Dataset Information

Behavioral Economic Demand for Alcohol and Cigarettes in Heavy Drinking Smokers: Evidence of Asymmetric Cross-commodity Reinforcing Value.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Previous studies have highlighted a strong bidirectional relationship between cigarette and alcohol consumption. To advance our understanding of this relationship the present study uses a behavioral economic approach in a community sample (N = 383) of nontreatment seeking heavy drinking smokers.

Aims and methods

The aims were to examine same-substance and cross-substance relationships between alcohol and cigarette use, and latent factors of demand. A community sample of nontreatment seeking heavy drinking smokers completed an in-person assessment battery including measures of alcohol and tobacco use as well as the Cigarette Purchase Task and the Alcohol Purchase Task. Latent factors of demand were derived from these hypothetical purchase tasks.

Results

Results revealed a positive correlation between paired alcohol and cigarette demand indices (eg, correlation between alcohol intensity and cigarette intensity) (rs = 0.18-0.46, p ≤ .003). Over and above alcohol factors, cigarette use variables (eg, Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence and cigarettes per smoking day) significantly predicted an additional 4.5% (p < .01) of the variance in Persistence values but not Amplitude values for alcohol. Over and above cigarette factors, alcohol use variables predicted cigarette Persistence values (ΔR2 = .013, p = .05), however, did not predict Amplitude values.

Conclusions

These results advance our understanding of the overlap between cigarette and alcohol by demonstrating that involvement with one substance was associated with demand for the other substance. This asymmetric profile-from smoking to alcohol demand, but not vice versa-suggests that it is not simply tapping into a generally higher reward sensitivity and warrants further investigation.

Implications

To our knowledge, no study to date has examined alcohol and cigarette demand, via hypothetical purchase tasks, in a clinical sample of heavy drinking smokers. This study demonstrates that behavioral economic indices may be sensitive to cross-substance relationships and specifically that such relationships are asymmetrically stronger for smoking variables affecting alcohol demand, not the other way around.

SUBMITTER: Green R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7976931 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction:The majority of cigarettes sold in the United States and abroad feature filter ventilation holes designed to dilute mainstream smoke. Although initially intended to produce a safer cigarette, data instead suggest that filter ventilation increases total harm from smoking. In the present study, we examined the effects of blocking ventilation holes on behavioral economic demand for cigarettes (i.e., consumption as a function of price). Methods:In a within-subjects design, regular smokers (N = 15) of ventilated cigarettes sampled vent-blocked cigarettes for 3 days. Subsequently, they completed three sessions in which they used an experimental income to purchase vent-blocked and/or control cigarettes across a range of prices. Participants also completed the Drug Effects/Liking Scale. Results:In sessions in which only one cigarette type was available, demand measures were undifferentiated between cigarette types. However, in sessions in which both cigarettes were available at equivalent prices, significantly greater preference for ventilated control cigarettes emerged in demand measures. Regardless of session type, participants also rated vent-blocked cigarettes more poorly in the Drug Effects/Liking Scale (more bad effects, fewer good effects, and less liking, desire, and less likely to use again). Conclusions:Removing filter ventilation reduced cigarette abuse liability, as measured by behavioral economic demand and the Drug Effects/Liking Scale. However, reduced demand was only apparent when both cigarette types were concurrently available. This selective effect suggests that regulatory action banning filter ventilation would only reduce cigarette consumption when effective substitutes for vent-blocked cigarettes are available. Implications:This preliminary study indicates that regulatory action designed to ban or restrict cigarette filter ventilation may decrease cigarette abuse liability as measured by both behavioral economic demand and self-report measures. However, effects of removing filter ventilation on demand measures appear to depend on concurrent availability of alternative, preferred cigarette types.

Project description:Introduction:Behavioral economic theory views addiction as a reinforcer pathology characterized by excessive demand for drugs relative to alternatives. Complementary to this theory, Lamb and Ginsburg (Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 164, 2018, 62) describe addiction as a behavioral allocation disorder and predict that decisions to drink under increasingly stringent constraints are a central indicator of addiction. This study used a modified demand-curve paradigm to examine alcohol demand in the context of a next-day contingency (high opportunity cost demand) as a specific indicator of a severe pattern of alcohol problems.Methods:Participants were 370 undergraduates (61.1% female, 86.5% white, Mage = 18.8) reporting multiple past-month heavy drinking episodes (5/4 drinks per occasion for men/women) who completed 2 versions of an alcohol purchase task (APT), along with measures of past-month alcohol use and problems. In 1 APT (low opportunity cost), students imagined they had no next-day responsibilities, and in the other APT (high opportunity cost), they imagined having a 10:00 am test the next day. Item-response theory analyses were used to determine mild and severe alcohol problems from the Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 67, 2006, 169), and the most and least severe binge drinking days throughout the week.Results:Low opportunity cost demand (? = 0.15, p = 0.02) significantly predicted beyond high opportunity cost demand for the least severe problems, and high opportunity cost demand (? = 0.17, p = 0.009) significantly predicted beyond low opportunity cost demand for the most severe problems. Similarly, low opportunity cost demand (? = 0.26, p < 0.001) was more highly associated with weekend drinking, whereas high opportunity cost demand (? = 0.21, p = 0.001) was more highly associated with weekday drinking.Conclusions:The current results suggest high opportunity cost alcohol demand is a distinct marker of severe alcohol problems among college student heavy drinkers.