ArticlePreventive medicine2020
Comparing participant estimated demand intensity on the cigarette Purchase Task to consumption when usual-brand cigarettes were provided free.
Article in Preventive medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Imagining the future can shape the present: A systematic review of the impact of episodic future thinking on substance use outcomes.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of cigarette package colors and warning labels on marlboro smokers' risk beliefs, product appraisals, and smoking behavior: a randomized trial.BMC public health · 2023Trial
- The Blinded-Dose Purchase Task: assessing hypothetical demand based on cocaine, methamphetamine, and alcohol administration.Psychopharmacology · 2023Trial
- Leveraging the cigarette purchase task to understand relationships between cumulative vulnerabilities, the relative reinforcing effects of smoking, and response to reduced nicotine content cigarettes.Preventive medicine · 2022Trial
- A further examination of the validity of assessing demand intensity using the Cigarette Purchase Task.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Validity and reliability of the cigarette purchase task when participant cigarette consumption is unconstrained.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2025Article
- Dose by design: How limits on nicotine flux and puff duration affect the abuse liability of electronic nicotine delivery systems.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2025Article
- Examining the latent factor structure of a hypothetical cigarette purchase task among pregnant women.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2023Article
- Smoking-Specific Risk Factors in Early Adulthood That Mediate Risk of Daily Smoking by Age 29 for Children with ADHD.Journal of attention disorders · 2022Article
- Relating individual differences in nicotine dependence severity to underpinning motivational and pharmacological processes among smokers from vulnerable populations.Preventive medicine · 2020Article
- Behavior change, health, and health disparities 2020: Some current challenges in tobacco control and regulatory science.Preventive medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accumulating evidence suggests that the hypothetical Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), especially its demand Intensity index (i.e., estimated cigarettes participants would smoke if free), is associated with individual differences in smoking risk. Nevertheless, few studies have examined the extent to which hypothetical CPT demand Intensity may differ from consumption when participants are provided with free cigarettes. That topic is the overarching focus of the present study. Participants were 745 adult smokers with co-morbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage. CPT was administered for usual-brand cigarettes prior to providing participants with seven days of their usual-brand cigarettes free of cost and consumption was recorded daily via an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System. Demand Intensity was correlated with IVR smoking rate (rs 0.670-0.696, ps < 0.001) but estimates consistently exceeded IVR smoking rates by an average of 4.4 cigarettes per day (ps < 0.001). Importantly, both measures were comparably sensitive to discerning well-established differences in smoking risk, including greater cigarettes per day among men versus women (F(1,732) = 18.74, p < 0.001), those with versus without opioid-dependence (F(1,732) = 168.37, p < 0.001), younger versus older adults (F(2,730) = 32.93, p < 0.001), and those with lower versus greater educational attainment (F(1,732) = 38.26, p < 0.001). Overall, CPT demand Intensity appears to overestimate consumption rates relative to those observed when participants are provided with free cigarettes, but those deviations are systematic (i.e., consistent in magnitude and direction, Fs all <1.63; ps > 0.19 for all interactions with subgroups). This suggests that demand Intensity was sensitive to established group differences in smoking rate, supporting its utility as an important measure of addiction potential.
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.