Trial reportPsychopharmacology2011
Cognitive conflict following appetitive versus negative cues and smoking cessation failure.
Trial report in Psychopharmacology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Behavioural tasks sensitive to acute abstinence and predictive of smoking cessation success: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2016Pooled it
- Effects of nicotine on response inhibition and interference control.Psychopharmacology · 2017Trial
- The effects of acute abstinence from smoking and performance-based rewards on performance monitoring.Psychopharmacology · 2013Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleAttentional biases and executive control deficits may play a role in smoking cessation failure.
objectivesThe object of this study was to determine whether smokers' pre-quit reaction times on a computerized modified Simon task (which assesses attentional biases and executive control deficits) predict abstinence following a quit attempt.
methodsParticipants (N = 365) in a larger smoking cessation clinical trial completed the modified Simon task twice (while 10-h nicotine-deprived vs. not deprived). In the task, two photographs (i.e., two digital slides) were displayed—one always neutral, the other positive, negative, smoking-relevant, or neutral. A probe (<<< or >>>) then appeared to the left or right of center, and participants indicated the arrow's direction (left or right) which was either congruent or incongruent with the arrow's location on the screen. The incongruency effect, a measure of executive control, was calculated by subtracting the reaction time to congruent probes from the reaction time to incongruent probes.
resultsGreater impairment in executive control (i.e., greater probe incongruency effects) after viewing positive and smoking slides relative to negative slides predicted an inability to establish initial cessation and to maintain abstinence up to 8 weeks post-quit.
conclusionsThese effects may be because smokers who avoid/escape from processing negative affect are more likely to fail in a cessation attempt. Differences in relatively automatic responses to affective cues distinguish smokers who are successful and unsuccessful in their smoking cessation attempts, but effects were modest in size.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.