Trial reportJournal of applied behavior analysis2010
Effects of escalating and descending schedules of incentives on cigarette smoking in smokers without plans to quit.
Trial report in Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04927143 (Encouraging Abstinence Behavior in a Drug Epidemic), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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.
Encouraging Abstinence Behavior in a Drug Epidemic: Optimizing Dynamic Incentives
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Incentives for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Incentives for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Use and effectiveness of behavioural economics in interventions for lifestyle risk factors of non-communicable diseases: a systematic review with policy implications.Perspectives in public health · 2018Pooled it
- A review of the literature on contingency management in the treatment of substance use disorders, 2009-2014.Preventive medicine · 2016Pooled it
- Interventions for recruiting smokers into cessation programmes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- The effects of fixed versus escalating reinforcement schedules on smoking abstinence.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2015Trial
- The effects of percentile versus fixed criterion schedules on smoking with equal incentive magnitude for initial abstinence.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2014Trial
- The effect of framing incentives as either losses or gains with contingency management for smoking cessation.Addictive behaviors · 2013Trial
- Evolution of the substance use landscape: Implications for contingency management.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2025Review
- The effects of large, small, and thinning magnitudes of alternative reinforcement on resurgence.Behavioural processes · 2022Article
- The ABCs of incentive-based treatment in health care: a behavior analytic framework to inform research and practice.Psychology research and behavior management · 2014Review
- An efficient early phase 2 procedure to screen medications for efficacy in smoking cessation.Psychopharmacology · 2014Review
- Monetary-based consequences for drug abstinence: methods of implementation and some considerations about the allocation of finances in substance abusers.The American journal of drug and alcohol abuse · 2012Review
- Voucher-based contingency management and in-treatment behaviors in smoking cessation treatment.International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Contingent incentives can reduce substance abuse. Escalating payment schedules, which begin with a small incentive magnitude and progressively increase with meeting the contingency, increase smoking abstinence. Likewise, descending payment schedules can increase cocaine abstinence. The current experiment enrolled smokers without plans to quit in the next 6 months and compared escalating and descending payments schedules over 15 visits. In the larger incentive condition (LI, n = 39), the largest possible incentive was $100, and in the smaller incentive condition (SI, n = 18), the largest possible incentive was $32. In both conditions, more participants in the descending groups initiated abstinence. A higher proportion of participants in both the escalating and descending groups initiated abstinence in the LI than in the SI. Although participants in the descending groups had more abstinent visits during the first five contingent visits than those in the escalating groups, these differences were not maintained.
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.