused on systematic treatment of FPE in patients with SAD. Our protocol warrants further controlled evaluation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.