Common factors across acute subjective effects of nicotine

Perkins, Kenneth A.; Jetton, Chris; Keenan, Jason

doi:10.1080/14622200310001614629

Cited by 25 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The NSE items were labeled ''pleasant,'' ''unpleasant,'' ''nausea,'' ''relaxed,'' ''dizzy,'' and ''buzzed,'' and these were scored as 0-100 visualanalog scale (VAS) items, anchored by ''not at all'' (0) and ''extremely'' (100). These VAS items are similar to measures used widely in acute nicotine studies of mood effects (Kalman & Smith, 2005;Perkins, Jetton, & Keenan, 2003) and have been shown to be reliable in prior research on nicotine intake via spray (Perkins, Jetton, Stolinski, et al, 2003).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…The ESE (Pomerleau et al, 1998) is a retrospective self-report measure asking subjects to rate the degree to which they recall experiencing several effects from smoking their ''first few cigarettes.'' Effects include six items generally capturing responses to acute nicotine per se (Kalman, 2002;Kalman & Smith, 2005;Perkins, Jetton, & Keenan, 2003), namely ''pleasant sensations,'' ''unpleasant sensations,'' ''nausea,'' ''relaxation,'' ''dizziness,'' and ''pleasurable rush or buzz.'' Two other items, ''coughing'' and ''difficulty inhaling,'' are more specific to smoke inhalation, regardless of nicotine intake.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Association of retrospective early smoking experiences with prospective sensitivity to nicotine via nasal spray in nonsmokers

Perkins¹,

Lerman²,

Coddington³

et al. 2008

CNTR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Greater sensitivity to early exposure to tobacco smoking may predict higher risk of becoming nicotine dependent. The most common measure of this sensitivity is the retrospective self-report Early Smoking Experiences (ESE) questionnaire. We examined the relationship between responses to the retrospective ESE and prospectively assessed sensitivity to nicotine via nasal spray in young adult nonsmokers (N = 58) with modest lifetime smoking experience (>0 but < or =10 lifetime uses). Nicotine spray (0 vs 10 microg/kg) was used due to ethical and practical concerns with administering tobacco smoke to nonsmokers. Responses to cigarette smoking on the retrospective ESE items of pleasant, unpleasant, nausea, relaxed, dizzy, and buzzed were compared with prospectively assessed nicotine spray effects (NSE) on the same responses. ESE responses were also compared with subjective spray ratings of nicotine reward (e.g., "liking") and perception (e.g., "feel the effects"), cardiovascular activity, and nicotine reinforcement via a nicotine spray choice procedure. Results showed that the retrospective ESE items of dizzy and buzzed were each associated with greater prospective NSE dizzy and buzzed responses to nasal spray nicotine. However, the other four ESE items were unrelated to the corresponding NSE items. Responses to some ESE items were also related to prospective nicotine spray reward and perception, but no ESE item was related to the cardiovascular or reinforcing effects of nicotine spray. These findings show that two of six retrospective ESE items, dizzy and buzzed, predicted the same prospectively assessed responses to acute nicotine via spray in young adult nonsmokers and may reflect a stable and reliable response to nicotine intake.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of retrospective early smoking experiences with prospective sensitivity to nicotine via nasal spray in nonsmokers

Perkins¹,

Lerman²,

Coddington³

et al. 2008

CNTR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Six other VAS items (also scored 0 to 100) were obtained to assess potential mood effects of a nicotine spray, other than craving and withdrawal. These items, which have been used in many past studies of nicotine effects (e.g., Kalman, 2002;Perkins et al, 2003a)…”

Section: Subjective Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each item was rated 0 (not at all) to 100 (extremely) on a visual analog scale (VAS). Subjects also completed a similar VAS item on ''buzz/ head rush,'' which we have previously found is very sensitive to nicotine dose manipulations (e.g., Perkins, Jetton, & Keenan, 2003a). Immediately after their initial exposure (only) to the single set of four sprays, participants in the two spray groups were also asked the following: ''How much would you pay for another set of four sprays?''…”

Section: Subjective Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instructions about nicotine dose influence acute responses to nasal spray

Perkins

Jacobs

Clark

et al. 2004

Nicotine & Tobacco Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of substance use are typically assumed to be related to pharmacological actions. However, beliefs about the drug content of a substance may strongly influence subjective and reinforcing responses to that substance (i.e., "placebo" effects). We examined the subjective and reinforcing effects of a nasal spray containing no nicotine as a function of instructions about the nicotine content of the spray (Told Nicotine vs. Told No Nicotine). Smokers (n=49) not interested in quitting smoking abstained overnight prior to a single session in which they were randomly assigned to one of three groups, involving one of the two instructional sets or a group that got no spray. Following dose instructions, subjects in the two spray groups were administered one set of four sprays from the spray bottle and then rated them intermittently on items related to "reward" (e.g., "liking", amount they would pay for more) and other effects. At the same time points, they also rated mood, craving, and withdrawal, and had heart rate and blood pressure measured. Reinforcement was then determined by the number of ad libitum sprays they self-administered during a 20-min period. The no-spray group simply rested quietly during the session, while measures were assessed at the same time points as subjects in the other two groups. Those in the Told Nicotine group reported greater spray ratings of "how much nicotine," "liking," "satisfying," "buzz/head rush," and "similar to smoking" compared with the Told No Nicotine group. Craving decreased more for those Told Nicotine versus those Told No Nicotine, but also decreased more for those Told No Nicotine compared with the no spray group. There were no significant differences in amount they would pay for more sprays, withdrawal, mood, cardiovascular responses, or in spray self-administration. These results show that instructions about the nicotine content of a novel delivery device (nasal spray) can influence self-reported spray ratings and reduce craving but are limited with respect to effects on other measures of drug response.

show abstract

“…Conversely, Perkins et al (1994) suggested that head rush may reflect an aversive effect of nicotine. The latter position was corroborated in a factor analysis of the subjective effects of nicotine nasal spray (Perkins et al 2003), in which the head rush factor was positively correlated with a negative affect factor and negatively correlated with a positive affect factor. We are not aware of any study that asked smokers directly to rate the subjective valence of specific nicotine-related sensations that occur during smoking.…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%