The role of nicotine content information in smokers' subjective responses to nicotine and placebo inhalers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A growing body of evidence suggests that non-pharmacological factors may play an important role in smoking cessation outcomes using nicotine replacement therapies. This study examined the role of information about nicotine content in smokers' subjective responses to nicotine and placebo inhalers, using the four conditions of the balanced-placebo design in a mixed within/between-subjects design. METHODS: Twenty-four adult smokers (12 male) completed two laboratory sessions following overnight abstinence from smoking. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either nicotine inhalers or placebo inhalers in both sessions but were told that they received a nicotine-containing inhaler in one session and a nicotine-free inhaler in the other. In each session participants completed subjective assessments before and after inhaler administration using visual analogue scales and the Brief Questionnaire of Smoking Urges. RESULTS: While neither nicotine content nor information about it significantly affected cigarette craving associated with withdrawal relief, participants reported a greater reduction in craving associated with intention to smoke when told the inhalers contained nicotine than when told the inhalers were nicotine-free, regardless of actual nicotine content. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that psychological factors play an important role in smokers' subjective responses to nicotine inhalers, the effects of which cannot be solely attributed to the direct pharmacological effects of nicotine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".