SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine / 2026 / Volume: 41 Issue: 3

Effects of smoking dependence level on attentional bias in smokers

Umut Karagöz(Sağlık Bakanlığı)0009-0005-7941-1156
Başak Ünübol(SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ ENSTİTÜSÜ, BAĞIMLILIK VE BAĞIMLILIKLA MÜCADELE ANABİLİM DALI, BAĞIMLILIK VE BAĞIMLILIKLA MÜCADELE (DR))0000-0003-0600-7900
Pages
—
Publication Date
2024-09-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results are discussed together with the existing studies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:There is uncertainty regarding whether the degree of nicotine dependence directly impacts the increase or decrease of attentional biases towards smoking-related cues.
📊
Key Findings & Data:We conducted the study with 114 smokers, utilizing a Modified Stroop Paradigm and Dot Probe Tasks to assess attentional biases toward both smoking-related and neutral cues.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results are discussed together with the existing studies.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Attentional bias · nicotine dependence · addiction

Abstract

There is uncertainty regarding whether the degree of nicotine dependence directly impacts the increase or decrease of attentional biases towards smoking-related cues. Their relationship remains unclear. Therefore, we compared the attentional bias among smokers with varying levels of dependence. We conducted the study with 114 smokers, utilizing a Modified Stroop Paradigm and Dot Probe Tasks to assess attentional biases toward both smoking-related and neutral cues. The objective was to compare attention bias levels among individuals with varying degrees of dependence. At various levels of nicotine dependence -whether mild, moderate, or severe- individuals demonstrated a consistent attentional bias towards smoking-related cues, suggesting no significant distinction between these groups. The results of the study show that there was no discernable correlation between attentional bias concerning smoking-related stimuli and the level of nicotine dependency. The results are discussed together with the existing studies.

🔖

Cite This Article

Karagöz, U., Ünübol, B. (2024). Effects of smoking dependence level on attentional bias in smokers. Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Volume: 41 Issue: 3. https://ajindex.com/articles/1422645

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (58)

