pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Comparison of delay discounting of different outcomes in cigarette smokers, smokeless tobacco users, e-cigarette users, and non-tobacco users - PubMed

. 2020 Sep;114(2):203-215.

doi: 10.1002/jeab.623. Epub 2020 Aug 27.

Affiliations

Comparison of delay discounting of different outcomes in cigarette smokers, smokeless tobacco users, e-cigarette users, and non-tobacco users

William Brady DeHart et al. J Exp Anal Behav. 2020 Sep.

Abstract

Delay discounting is the process by which a commodity loses value as the delay to its receipt increases. Rapid discounting predicts various maladaptive behaviors including tobacco use. Typically, delay discounting of different outcomes has been compared between cigarette smokers and nonsmokers. To better understand the relationship of delay discounting to different modes of tobacco use, we examined the differences in delay discounting of different outcomes between cigarette smokers, smokeless tobacco users, e-cigarette users, and non-tobacco users. In the present study, all participants completed 8 titrating delay-discounting tasks: $100 gain, $500 gain, $500 loss, alcohol, entertainment, food, a temporary health gain, and a temporary cure from a disease. Non-tobacco users discounted most outcomes less than tobacco users overall; however, there were no differences in discounting among the different types of tobacco users. These results suggest that nicotine consumption of any kind is associated with a higher degree of impulsivity compared to non-tobacco users. Adoption of tobacco products that have been perceived as less harmful (e.g., e-cigarettes) is not associated with a baseline difference or decrease in delay discounting if adopted after a history of cigarette use.

Keywords: cigarettes; decision-making; delay discounting; electronic cigarettes; impulsivity; nicotine.

© 2020 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1

Median Indifference Points for Each Group by Outcome Connected by Straight Lines

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Amlung M, Vedelago L, Acker J, Balodis I, & MacKillop J. (2017). Steep delay discounting and addictive behavior: A meta-analysis of continuous associations. Addiction, 112, 51–62. 10.1111/add.13535 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Audrain-McGovern J, Rodriguez D, Epstein LH, Cuevas J, Rodgers K, & Wileyto EP (2009). Does delay discounting play an etiological role in smoking or is it a consequence of smoking? Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 103, 99–106. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.12.019 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baker F, Johnson MW, & Bickel WK (2003). Delay discounting in current and never-before cigarette smokers: Similarities and differences across commodity, sign, and magnitude. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 382–392. - PubMed
    1. Białaszek W, Marcowski P, & Cox DJ (2017). Differences in delay, but not probability discounting, in current smokers, e-cigarette users, and never smokers. The Psychological Record, 67, 223–230. 10.1007/s40732-017-0244-1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bickel WK, Athamneh LN, Basso JC, Mellis AM, DeHart WB, Craft WH, & Pope D. (2019). Excessive discounting of delayed reinforcers as a transdisease process: Update on the state of the science. Current Opinion in Psychology, 30, 59–64. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.01.005 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms