Background and aims An early meta‐analysis testing the concurrent validity of the Alcohol Purchase Task (APT), a measure of alcohol's relative reinforcing value, reported mixed associations, but predated a large number of studies. This systematic review and meta‐analysis sought to: (1) estimate the relationships between trait‐based alcohol demand indices from the APT and multiple alcohol indicators, (2) test several moderators and (3) analyze small study effects. Methods A meta‐analysis of 50 cross‐sectional studies in four databases (n = 18 466, females = 43.32%). Sex, year of publication, number of APT prices and index transformations (logarithmic, square root or none) were considered as moderators. Small study effects were examined by using the Begg–Mazumdar, Egger's and Duval & Tweedie's trim‐and‐fill tests. Alcohol indicators were quantity of alcohol use, number of heavy drinking episodes, alcohol‐related problems and hazardous drinking. APT indices were intensity (i.e. consumption at zero cost), elasticity (i.e. sensitivity to increases in costs), Omax (i.e. maximum expenditure), Pmax (i.e. price associated to Omax) and breakpoint (i.e. price at which consumption ceases). Results All alcohol demand indices were significantly associated with all alcohol‐related outcomes (r = 0.132–0.494), except Pmax, which was significantly associated with alcohol‐related problems only (r = 0.064). The greatest associations were evinced between intensity in relation to alcohol use, hazardous drinking and heavy drinking and between Omax and alcohol use. All the tested moderators emerged as significant moderators. Evidence of small‐study effects was limited. Conclusions The Alcohol Purchase Task appears to have concurrent validity in alcohol research. Intensity and Omax are the most relevant indices to account for alcohol involvement.

Background and AimsA cigarette purchase task (CPT) aims to characterize individual variation in the reinforcing value of tobacco. This meta‐analysis estimated the associations between cigarette demand, tobacco consumption and nicotine dependence using this task.DesignA meta‐analysis of cross‐sectional studies identified by PubMed and PsycINFO databases was conducted. Fixed‐ and random‐effects models were used. The study also examined the model used to derive elasticity of demand (exponential or exponentiated) as a potential moderator. Publication bias was assessed using ‘fail‐safe N', Begg–Mazumdar test, Egger's test, Tweedie's trim‐and‐fill approach and meta‐regression of publication year with effect size.SettingStudies from any setting that reported coefficient correlations on the tested associations.ParticipantsDaily cigarette users (i.e. 5 to 38 cigarettes per day; n = 7649).MeasurementsCigarette consumption, nicotine dependence and five tobacco demand indicators: intensity (i.e. consumption at no cost), elasticity (i.e. sensitivity to rises in costs), Omax (maximum expenditure), Pmax (i.e. price at which consumption becomes elastic) and breakpoint (i.e. price at which consumption ceases).FindingsTwenty‐three studies met inclusion criteria. All the CPT indices were significantly correlated with smoking behavior (rs = 0.044–0.572, Ps = 0.012–10−8). Medium‐to‐large effect size associations were present for intensity, Omax, and elasticity, whereas small effects were obtained for breakpoint and Pmax. Evidence of a moderating effect of the different elasticity modeling approaches was not present. There was limited evidence of publication bias.ConclusionsAll five demand indices derived from the cigarette purchase task by (CPT) were robustly associated with cigarette consumption and tobacco dependence. Of the demand indices, maximum expenditure, intensity and elasticity exhibited the largest magnitude associations.