Implicit beliefs and automatic associations in smoking

Area of Science:

• Psychology
• Addiction Science
• Cognitive Science

Background:

• Dual process models posit that controlled processes inhibit drug use, while impulsive processes drive it.
• The implicit association test (IAT) has shown inconsistent results in measuring automatic smoking-related processes.
• This study explores the validity of two alternative implicit measures: the affect misattribution procedure (AMP) and the relational responding task (RRT).

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine the validity of the AMP and RRT as measures of automatic evaluations and implicit beliefs related to smoking.
• To compare the performance of smokers and non-smokers on these implicit measures.
• To investigate the influence of smoking deprivation on implicit smoking-related processes.

Main Methods:

• Smokers and non-smokers completed smoking-related versions of the AMP and RRT.
• Smokers underwent testing both after smoking and after 10 hours of deprivation.
• Participants also completed smoking dependence questionnaires and a smoking diary.

Main Results:

• Significant differences were found between smokers and non-smokers on both the RRT and AMP.
• Smoking dependence predicted subsequent smoking behavior, but the AMP and RRT did not explain additional variance.
• Neither the AMP nor the RRT were significantly affected by the smoking deprivation manipulation.

Conclusions:

• Limited evidence supports the validity of the smoking-specific AMP and RRT.
• The findings underscore the need for critical evaluation of implicit measures in addiction research.
• Future research should investigate the sensitivity of implicit measures to motivational contexts.