Effect of stage of change on cue reactivity in continuing smokers.

Abstract

Three classical conditioning models (the conditioned compensatory response, conditioned withdrawal, and conditioned appetitive motivational models) postulate that drug cues evoke physiological and emotional responses associated with motivational states that prompt drug use. There is accumulating evidence to suggest that factors other than classical conditioning can influence emotional and physiological reactivity to drug stimuli. This study tested whether stage of change affects the nature of reactivity to smoking cues among continuing smokers. Precontemplators (smokers not considering quitting) and contemplators (smokers considering quitting in the near future) watched videotapes containing smoking cues. Emotional and physiological responses to the smoking video were contrasted with responses to a neutral videotape. Precontemplators had lower heart rates than did contemplators in response to the smoking videotape. Both contemplators and precontemplators evinced increased positive affect in response to the smoking cue. A comparison sample of nonsmokers did not show any reactivity to the smoking cue. Implications of these findings for conditioning theories of smoking are discussed.

The effect of smoking cues in antismoking advertisements on smoking urge and psychophysiological reactions

“…Six advertisements were presented in each argument condition, with three no-cue advertisements followed by three smoking cue advertisements. Using smoking cue exposure as a within-subject factor is consistent with previous studies (e.g., McDermut & Haaga, 1998 ; M. J. Morgan, Davies, & Willner, 1999 ;Shadel & Cervone, 2006 ).…”

Cue-induced reinstatement of nicotine-seeking behavior in rats: effect of bupropion, persistence over repeated tests, and its dependence on training dose

“…As such, cigarette smoking may be particularly effective in establishing the incentive properties of nicotine-associated environmental stimuli (cues), such as the smell and taste of cigarettes or contexts within which smoking occurs (Goldberg et al 1981;Rose and Levin 1991;Balfour et al 2000;Caggiula et al 2001). Clinical studies have demonstrated that smoking cues produce physiological responses (Saumet and Dittmar 1985;Abrams et al 1988;Niaura et al 1989;Niaura et al 1992), enhance the desire to smoke (Perkins et al 1994;Droungas et al 1995;Drobes and Tiffany 1997;McDermut and Haaga 1998;Lazev et al 1999;Brody et al 2002), and increase the rate, intensity, and time of smoking (Surawy et al 1985;Mucha et al 1998). Smoking denicotinized cigarettes (i.e., cue alone) produces an equal amount of smoke intake and similar or even higher levels of satisfaction compared to nicotine-containing cigarettes (i.e., cue plus nicotine) (Butschky et al 1995;Gross et al 1997;Rose et al 2000).…”

Convergent validation study of the Contemplation Ladder for application via telephone in tobacco users

“…This last correlation was only significant for the individuals aged 35 years or younger. In other study, the Contemplation Ladder demonstrated convergent validity when applied to smokers identified to be in the contemplation stage as well as in the precontemplation stage through URICA 29 . The instrument has demonstrated to predict subsequent participation in programs to quit smoking and in educational events promoted to increase tobacco risk awareness 21,30 .…”