Comparison of the effects of nicotine on a fixed rate and a subject-paced version of the rapid information processing task

Abstract

In a modified "subject-paced" rather than fixed rate version of a rapid information processing (RIP) task, the presentation rate of the stimuli is continuously adapted to the individual performance level. Thus, this modified task version probably assesses a continuous "speed function" rather than mere "vigilance". In order to compare the two task versions more directly, we carried out a study which assessed the effects of a regular nicotine cigarette and the nearly nicotine-free cigarette NEXT on both task versions under the same experimental conditions. The dominant alpha frequency pointed to a greater arousal evoked by the subject-paced RIP version compared with the fixed rate version. With the fixed rate version, smoking nicotine cigarettes reduced reaction times, whereas with the subject-paced version, processing rate was improved. Additionally, smoking NEXT decreased craving less than smoking the regular cigarettes. It was concluded that the two task versions are sensitive to different cognitive functions. Whereas the subject-paced version was more sensitive to effects on the speed of processing, the fixed rate version was more sensitive to effects on reaction time.

Effects of d-amphetamine in human models of information processing and inhibitory control

“…Past demonstrations of stimulant-induced cognitive improvements using the RIP task involved cholinergic stimulants, such as nicotine (e.g., Baldinger et al, 1995) and the non-specific stimulant, caffeine (Hasenfratz et al, 1993). The present results extend the previous findings by showing that similar enhancing effects on information processing can be produced by a dopaminergic-acting stimulant drug.…”

“…Studies of RIP task performance show increased information processing capacity following the administration of cholinergic stimulants, such as nicotine (e.g., Baldinger et al, 1995;Hasenfratz and Battig, 1994) and non-specific stimulants, such as caffeine (Hasenfratz et al, 1993). Moreover, these improvements do not simply reflect relief from temporary withdrawal-induced performance deficits, but rather represent actual, above-baseline facilitation of information processing.…”

Effects of cigarette smoking and abstinence on stroop task performance

“…Substantial research indicates that non-nicotine components of smoking contribute to nicotine dependence (see Robinson et al 2000 andRose 2005 for reviews). As several studies have consistently shown, smoking denicotinized cigarettes provides relief from craving and withdrawal symptoms in abstinent smokers (Gross et al 1997;Pickworth et al 1999;Westman et al 1996), but does not reverse the cognitive deficits associated with abstinence (Baldinger et al 1995). Related research assessing prepulse inhibition (PPI) of startle in overnight abstinent smokers found that smokers did not exhibit significantly lower PPI when abstinent overnight compared to findings on an ad libitum smoking day.…”

Acute effects of nicotine on visual search tasks in young adult smokers

“…It requires sustained attention but also has a moderate working memory load. Nicotine has been found to decrease reaction times and improve correct detections on this task (Foulds 1996, Warburton and Mancuso 1998, Baldinger et al 1995, Revell 1988. These findings are unlikely to reflect the reversal of a withdrawal-induced deficit in performance in nicotine-dependant smokers as they have also been observed in non-abstinent smokers (Warburton and Arnall 1994) and non-smokers (Wesnes & Revell, 1984).…”