Effects of nicotine on attention and inhibitory control in healthy nonsmokers.

Abstract

Nicotine improves cognitive functioning in smokers and psychiatric populations, but its cognitive-enhancing effects in healthy nonsmokers are less well understood. Nicotine appears to enhance certain forms of cognition in nonsmokers, but its specificity to subtypes of cognition is not known. This study sought to replicate and extend previous findings on the effects of nicotine on cognitive performance in healthy nonsmokers. Healthy young adults (N=40, 50% female) participated in a placebo-controlled, double-blind, repeated-measures experiment examining the effects of 7mg transdermal nicotine or placebo. Participants completed tests of attention (Attention Network Test), behavioral inhibition (stop signal task, Stroop test), reward responsiveness (signal detection task) and risk-taking behavior (Balloon Analogue Risk Taking task (BART)). Physiological (heart rate, blood pressure) and subjective (Profile of Mood States; POMS, Drug Effects Questionnaire; DEQ) measures were also obtained. Nicotine significantly improved performance only on the Stroop test, but it impaired performance on one aspect of the Attention Network Test, the orienting effect. Nicotine produced its expected effects on physiologic and subjective measures, within the intended time course. The findings of this study contribute to a growing literature indicating that nicotine differentially affects specific subtypes of cognitive performance in healthy nonsmokers.

Detrimental effects of acute nicotine on the response-withholding performance of spontaneously hypertensive and Wistar Kyoto rats

“…Although acute nicotine appears to enhance the capacity to withhold an ongoing response regardless of smoking or ADHD status (Potter et al 2012; Potter and Newhouse 2008; Potter and Newhouse 2004), these findings are inconsistent with other data from non-clinical smokers and non-smokers (Bekker et al 2005; Wignall and de Wit 2011). The effects of acute nicotine on estimates of response inhibition capacity observed in vigilance tasks are also inconsistent: whereas some studies report substantial nicotine-induced enhancement in vigilance-related response inhibition capacity (Myers et al 2013; Myers et al 2008), other studies report very mild effects (Levin et al 1998), effects related only to irrelevant stimuli (Dawkins et al 2007), and dose-dependent effects (Bekker et al 2005).…”

“…The effects of acute nicotine on estimates of response inhibition capacity observed in vigilance tasks are also inconsistent: whereas some studies report substantial nicotine-induced enhancement in vigilance-related response inhibition capacity (Myers et al 2013; Myers et al 2008), other studies report very mild effects (Levin et al 1998), effects related only to irrelevant stimuli (Dawkins et al 2007), and dose-dependent effects (Bekker et al 2005). Inconsistent effects of acute nicotine have also been observed in biased visual discrimination tasks (Barr et al 2008; Wignall and de Wit 2011) that are discriminative of ADHD status (Tripp and Alsop 1999). …”

An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement: Current Understanding and Future Research Needs in Tobacco Control and Treatment

“…Several animal species, including humans, will self-administer intravenous nicotine in a variety of experimental paradigms, including forced-choice experiments in which they choose nicotine over food (169)(170)(171)(172)(173)(174)(175)(176)(177). Nicotine relieves nicotine withdrawal symptoms in abstaining smokers, improves cognitive function in nonsmoking adults (178), and appears to have therapeutic effects in neurodegenerative diseases (179,180), attention disorders (181), and inflammatory bowel disease (182,183).…”

The role of self-regulation in predicting sleep hygiene in university students

“…Interference score (e.g. Wignall & de Wit, 2011) was calculated as the mean difference in accuracy between congruent and incongruent trials, where a greater score is indicative of a poorer ability to inhibit a prepotent or dominant response. Baseline interference score was 13.55 (SD=16.63).…”