ArticleFrontiers in psychology2016
Assessment of Tobacco-Related Approach and Attentional Biases in Smokers, Cravers, Ex-Smokers, and Non-Smokers.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Approach Bias and Tobacco Craving as Mechanisms of the Effect of Approach Bias Retraining on Smoking Cessation.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Trial
- Approach bias retraining to augment smoking cessation: A pilot randomized controlled trial.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2022Trial
- "Push it!" or "Hold it!"? A comparison of nicotine-avoidance training and nicotine-inhibition training in smokers motivated to quit.Psychopharmacology · 2022Trial
- Effect of attentional retraining on cognition, craving, and smoking in African American smokers.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2017Trial
- Appetitive responses toward smoking-related stimuli in abstinence-motivated, non-deprived individuals with chronic tobacco dependence: A multi-methodological investigation.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Article
- Nicotine-related interpretation biases in cigarette smoking individuals.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Same same, but different: A psychometric examination of three frequently used experimental tasks for cognitive bias assessment in a sample of healthy young adults.Behavior research methods · 2023Article
- A Smartphone App for Attentional Bias Retraining in Smokers: Mixed Methods Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Improving the touchscreen-based food approach-avoidance task: remediated block-order effects and initial findings regarding validity.Open research Europe · 2021Article
- Studying Implicit Attitudes Towards Smoking: Event-Related Potentials in the Go/NoGo Association Task.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- The impact of nicotine dose and instructed dose on smokers' implicit attitudes to smoking cues: An ERP study.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2019Article
- Approach bias retraining to augment smoking cessation: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2019Article
- Let's Open the Decision-Making Umbrella: A Framework for Conceptualizing and Assessing Features of Impaired Decision Making in Addiction.Neuropsychology review · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
According to theories of addictive behaviors, approach and attentional biases toward smoking-related cues play a crucial role in tobacco dependence. Several studies have investigated these biases by using various paradigms in different sample types. However, this heterogeneity makes it difficult to compare and evaluate the results. The present study aimed to address this problem, via (i) a structural comparison of different measures of approach-avoidance and a measure of smoking-related attentional biases, and (ii) using within one study different representative samples in the context of tobacco dependence. Three measures of approach-avoidance were employed: an Approach Avoidance Task (AAT), a Stimulus Response Compatibility Task (SRC), and a Single Target Implicit Association Test (ST-IAT). To assess attentional biases, a modified Stroop task including smoking-related words was administered. The study included four groups: n = 58 smokers, n = 57 non-smokers, n = 52 cravers, and n = 54 ex-smokers. We expected to find strong tobacco-related approach biases and attentional biases in smokers and cravers. However, the general pattern of results did not confirm these expectations. Approach responses assessed during the AAT and SRC did not differ between groups. Moreover, the Stroop did not show the expected interference effect. For the ST-IAT, cravers had stronger approach associations toward smoking-related cues, whereas non-smokers showed stronger avoidance associations. However, no such differences in approach-avoidance associations were found in smokers and ex-smokers. To conclude, these data do not provide evidence for a strong role of implicit approach and attentional biases toward smoking-related cues in tobacco dependency.
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.