The Influence of Instructions and Nicotine Dose on the Subjective and Reinforcing Effects of Smoking.

Perkins, Kenneth A.; Jacobs, Lynette; Ciccocioppo, Melinda; Conklin, Cynthia A.; Sayette, Michael A.; Caggiula, Anthony R.

doi:10.1037/1064-1297.12.2.91

Cited by 39 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with past research, we expected to find a significant effect of instructional set on ratings of craving/urge reduction (Juliano & Brandon, 2002) and cigarette satisfaction (Perkins et al 2004), as well as other dimensions of the CES. We sought to expand on these findings by assessing smoking urges, tension, and energy at three different points in the experiment.…”

supporting

confidence: 84%

“…Juliano and Brandon (2002) used a 3-hour abstinence interval and found that both instructional set and nicotine reduced the urge to smoking. In contrast, Perkins et al (2004) found no reduction in cravings using minimallyabstinent smokers. We asked our participants to abstain for 8 hours and found an effect of nicotine on the "craving" item of the CES as well as an effect of instructional set over time using the QSU.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…Hundreds of articles have been published on the pharmacological effects of nicotine on human cognition (for reviews, see Heishman, Taylor, & Henningfield, 1994;Sherwood, 1993), and there is a substantial body of research pointing to cognitive improvements from cholinergic stimulation by specific nicotinic receptor agonists and cognitive impairments with nicotinic antagonists (Levin, 1992;Rezwani & Levin, 2001 (Grunberg & Acri, 1991). The present research was designed to directly compare the effects of expectancy in smoking to the pharmacological changes induced by nicotine."Stimulus expectancy" (Kirsch, 1999;Perkins et al, 2004) can be manipulated through instructional sets, in which some participants are told to expect an active drug and others are told to expect an inactive drug. This type of expectancy is ignored in double-blind research, because in that research participants are not informed about which condition has been administered.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Expectancy and pharmacology influence the subjective effects of nicotine in a balanced-placebo design.

Kelemen¹,

Kaighobadi²

2007

Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The expectancy and pharmacological effects of nicotine (0.60 mg) on memory and the subjective effects of cigarettes were examined using a balanced-placebo design (i.e., expect either nicotine or no nicotine and receive either nicotine or no nicotine). A total of 120 college students who smoke were assigned to 1 of the 4 experimental groups and rated the cigarettes on a number of dimensions and completed questionnaires on smoking urges, tension, and energy. Participants also completed tests of memory as well as predictions of memory. Pharmacology played a stronger role than expectancy in most ratings of the cigarettes, but significant effects of expectancy did emerge for feelings of increased wakefulness, concentration, calming, cigarette satisfaction, and hunger reduction. The presence of nicotine significantly reduced smoking urges, but expectancy alone reduced tension after smoking. Neither variable produced significant effects on memory or memory predictions. These findings demonstrate that non-pharmacological factors can play an important role in the self-reported effects of nicotine. KeywordsBalanced-placebo design; Cigarette smoking; Nicotine; Stimulus Expectancy Many individuals who smoke may do so, at least in part, to induce cognitive changes in response to environmental demands. Consider college students who smoke while preparing for exams. Wesnes, Revell, and Warburton (1983) found that students smoked more cigarettes during exam weeks than during non-exam weeks. Moreover, 80% of students reported that smoking helped them concentrate, and 74% reported that smoking increased concentration. West and Lennox (1992) subsequently confirmed that college students smoked before exams to increase arousal during study, rather than to simply relieve stress or alleviate withdrawal. These studies suggest that nicotine's cognitive effects, or perhaps students' beliefs about nicotine's effects, may contribute to the maintenance of smoking behavior.There is now increasing recognition in the field of nicotine and tobacco research that numerous factors, including non-pharmacological factors, can play important roles in maintaining smokers' addiction to cigarettes (Johnson, Bickel, & Kirshenbaum, 2004;Perkins, Sayette, Conklin, & Caggiula, 2003). Hundreds of articles have been published on the pharmacological effects of nicotine on human cognition (for reviews, see Heishman, Taylor, & Henningfield, 1994;Sherwood, 1993), and there is a substantial body of research pointing to cognitive improvements from cholinergic stimulation by specific nicotinic receptor agonists and cognitive impairments with nicotinic antagonists (Levin, 1992;Rezwani & Levin, 2001 (Grunberg & Acri, 1991). The present research was designed to directly compare the effects of expectancy in smoking to the pharmacological changes induced by nicotine."Stimulus expectancy" (Kirsch, 1999;Perkins et al., 2004) can be manipulated through instructional sets, in which some participants are told to expect an active drug and others are told to expect an in...

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Expectancy and pharmacology influence the subjective effects of nicotine in a balanced-placebo design.

Kelemen¹,

Kaighobadi²

2007

Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ces stimulis peuvent être à proximité (l'odeur de la cigarette) ou distants (une personne associée au tabagisme) (Conklin, 2006). Comparativement aux hommes, les femmes semblent moins influencées par la nicotine elle-même que par les stimulis à proximité (Perkins et al, 2006). Ces différences vont peut-être nous permettre d'améliorer notre compréhension étiologique de l'usage de la nicotine et aider à la mise sur pied de traitements propres aux genres.…”

Section: Stimulantsunclassified

Existe-t-il des différences entre les hommes et les femmes en ce qui concerne les problèmes de toxicomanie ?

