Changes in smoking expectancies in abstinent, reducing, and non-abstinent participants during a pharmacological trial for smoking cessation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Smoking expectancies are related to smoking consumption and predict smoking cessation. Little is known about whether expectancies change during smoking treatments, consistent with changes in smoking behavior. This study examined reported changes in smoking beliefs during an 8-week smoking cessation trial, which evaluated the safety and efficacy of the monoamine oxidase B inhibitor selegiline hydrochloride versus placebo. METHODS: Participants were classified as "Quit" (n = 18), "Reduced" (n = 34), or "Not Quit" (n = 49) by 7-day point prevalence abstinence at the end of treatment. Expectancies were assessed at randomization, 1 week after the target quit date, and at the end of treatment. RESULTS: Beliefs about smoking assessed prior to the quit attempt were not associated with cessation outcomes. Participants who quit smoking reported a reduction in expectations that smoking would reduce negative affect, boredom, and cravings, and facilitate social interactions, while participants who did not quit smoking reported an increase in Negative Social Impression beliefs. There were gender differences in beliefs related to Negative Affect Reduction, Negative Physical Feelings, Social Facilitation, and Cravings and significant Gender X Smoking Status interactions for Health Risk and Weight Control beliefs. There were no significant effects of medication on expectancies. DISCUSSION: Baseline expectancies were not associated with abstinence outcomes; however, expectancies changed over time with changes in smoking, and the greatest changes were seen with smoking abstinence. Information about the relationship between smoking beliefs and behaviors may be used to enhance or tailor smoking cessation treatments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".