Heckman Bryan W, Carpenter Matthew J, Correa John B, Wray Jennifer M, Saladin Michael E, Froeliger Brett, Drobes David J, Brandon Thomas H
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, SC, USA.
Addiction. 2015 May;110(5):751-60. doi: 10.1111/add.12866.
To quantify the effect of negative affect (NA), when manipulated experimentally, upon smoking as measured within laboratory paradigms. Quantitative meta-analyses tested the effects of NA versus neutral conditions on (1) latency to smoke and (2) number of puffs taken.
Twelve experimental studies tested the influence of NA induction, relative to a neutral control condition (n = 1190; range = 24-235). Those providing relevant data contributed to separate random-effects meta-analyses to examine the effects of NA on two primary smoking measures: (1) latency to smoke (nine studies) and (2) number of puffs taken during ad libitum smoking (11 studies). Hedge's g was calculated for all studies through the use of post-NA cue responses relative to post-neutral cue responses. This effect size estimate is similar to Cohen's d, but corrects for small sample size bias.
NA reliably decreased latency to smoke (g = -0.14; CI = -0.23 to -0.04; P = 0.007) and increased number of puffs taken (g = 0.14; CI = 0.02 to 0.25; P = 0.02). There was considerable variability across studies for both outcomes (I(2) = 51 and 65% for latency and consumption, respectively). Potential publication bias was indicated for both outcomes, and adjusted effect sizes were smaller and no longer statistically significant.
In experimental laboratory studies of smokers, negative affect appears to reduce latency to smoking and increase number of puffs taken, but this could be due to publication bias.
通过实验操控消极情绪(NA),量化其在实验室范式下对吸烟行为的影响。定量荟萃分析测试了消极情绪与中性条件对以下两方面的影响:(1)吸烟潜伏期;(2)吸烟口数。
十二项实验研究测试了NA诱导相对于中性对照条件的影响(n = 1190;范围= 24 - 235)。提供相关数据的研究参与了独立的随机效应荟萃分析,以检验NA对两项主要吸烟指标的影响:(1)吸烟潜伏期(九项研究);(2)自由吸烟时的吸烟口数(十一项研究)。通过使用NA提示反应相对于中性提示反应的结果,计算所有研究的Hedge's g。这种效应量估计类似于Cohen's d,但校正了小样本偏差。
NA可靠地缩短了吸烟潜伏期(g = -0.14;CI = -0.23至-0.04;P = 0.007),并增加了吸烟口数(g = 0.14;CI = 0.02至0.25;P = 0.02)。两项结果在各研究之间均存在相当大的变异性(潜伏期和吸烟量的I(2)分别为51%和65%)。两项结果均显示存在潜在的发表偏倚,调整后的效应量较小且不再具有统计学意义。
在吸烟者的实验室内研究中,消极情绪似乎会缩短吸烟潜伏期并增加吸烟口数,但这可能是由于发表偏倚所致。