4.4 Article

Appetitive nature of drug cues re-confirmed with physiological measures and the potential role of stage of change

期刊

PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 194, 期 2, 页码 253-260

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-007-0839-3

关键词

smoking cues; affective modulation; acoustic startle reflex; nicotine; stage of change; transtheoretical; drug cue

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale Smokers report pleasant reactions to viewing cigarettes, suggesting that smoking cues may be appetitive in nature. Two studies have investigated this hypothesis through physiological assessment. The first study found that smoking cues were physiologically appetitive in nature, with dampened startle response to smoking pictures in comparison to neutral pictures. The second found that smoking pictures did not modulate the startle response, suggesting such cues may not be physiologically appetitive. Objective The goal of the present study was to further investigate how participants' motivation to quit smoking might modulate responses to smoking cues. Materials and methods Twenty-two nicotine-dependent smokers viewed standardized pleasant, unpleasant, neutral, and smoking pictures. Eleven of the subjects reported no intent to quit (precontemplators) and 11 reported planning to quit within the next 6 months (contemplators). Acoustic startle probes were randomly administered while subjects viewed the pictures, and eyeblink startle magnitude was measured with electromyography (EMG). Results As a whole, participants exhibited dampened startle responses during smoking pictures, relative to unpleasant pictures. Precontemplators showed robust startle inhibition to smoking pictures, in comparison to both neutral and unpleasant pictures. Contemplators, however, showed blunted unpleasant picture augmentation and a lack of startle inhibition for pleasant pictures. Conclusion These findings are consistent with the idea that smoking pictures are appetitive in nature. Furthermore, they suggest that smokers at a later stage of change may exhibit a lesser response.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据