  1. Stewart J, de Wit H, Eikelboom R. Role of unconditioned and conditioned drug effects in the self-administration of opiates and stimulants. Psychol Rev. 1984;91(2):251–68.
  2. Carter BL, Tiffany ST. Meta-analysis of cue-reactivity in addiction research. Addiction. Carfax Publishing Company; 1999;94(3):327–40.
  3. Niaura RS, Rohsenow DJ, Binkoff JA, Monti PM, Pedraza M, Abrams DB. Relevance of Cue Reactivity to Understanding Alcohol and Smoking Relapse. J Abnorm Psychol. 1988;97(2):133–52.
  4. Sayette MA, Hufford MR. Effects of Cue Exposure and Deprivation on Cognitive Resources in Smokers. J Abnorm Psychol. 1994;103(4):812–8.
  5. Field M, Cox WM. Attentional bias in addictive behaviors: A review of its development, causes, and consequences. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008 Sep 1;97(1–2):1–20.
  6. Sayette M. Behaviour Research and Therapy The effects of alcohol on emotion in social drinkers. Behav Res Ther [Internet]. 2017;88:76–89. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2016.06.005
  7. Fadardi JS, Cox WM, Rahmani A. Neuroscience of attentional processes for addiction medicine: From brain mechanisms to practical considerations. In: Progress in Brain Research. Elsevier B.V.; 2016. p. 77–89.
  8. Waters AJ, Shiffman S, Bradley BP, Mogg K. Attentional shifts to smoking cues in smokers. Addiction. 2003;98(10):1409–17.
  9. Ehrman RN, Robbins SJ, Bromwell MA, Lankford ME, Monterosso JR, O’brien CP. Comparing attentional bias to smoking cues in current smokers, former smokers, and non-smokers using a dot-probe task. Drug Alcohol Depend [Internet]. 2002;(67):185–91. Available from: www.elsevier.com/locate/drugalcdep
  10. Bradley B, Field M, Mogg K, De Houwer J. Attentional and evaluative biases for smoking cues in nicotine dependence: component processes of biases in visual orienting. Behav Pharmacol. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004;15:29–36.
  11. Powell J, Dawkins L, West R, Powell J, Pickering A. Relapse to smoking during unaided cessation: Clinical, cognitive and motivational predictors. Psychopharmacology (Berl). Springer Verlag; 2010;212(4):537–49.
  12. Cox WM, Hogan LM, Kristian MR, Race JH. Alcohol attentional bias as a predictor of alcohol abusers’ treatment outcome. Drug Alcohol Depend [Internet]. 2002;(68):237–43. Available from: www.elsevier.com/locate/drugalcdep
  13. Marissen MAE, Franken IHA, Waters AJ, Blanken P, Van Den Brink W, Hendriks VM. Attentional bias predicts heroin relapse following treatment. Addiction. 2006 Sep;101(9):1306–12.
  14. Carpenter KM, Schreiber E, Church S, McDowell D. Drug Stroop performance: Relationships with primary substance of use and treatment outcome in a drug-dependent outpatient sample. Addict Behav. 2006 Jan;31(1):174–81.
  15. Rubinstein ML, Luks TL, Moscicki AB, Dryden W, Rait MA, Simpson G V. Smoking-related cue-induced brain activation in adolescent light smokers. J Adolesc Heal [Internet]. Elsevier Inc.; 2011;48(1):7–12. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.09.016
  16. Waters AJ, Feyerabend C. Determinants and Effects of Attentional Bias in Smokers. Psychol Addict Behav. 2000;14(2):111–20.
  17. Gross TM, Jarvik ME, Rosenblatt MR. Nicotine abstinence produces content-specific Stroop interference. Vol. 110, Psychopharmacology. Springer-Verlag; 1993.
  18. Mogg K, Bradley BP, Field M, De Houwer J. Eye movements to smoking-related pictures in smokers: relationship between attentional biases and implicit and explicit measures of stimulus valence. 2003.
  19. Eysenck MW, Macleod C, Mathews A. Cognitive functioning and anxiety. Psychol Res. 1987;49:189–95.
  20. Macleod C, Mathews A, Tata P. Attentional Bias in Emotional Disorders. Vol. 95, Journal of Abnormal Piychofcgy. 1986.
  21. Fridrici C, Leichsenring-Driessen C, Driessen M, Wingenfeld K, Kremer G, Beblo T. The individualized alcohol Stroop task: No attentional bias toward personalized stimuli in alcohol-dependents. Psychol Addict Behav. 2013 Mar;27(1):62–70.
  22. Robbins SJ, Ehrman RN. The role of attentional bias in substance abuse. Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2004;3(4):243–60.
  23. Sweatt,S.K, Gower, B.A, Chieh, A.Y, Liu, Y, Li L. What is Abnormal About Addiction-Related Attentional Biases. Physiol Behav. 2016;176(1):139–48.
  24. Stormark KM, Hugdahl K, Ph D. Selective Attention to Alcohol Stimuli: Automated Processing ? J Stud Alcohol. 1998;
  25. Rosse RB, Johri S, Kendrick K, Hess AL, Alim TN, Miller M, et al. Preattentive and attentive eye movements during visual scanning of a cocaine cue: Correlation with intensity of cocaine cravings. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 1997;9(1):91–3.
  26. Robinson TE, Berridge KC. The neural basis of drug craving: An incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Res Rev. 1993;18(3):247–91.
  27. Sharma D, Albery IP, Cook C. Selective attentional bias to alcohol related stimuli in problem drinkers and non-problem drinkers. Addiction. 2001;96(2):285–95.
  28. Field M, Christiansen P, Cole J, Goudie A. Delay discounting and the alcohol Stroop in heavy drinking adolescents. Addiction. 2007;102(4):579–86.
  29. Cox WM, Yeates GN, Regan CM. Effects of alcohol cues on cognitive processing in heavy and light drinkers. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1999;55(1–2):85–9.
  30. Field M, Mogg K, Zetteler J, Bradley BP. Attentional biases for alcohol cues in heavy and light social drinkers: The roles of initial orienting and maintained attention. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2004 Oct;176(1):88–93.
