(PS6-D95) Applied Utility of Subjective Negative Reinforcement Smoking: An Experimental Investigation

Negative reinforcement models of smoking motivation provide a useful framework for identifying contextual factors that influence smoking urges and behavior. These may provide valuable insight in the design and tailoring of smoking cessation treatments to optimally leverage available strategies. An important factor both in researching these models and translating them to applied clinical use is the measurement of smoking motives, which heavily relies on self-report measures. Implied in this clinically relevant translational work is the assumption that smoking urges and behavior correspond with self-reported motives. However, there is a paucity of experimental work investigating these relations.

            To address this gap, this study examined the impact of negative reinforcement smoking (i.e., smoking to reduce negative affect) on the relations between negative affect (NA) and smoking urges and behavior following a socio-evaluative stressor. Adult daily smokers (n=39) completed the Reasons for Smoking (RFS) and Smoking Consequences Questionnaire (SCQ), and then completed a stressful speech task. NA (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule) was assessed both at baseline and following the stressor. Post-stressor smoking urges were assessed both via self-report (Brief Questionnaire on Smoking Urges; QSU-B) and behaviorally (delayed versus immediate smoking in the McKee Lapse Protocol). Two linear (QSU-B) and two logistic (delay/immediate smoking) regressions were conducted examining the main and interactive effects of post-stressor NA and NA-reduction motives (NA-rm) as reported in either the RFS or the SCQ. In line with negative reinforcement models, we hypothesized that higher post-stressor NA would be associated with greater smoking urges and immediate smoking behavior. We further hypothesized that this relation would be moderated by NA-rm such that individuals who reported higher motives would have greater urges and would be more likely to smoke immediately.

Both models evidenced a significant positive association between post-stressor NA and self-reported smoking urges. Although neither index of NA-rm yielded a significant main effect, there was a significant post-stressor NA and NA-rm interaction on self-reported smoking urges. However, this contrasted with the study hypothesis; the positive effect of post-stressor NA on smoking urges was significant only at lower NA-rm levels, but not at higher levels of such motives. No significant effects were seen in the smoking behavior models.

            The direction of the impact of smoking motives on the relation between NA and self-reported smoking urges was unexpected. This, coupled with the non-significant effect of smoking motives on objective measures of smoking behavior, highlights the need for applied investigations that test the theoretical assumptions of smoking motivation models. Further investigations employing controlled experimental settings are needed to replicate and extend the current findings utilizing alternative NA inductions (e.g., nicotine deprivation), as well as in both larger and cessation-seeking samples. Such steps would be informative in translating negative reinforcement theoretical models into effective evidence-informed clinical practices.