Mendrek

2014

smq

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

La consommation et la dépendance aux drogues furent longtemps considérées comme un problème typiquement masculin. Néanmoins, bien que l’abus et la dépendance à l’alcool, au cannabis et à la nicotine soient encore plus répandus chez les hommes, les différences de genre en ce qui concerne les stimulants et les opiacés ont largement disparu. Il semblerait également que les motivations pour commencer à consommer, l’escalade vers la dépendance et les taux de cessation diffèrent chez les hommes et les femmes. Les raisons qui expliquent ces différences sont multiples et complexes. Nous allons examiner ici les données des études épidémiologiques et cliniques concernant la consommation de diverses drogues chez des hommes et chez des femmes en contexte des facteurs socioculturels, psychologiques et neurobiologiques.Drug use and drug addiction have been traditionally considered to be a male problem, however the gender gap has been decreasing over the past few decades. Thus, while the prevalence of alcohol, cannabis and nicotine dependence is still overall greater among men than among women, sex/gender differences in the abuse of stimulants and opiates seem to have disappeared. Moreover, women appear to be more prone to develop drug dependence, suffer more severe physical and psychological consequences of drug abuse, and have more difficulties quitting the habit. Numerous psychological, socio-cultural and biological factors have been implicated in these changing statistics. For example, while a large proportion of men initiate drug use to induce feelings of elation, energy or focus, women frequently start taking drugs to alleviate pre-existing mental health problems, including high levels of stress, feelings of alienation, depression, anxiety, or post-traumatic stress disorder. This maladaptive self-medication strategy often results in a faster transition to a habitual drug use and eventually a more severe dependence. In addition, the socio-cultural norms (particularly in the Western society) have changed dramatically over the past few decades. Thus, while there is still a more severe stigma and prejudice against women who use drugs (especially if they are pregnant of have children), overall there is much greater acceptance of women’s drug use than it was several decades ago. Moreover, women have much greater access to various drugs of abuse than they used to have. Finally, over the past couple of decades new research started emerging pointing to some neurobiological factors that could also contribute to sex differences in drug addiction. Thus, there is now evidence that dopamine system, which for decades has been strongly implicated in drug reinforcement, is sexually dimorphic. The number of dopaminergic neurons, the density of the dopaminergic terminals, as well as responsiveness of the dopaminergic system to drugs of abuse, has been shown to differ between males and females and it has been shown to be modulated by sex steroid hormones, especially estrogen. For example, female rats exhibit greater motivation to self-admini...

show abstract

“…Expectancy can also refer to whether participants expect an active or inactive substance in a study. This variable is more precisely termed "stimulus expectancy" (Kirsch, 1999;Perkins et al, 2004). Stimulus expectancy can be manipulated through instructional sets, in which some participants are told to expect an active drug and others are told to expect an inactive control.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulus and Response Expectancies Influence the Cognitive Effects of Cigarettes

Kelemen¹

2008

J Smok Cessat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pharmacological, stimulus expectancy, and response expectancy effects of light cigarettes (0.60 mg yield of nicotine) compared with virtually nicotine-free cigarettes (less than 0.05 mg yield of nicotine) were examined using a between-subjects design. A total of 103 college-student smokers completed tests of cognition before and after smoking one type of cigarette, which was evaluated on a number of dimensions. Cigarettes with nicotine were preferred on most dimensions, and stimulus expectancy partially mediated the relationship between nicotine and subjective effects of the cigarettes. Stimulus expectancy also mediated the effect of nicotine on tension reduction immediately after smoking, but not near the end of the experiment. Response expectancy effects of nicotine were related to predicted and actual recall performance, such that participants who performed well tended to attribute the effect to the cigarette they smoked. Implications for smoking cessation and research studies using non-nicotine cigarettes are discussed.There is growing consensus that changes in cognitive processing contribute to the reinforcing effects of cigarettes (e.g., Brandon, Herzog, Irvin, & Gwaltney, 2004;Kassel, 1997;Levin, 1992). In college students, for example, smoking behavior increases substantially during periods of intense study (Wesnes, Revell, & Warburton, 1983), and students report increased smoking specifically to increase their level of cognitive arousal (West & Lennox, 1992). Whereas a large, established body of research has focused on the cognitive effects of nicotine (for reviews, see Heishman, Taylor, & Henningfield, 1994;Sherwood, 1993), there is now increasing recognition that numerous factors, including non-pharmacological factors, can play important roles in maintaining smokers' addiction to cigarettes (Johnson, Bickel, & Kirshenbaum, 2004;Perkins, Sayette, Conklin, & Caggiula, 2003;Rose, 2006). The focus of the present study was on the role of expectancy in nicotine's cognitive effects.The term expectancy denotes two different phenomena in nicotine research. First, participants may hold certain beliefs about the effects of a drug on their own internal state, which can be based on past use of the drug or information received from others. This type of expectancy is more precisely termed "response expectancy," and it has been shown to influence a variety of outcomes, including mood states, memory, and drug use (Kirsch, 1999). Response expectancies related to cigarettes have been shown to be a causal factor in smoking motivation (e.g., Copeland & Brandon, 2000). In addition, Hendricks and Brandon (2008) showed that smokers had different expectancies for cigarettes, which were primarily associated with negative health consequences, compared with nicotine, which was more closely associated with addition. Both cigarettes and nicotine were equally associated with arousal. Expectancy can also refer to whether participants expect an active or inactive substance in a study. This variable is more precisely terme...

show abstract

The Influence of Instructions and Nicotine Dose on the Subjective and Reinforcing Effects of Smoking.

Cited by 39 publications

References 27 publications

Expectancy and pharmacology influence the subjective effects of nicotine in a balanced-placebo design.

Expectancy and pharmacology influence the subjective effects of nicotine in a balanced-placebo design.

Existe-t-il des différences entre les hommes et les femmes en ce qui concerne les problèmes de toxicomanie ?

Stimulus and Response Expectancies Influence the Cognitive Effects of Cigarettes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About