No Meaningful Difference in Attentional Bias Between Daily and Non-Daily Smokers

James Bartlett, Rebecca Jenks, Nigel Wilson
{"title":"No Meaningful Difference in Attentional Bias Between Daily and Non-Daily Smokers","authors":"James Bartlett, Rebecca Jenks, Nigel Wilson","doi":"10.36850/e11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Both daily and non-daily smokers find it difficult to quit smoking long-term. One factor associated with addictive behavior is attentional bias, but previous research in daily and non-daily smokers found inconsistent results and did not report the reliability of their cognitive tasks. Using an online sample, we compared daily (n = 106) and non-daily (n = 60) smokers in their attentional bias towards smoking pictures. Participants completed a visual probe task with two picture presentation times: 200ms and 500ms. In confirmatory analyses, there were no significant effects of interest, and in exploratory analyses, equivalence testing showed the effects were statistically equivalent to zero. The reliability of the visual probe task was poor, meaning it should not be used for repeated testing or investigating individual differences. The results can be interpreted in line with contemporary theories of attentional bias where there are unlikely to be stable trait-like differences between smoking groups. Future research in attentional bias should focus on state-level differences using more reliable measures than the visual probe task.","PeriodicalId":275817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trial and Error","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trial and Error","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36850/e11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Both daily and non-daily smokers find it difficult to quit smoking long-term. One factor associated with addictive behavior is attentional bias, but previous research in daily and non-daily smokers found inconsistent results and did not report the reliability of their cognitive tasks. Using an online sample, we compared daily (n = 106) and non-daily (n = 60) smokers in their attentional bias towards smoking pictures. Participants completed a visual probe task with two picture presentation times: 200ms and 500ms. In confirmatory analyses, there were no significant effects of interest, and in exploratory analyses, equivalence testing showed the effects were statistically equivalent to zero. The reliability of the visual probe task was poor, meaning it should not be used for repeated testing or investigating individual differences. The results can be interpreted in line with contemporary theories of attentional bias where there are unlikely to be stable trait-like differences between smoking groups. Future research in attentional bias should focus on state-level differences using more reliable measures than the visual probe task.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
每日吸烟者和非每日吸烟者的注意偏倚无显著差异
无论是日常吸烟者还是非日常吸烟者,都很难长期戒烟。与成瘾行为相关的一个因素是注意力偏差,但之前对日常吸烟者和非日常吸烟者的研究发现了不一致的结果,并且没有报告他们认知任务的可靠性。使用在线样本,我们比较了日常吸烟者(n = 106)和非日常吸烟者(n = 60)对吸烟图片的注意偏差。参与者完成了一项视觉探测任务,该任务有两种图像呈现时间:200ms和500ms。在验证性分析中,没有显著的效应,而在探索性分析中,等效性检验显示,这些效应在统计上等于零。视觉探测任务的可靠性较差,不宜用于重复测试或调查个体差异。研究结果可以用当代注意偏差理论来解释,即吸烟组之间不太可能存在稳定的特征差异。未来对注意偏倚的研究应采用比视觉探测任务更可靠的测量方法来关注国家层面的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Serendipity in Scientific Research Three Persistent Myths about Open Science The Music Must Play On: The Music Therapy Sessions that Should not Have Stopped Medical Expert Endorsement Fails to Reduce Vaccine Hesitancy in U.K. Residents A Manifesto for Rewarding and Recognizing Team Infrastructure Roles
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1