Current models of smoking and dependence assume a need to smoke at regular intervals to maintain nicotine levels, yet about 25% of adult smokers do not smoke daily. This subset of intermittent smokers (ITS) has gone largely unexamined. In this study, we describe the demographics, smoking history, and smoking behavior of ITS (n=282; 50.2% male) in comparison to daily smokers (DS; n=233; 60.7% male). Within ITS, we also compare “converted” ITS (CITS), who had previously smoked daily, with “native” ITS (NITS). On average, ITS were 34.66 years of age, and had smoked 42,850 cigarettes in the course of an average of 18 years of smoking. They smoked an average of 4.38 days per week, consuming 4.39 cigarettes a day on smoking days, and demonstrated considerable day-to-day variability in cigarette consumption. Almost half of ITS had Fagerstrom Test of Nicotine Dependence scores of 0, indicating no dependence. Compared to DS, ITS were more likely to cite alcohol drinking, socializing and being with other smokers as common contexts for smoking, and they also more often cited being angry or stressed. Data suggested that ITS’ behavior was not explained by use of other nicotine products or by economic constraints on smoking, nor by differences in psychological adjustment. Within ITS, CITS were heavier, more frequent, and more dependent smokers. In many respects, CITS were intermediate between NITS and DS. ITS show distinct patterns of smoking behavior that are not well explained by current models of nicotine dependence.

Intermittent smokers (ITS) – who smoke less than daily – comprise an increasing proportion of adult smokers. Their smoking patterns challenge theoretical models of smoking motivation, which emphasize regular and frequent smoking to maintain nicotine levels and avoid withdrawal, but yet have gone largely unexamined. We characterized smoking patterns among 212 ITS (smoking 4–27 days per month) compared to 194 daily smokers (DS; smoking 5–30 cigarettes daily) who monitored situational antecedents of smoking using ecological momentary assessment. Subjects recorded each cigarette on an electronic diary, and situational variables were assessed in a random subset (n = 21,539 smoking episodes); parallel assessments were obtained by beeping subjects at random when they were not smoking (n = 26,930 non-smoking occasions). Compared to DS, ITS' smoking was more strongly associated with being away from home, being in a bar, drinking alcohol, socializing, being with friends and acquaintances, and when others were smoking. Mood had only modest effects in either group. DS' and ITS' smoking were substantially and equally suppressed by smoking restrictions, although ITS more often cited self-imposed restrictions. ITS' smoking was consistently more associated with environmental cues and contexts, especially those associated with positive or “indulgent” smoking situations. Stimulus control may be an important influence in maintaining smoking and making quitting difficult among ITS.

The study confirmed that DS are more dependent than ITS and that CITS are more dependent than NITS. Importantly, ITS exhibit features of dependence, and there is meaningful variation in dependence within ITS, suggesting that some aspects of dependence may appear with very infrequent smoking. Future work should examine implications for ITS' potential progression to daily smoking and cessation outcome.

We assessed craving and smoking in response to smoking-relevant cues. 207 daily smokers viewed images related to one of six cue sets (cigarettes, positive and negative affect, alcohol, smoking prohibitions, and neutral cues) in separate sessions. Compared to neutral cues, cigarette cues significantly increased craving, and positive affect cues significantly decreased craving. When subjects were then allowed to smoke during continuing cue exposure, cues did not affect the likelihood of smoking or the amount smoked (number of cigarettes, number of puffs, puff time, or increased carbon monoxide). However, craving intensity predicted likelihood of smoking, latency to smoke, and amount smoked, with craving increases after cue exposure making significant independent contributions. Some craving effects were curvilinear, suggesting that they are subject to thresholds and might not be observed under some circumstances.

Background Non-daily or intermittent smoking is becoming common, but little is known about smoking patterns of intermittent smokers (ITS). This study assesses differences in the profile of smoking motives of non-daily, ITS and daily smokers (DS). Methods Participants were 218 DS and 252 ITS (152 converted ITS [CITS], who previously smoked daily, and 80 native ITS [NITS] who did not), not currently quitting, recruited by advertisement. ITS were defined as smoking 4–27 days per month; DS as smoking daily, 5–30 cigarettes per day. Participants completed the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (WISDM), yielding scores for 13 different motives. The within-profile standard deviation expressed profile scatter (differentiation among motives), and profile shape was assessed on scores standardized for within-profile mean and standard deviation. Results There was no difference between ITS and DS on profile scatter. ITS and DS differed in the shape of the standardized score profile, with DS scoring higher on Tolerance, Craving, Automaticity, Loss of Control and Behavioral Choice motives, and ITS scoring higher on Cue Exposure, Weight Control, and Positive Reinforcement motives. CITS did not differ from NITS in profile scatter or profile shape. Conclusion ITS differ from DS in the relative importance of motives, with ITS emphasizing motives associated with acute, situational smoking, and DS emphasizing dependence-related motives. Among ITS, history of daily smoking did not influence the profile of motives.