ArticlePsychopharmacology2022
Differences in attentional bias to smoking-related, affective, and sensation-seeking cues between smokers and non-smokers: an eye-tracking study.
Article in Psychopharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attentional bias in young adult tobacco cigarette smokers and e-cigarette users: an eye-tracking study.Psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Using eye tracking to evaluate the impact of smartphone-delivered attentional bias modification training for smokers.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2024Article
- Smokers' Self-Report and Behavioral Reactivity to Combined Personal Smoking Cues (Proximal + Environment + People): A Pilot Study.Brain sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleOne of the behavioural features of tobacco use disorder is the presence of attentional bias (AB) to smoking-related stimuli. However, much of the research investigating these associations have been limited to the use of reaction-based indices.
objectivesWe aimed to investigate differences in AB to smoking, affective, and sensation-seeking cues in smokers and non-smokers using novel, free-viewing, eye-tracking technology. Secondary aims included investigating impulsivity-by-group interaction effects on AB to sensation-seeking cues.
methodsParticipants were either otherwise-healthy smokers of at least 8 cigarettes per day or otherwise-healthy non-smokers (< 100 cigarettes in their lifetime and no smoking in the past year). AB was measured using a free-viewing, eye-tracking system. Participants were presented a series of slides divided into 3 themes: smoking, affective, and sensation-seeking. Each slide contained 4 images (1 theme-related, 1 neutral, 2 competitive). Primary outcome measure was the difference in the proportion of time spent viewing the theme-related cue to neutral cue. Impulsivity was measured using a monetary delayed discounting task.
resultsThe sample consisted of 50 smokers (41 ± 12 years old) and 50 age- and sex-matched non-smokers (40 ± 14 years old). Smokers spent over 2 times longer looking at smoking-related images than non-smokers (F = 25.50, p < 0.001). As well, greater impulsivity was significantly associated with increased AB to sensation-seeking cues (R
conclusionThe eye-tracking procedure is a sensitive tool for assessing AB in smokers compared to non-smokers to both smoking and sensation-seeking cues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36181542What 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.