  31. Mogg K, Bradley BP. Selective processing of smoking-related cues in smokers: Manipulation of deprivation level and comparison of three measures of processing bias. J Psychopharmacol. 2002;16(4):385–92.
  32. Zack M, Belsito L, Scher R, Eissenberg T, Corrigall WA. Effects of abstinence and smoking on information processing in adolescent smokers. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2001;153(2):249–57.
  33. Bradley BP, Mogg K, Wright T, Field M. Attentional bias in drug dependence: Vigilance for cigarette-related cues in smokers. Psychol Addict Behav. 2003 Mar;17(1):66–72.
  34. Mogg K, Field M, Bradley BP. Attentional and approach biases for smoking cues in smokers: An investigation of competing theoretical views of addiction. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2005;180(2):333–41.
  35. Lang PJ, Bradley MM, & Cuthbert BN. International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Technical Report A-8. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 2008;2008.
  36. Bradley BP, Field M, Healy H, Mogg K. Do the affective properties of smoking-related cues influence attentional and approach biases in cigarette smokers? J Psychopharmacol. 2008 Sep;22(7):737–45.
  37. Froeliger B, Modlin L, Wang L, Kozink R V., McClernon FJ. Nicotine withdrawal modulates frontal brain function during an affective Stroop task. Psychopharmacology (Berl). Springer Verlag; 2012 Apr 1;220(4):707–18.
  38. Kisacik E, Çakir Z. The development study of smoking stroop test on a turkish sample. Noropsikiyatri Ars. Turkish Neuropsychiatric Society; 2020;57(3):234–40.
  39. Frecker RC, Fagerström K. The Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence: A revision of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire. Br J Addict [Internet]. 1991;86:1119–27. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/21222875
  40. Atilla UYSAL M, Kadakal F, Karşidağ Ç, Gülhan BAYRAM N, Uysal Ö, Yilmaz V, et al. Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence: Reliability in a Turkish sample and factor analysis #. Vol. 52, Tüberküloz ve Toraks Dergisi. 2004.
  41. DEMİREZEN DANIŞMAN Mehmet Ali KURÇER ZONGULDAK M. SİGARA İÇME ARZUSU ÖLÇEĞİ’NİN TÜRKÇE GEÇERLİLİK, GÜVENİLİRLİĞİ VE ANKSİYETE İLE İLİŞKİSİ TIPTA UZMANLIK TEZİ. 2013.
  42. Hisli N. Beck Depresyon Envanterinin Üniversite Öğrencileri İçin Geçerliği, Güvenirliği. Vol. 7, Psikoloji Dergisi. 1989. p. 3–13.
  43. Muhterem ULUSOY, ŞAHİN NH. Turkish Version of the Beck Anxiety Inventory: Psychometric Properties. 1998.
  44. Field M, Duka T, Tyler E, Schoenmakers T. Attentional bias modification in tobacco smokers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2009;11(7):812–22.
  45. Tiffany ST. A Cognitive Model of Drug Urges and Drug-Use Behavior: Role of Automatic and Nonautomatic Processes. Vol. 97, Psychological Review. 1990.
  46. Schoenmakers T, Wiers RW, Field M. Effects of a low dose of alcohol on cognitive biases and craving in heavy drinkers. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2008;197(1):169–78.
  47. Duka T, Townshend JM. The priming effect of alcohol pre-load on attentional bias to alcohol-related stimuli. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2004;176(3–4):353–61.
  48. Bruce G, Jones BT. A pictorial Stroop paradigm reveals an alcohol attentional bias in heavier compared to lighter social drinkers. J Psychopharmacol. 2004;18(4):527–33.
  49. Noël X, Colmant M, Van Der Linden M, Bechara A, Bullens Q, Hanak C, et al. Time course of attention for alcohol cues in abstinent alcoholic patients: The role of initial orienting. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2006;30(11):1871–7.
  50. Field M, Eastwood B, Bradley BP, Mogg K. Selective processing of cannabis cues in regular cannabis users. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2006;85(1):75–82.
  51. Bearre L, Sturt P, Bruce G, Jones BT. Heroin-related attentional bias and monthly frequency of heroin use are positively associated in attenders of a harm reduction service. Addict Behav. 2007;32(4):784–92.
  52. Field M, Mogg K, Bradley BP. Craving and cognitive biases for alcohol cues in social drinkers. Alcohol Alcohol. 2005;40(6):504–10.
  53. Hogarth LC, Mogg K, Bradley BP, Duka T, Dickinson A. Attentional orienting towards smoking-related stimuli. Behav Pharmacol. 2003;14(2):153–60.
  54. Waters AJ, Shiffman S, Sayette MA, Paty JA, Gwaltney CJ, Balabanis MH. Attentional bias predicts outcome in smoking cessation. Heal Psychol. 2003 Jul;22(4):378–87.
  55. Munafò M, Mogg K, Roberts S, Bradley BP, Murphy M. Selective processing of smoking-related cues in current smokers, ex-smokers and never-smokers on the modified Stroop task. J Psychopharmacol. 2003;13(3):310–316.
  56. Choi SW, Chon Y, Bhang S young, Jang YL, Won WY, Choi JT, et al. Nicotine dependence syndrome scale and craving: Comparing nicotine-dependent individuals with and without comorbid alcohol dependence. Asia-Pacific Psychiatry. 2014;6(2):200–6.
  57. Istvan JA. Are Heavy Smokers Different From Light Smokers? JAMA J Am Med Assoc. 1989;261(1):43. Droungas A, Ehrman RN, Childress AR, O’Brien CP. Effect of smoking cues and cigarette availability on craving and smoking behavior. Addict Behav. 1995;20(5):657–73.
  58. Stormark KM, Hugdahl K, Ph D. Selective Attention to Alcohol Stimuli: Automated Processing ? J Stud Alcohol. 1998;