ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2026
Attentional bias toward emotional and cigarette cues: Insights from a computer mouse-tracking task in adults who smoke and adults who do not smoke.
Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAttentional bias to drug-related cues is widely considered a core feature of addiction, yet its empirical assessment is highly sensitive to task design and stimulus selection. We used a computer mouse-tracking paradigm to examine attentional bias toward cigarette-related, pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral images.
methodsNinety-six participants (49 adults who smoke, 47 adults who did not smoke) completed the task. Trajectory deviation, measured via maximum absolute deviation (MAD), served as index of attentional bias. To examine individual differences in cue reactivity among participants who smoked, we applied k-means clustering to the MAD data and replicated the findings in an independent sample of 85 individuals who smoked cigarettes.
resultsBoth groups showed stronger bias for emotionally salient distractors, especially pleasant images, highlighting how the inclusion of emotionally matched control stimuli could reveal overlooked confounds in addiction research. Contrary to expectations, individuals who smoked did not show greater attentional bias to cigarette cues than nonsmokers. K-means clustering revealed two subgroups among individuals who smoked: one selectively biased toward cigarette cues, and another more reactive to pleasant stimuli. We replicated these results in an independent sample of 85 individuals who smoked cigarettes.
conclusionsThe identification of different attentional bias profiles among individuals who smoke aligns with prior neuroimaging findings and suggests that the mouse-tracking paradigm may serve as a scalable, cost-effective tool for detecting individual differences in reactivity to drug-related and non-drug-related pleasant stimuli.
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.