2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.05.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gender differences in affective response to acute nicotine administration and deprivation

Abstract: Men and women may differ in their sensitivity to the mood-modulating properties of nicotine. Male and female adult smokers were exposed to four sessions crossing two nicotine deprivation conditions (12-hr deprived vs. nondeprived) with two drug conditions (nicotine vs. placebo nasal spray). Acoustic probes elicited startle eyeblink responses while viewing affective and cigaretterelated slides. In-session mood ratings were collected to gauge self-reported negative affect, positive affect, and craving. Nicotine … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
22
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
2
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In several previous studies, abstinent female smokers reported less reduction of withdrawal than their male counterparts after nicotine administration by routes other than smoking (e.g., via the patch or nasal spray) (Evans, Blank, Sams, Weaver, & Eissenberg, 2006; Perkins, Donny, & Caggiula, 1999; Robinson et al, 2007; Wetter et al, 1999). Females may be less sensitive than males to nicotine administered by routes other than smoking, but may be more sensitive to other smoking-related stimuli, such as visual, motor, and somatosensory components of the experience (Bohadana et al, 2003; Perkins, 2001; Pogun, 2001).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…In several previous studies, abstinent female smokers reported less reduction of withdrawal than their male counterparts after nicotine administration by routes other than smoking (e.g., via the patch or nasal spray) (Evans, Blank, Sams, Weaver, & Eissenberg, 2006; Perkins, Donny, & Caggiula, 1999; Robinson et al, 2007; Wetter et al, 1999). Females may be less sensitive than males to nicotine administered by routes other than smoking, but may be more sensitive to other smoking-related stimuli, such as visual, motor, and somatosensory components of the experience (Bohadana et al, 2003; Perkins, 2001; Pogun, 2001).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…This is perhaps unsurprising given the equivocal findings regarding gender differences and smoking cue reactivity. While some studies have found greater smoking cue reactivity among women than men (Field & Duka, 2004; Knott et al, 2009; Waters et al, 2004), others have found no gender differences (Carter & Tiffany, 2001; Robinson et al, 2007; Saladin et al, 2012). In terms of ERP responses to smoking-related cues, we are unaware of any study in this area that reported examining gender differences, so it is unknown whether our lack of gender findings are typical.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…In terms of health behavior research, hedonic theory has been used extensively in studies of obesity and eating (e.g., Cota, Tschop, Horvath, & Levine, 2006; Finlayson, King, & Blundell, 2007; Garg, Wansink, & Inman, 2007; Mela, 2006; Urala & Lahteenmaki, 2006), smoking (Blendy, Strasser, & Walters, 2005; Cook, Spring, & McChargue, 2004; Dawkins, Acaster, & Powell, 2007; Kenny & Markou, 2005; J. D. Robinson, Cinciripini, & Tiffany, 2007; Shiffman, Ferguson, & Gwaltney, 2006), and substance abuse (Berridge, 2007; Everitt & Robbins, 2005; Le Foll, Goldberg, & Sokoloff, 2005; Stevens, Peschk, & Schwarz, 2007).…”
Section: Hedonic Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%