Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. This is the accepted author manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via American Psychological Association at http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/adb/index.aspx. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
University of Bristol -Explore Bristol Research General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms 1 Association between smoking-related attentional bias and craving measured in the clinic and in the natural environment 2
ObjectivePrevious studies have investigated the association between attentional bias and craving in laboratories, but ecological momentary assessment (EMA) may provide ecologically valid data. This study examines whether clinic-measured attentional bias is associated with noticing smoking cues, attention to smoking, and craving assessed by EMA and whether EMA-assessed cues and attention to smoking are associated with craving.
MethodSecondary analyses of clinical trial data involving 100 cigarette smokers attempting to quit assisted by behavioural support and nicotine patch treatment. Two weeks prior to quitting, participants completed attentional bias assessments on visual probe and Stroop tasks.Participants carried personal digital assistants for seven weeks thereafter, which administered random assessments of smoking cues, attention towards smoking, and craving.
ResultsParticipants completed 9271 random prompt assessments, averaging 3.3 prompts/day. There was no evidence that clinic-measured attentional bias was associated with cues seen (visual probe: OR=1.00, 95%CI=0.99, 1.01; Stroop: OR=1.00, 95%CI=0.99, 1.00), attention towards smoking (visual probe: OR=1.00, 95%CI=0.99, 1.02; Stroop: OR=1.00, 95%CI=0.99, 1.00), or craving (visual probe: OR=1.00, 95%CI=0.99, 1.02; Stroop: OR=1.00, 95% CI=0.99, 1.01). EMA responses to seeing a smoking cue (OR=1.94, 95%CI=1.74, 2.16) and attention towards smoking (OR=3.69, 95%CI=3.42, 3.98) were associated with craving. Internal reliability was higher for the Stroop (α=0.75) than visual probe task (α=0.20).
Conclusions
3In smokers attempting cessation, clinic measures of attentional bias do not predict noticing smoking cues, focus on smoking, or craving. However, there are associations between noticing smoking cues, attention towards smoking, and craving when assessed in the moment, suggesting that attentional bias may not be a stable trait.