Reliability of and associations between cognitive bias measures and response inhibition in smoking

Charlotte E Wittekind; Tanja Schiebel; Simone Kühn

doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2023.101853

Reliability of and associations between cognitive bias measures and response inhibition in smoking

Standard

Reliability of and associations between cognitive bias measures and response inhibition in smoking. / Wittekind, Charlotte E; Schiebel, Tanja; Kühn, Simone.

In: J BEHAV THER EXP PSY, Vol. 81, 12.2023, p. 101853.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Wittekind, CE, Schiebel, T & Kühn, S 2023, 'Reliability of and associations between cognitive bias measures and response inhibition in smoking', J BEHAV THER EXP PSY, vol. 81, pp. 101853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2023.101853

APA

Wittekind, C. E., Schiebel, T., & Kühn, S. (2023). Reliability of and associations between cognitive bias measures and response inhibition in smoking. J BEHAV THER EXP PSY, 81, 101853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2023.101853

Vancouver

Wittekind CE, Schiebel T, Kühn S. Reliability of and associations between cognitive bias measures and response inhibition in smoking. J BEHAV THER EXP PSY. 2023 Dec;81:101853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2023.101853

Bibtex

@article{7fc7031320bf42169a4a72a98b464e5a,

title = "Reliability of and associations between cognitive bias measures and response inhibition in smoking",

abstract = "BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Theoretical models propose that different cognitive biases are caused by a common underlying mechanism (incentive salience/{"}wanting{"}) and should, therefore, be interrelated. Additionally, stronger impulsive processes should be related to weaker inhibitory abilities. However, these assumptions have hardly been empirically tested and key psychometric information have hardly been reported in samples of smokers. To extent previous research, the present study aimed (1) to estimate the reliability (split-half) of different cognitive bias measures and (2) to investigate associations between attention, approach and associative biases, response inhibition, and smoking-related variables.METHODS: Eighty current, non-deprived smokers completed the following tasks in random order: Approach-Avoidance Task (AAT), Stimulus-Response Compatibility Task (SRCT), Implicit-Association Tests (IAT, approach-avoid, valence), Dotprobe Task, Go-/NoGo Task (GNGT). Additionally, different smoking-related variables were assessed. Split-half reliabilities of the different cognitive (bias) measures and correlations between them were calculated.RESULTS: Split-half reliabilities of the AAT, the SRCT, and the Dotprobe Task were unacceptable whereas both IATs and the GNGT showed good to excellent reliability. Smoking-approach associations were significantly related to nicotine dependence; however, none of the cognitive bias measures correlated with response inhibition or smoking-related variables.LIMITATIONS: Pictorial stimuli were the same across paradigms and might not have been relevant to all participants.CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to investigate the association between different cognitive biases, response inhibition, and smoking-related variables. Although findings are at odds with theoretical assumptions, their interpretation is clearly restricted by the low reliability of the cognitive bias measures.",

keywords = "Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Smoking, Attention, Cognition/physiology, Bias",

author = "Wittekind, {Charlotte E} and Tanja Schiebel and Simone K{\"u}hn",

year = "2023",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1016/j.jbtep.2023.101853",

language = "English",

volume = "81",

pages = "101853",

journal = "J BEHAV THER EXP PSY",

issn = "0005-7916",

publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reliability of and associations between cognitive bias measures and response inhibition in smoking

AU - Wittekind, Charlotte E

AU - Schiebel, Tanja

AU - Kühn, Simone

PY - 2023/12

Y1 - 2023/12

N2 - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Theoretical models propose that different cognitive biases are caused by a common underlying mechanism (incentive salience/"wanting") and should, therefore, be interrelated. Additionally, stronger impulsive processes should be related to weaker inhibitory abilities. However, these assumptions have hardly been empirically tested and key psychometric information have hardly been reported in samples of smokers. To extent previous research, the present study aimed (1) to estimate the reliability (split-half) of different cognitive bias measures and (2) to investigate associations between attention, approach and associative biases, response inhibition, and smoking-related variables.METHODS: Eighty current, non-deprived smokers completed the following tasks in random order: Approach-Avoidance Task (AAT), Stimulus-Response Compatibility Task (SRCT), Implicit-Association Tests (IAT, approach-avoid, valence), Dotprobe Task, Go-/NoGo Task (GNGT). Additionally, different smoking-related variables were assessed. Split-half reliabilities of the different cognitive (bias) measures and correlations between them were calculated.RESULTS: Split-half reliabilities of the AAT, the SRCT, and the Dotprobe Task were unacceptable whereas both IATs and the GNGT showed good to excellent reliability. Smoking-approach associations were significantly related to nicotine dependence; however, none of the cognitive bias measures correlated with response inhibition or smoking-related variables.LIMITATIONS: Pictorial stimuli were the same across paradigms and might not have been relevant to all participants.CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to investigate the association between different cognitive biases, response inhibition, and smoking-related variables. Although findings are at odds with theoretical assumptions, their interpretation is clearly restricted by the low reliability of the cognitive bias measures.

AB - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Theoretical models propose that different cognitive biases are caused by a common underlying mechanism (incentive salience/"wanting") and should, therefore, be interrelated. Additionally, stronger impulsive processes should be related to weaker inhibitory abilities. However, these assumptions have hardly been empirically tested and key psychometric information have hardly been reported in samples of smokers. To extent previous research, the present study aimed (1) to estimate the reliability (split-half) of different cognitive bias measures and (2) to investigate associations between attention, approach and associative biases, response inhibition, and smoking-related variables.METHODS: Eighty current, non-deprived smokers completed the following tasks in random order: Approach-Avoidance Task (AAT), Stimulus-Response Compatibility Task (SRCT), Implicit-Association Tests (IAT, approach-avoid, valence), Dotprobe Task, Go-/NoGo Task (GNGT). Additionally, different smoking-related variables were assessed. Split-half reliabilities of the different cognitive (bias) measures and correlations between them were calculated.RESULTS: Split-half reliabilities of the AAT, the SRCT, and the Dotprobe Task were unacceptable whereas both IATs and the GNGT showed good to excellent reliability. Smoking-approach associations were significantly related to nicotine dependence; however, none of the cognitive bias measures correlated with response inhibition or smoking-related variables.LIMITATIONS: Pictorial stimuli were the same across paradigms and might not have been relevant to all participants.CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to investigate the association between different cognitive biases, response inhibition, and smoking-related variables. Although findings are at odds with theoretical assumptions, their interpretation is clearly restricted by the low reliability of the cognitive bias measures.

KW - Humans

KW - Reproducibility of Results

KW - Smoking

KW - Attention

KW - Cognition/physiology

KW - Bias

U2 - 10.1016/j.jbtep.2023.101853

DO - 10.1016/j.jbtep.2023.101853

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 36947971

VL - 81

SP - 101853

JO - J BEHAV THER EXP PSY

JF - J BEHAV THER EXP PSY

SN - 0005-7916

ER -