Department of Psychology, Eberly College of Arts and Sciences, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26508, USA.
Department of Prevention and Community Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052, USA.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2023 Feb 9;25(3):563-570. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntac260.
Extant electronic cigarette (ECIG) dependence measures are largely adapted from those designed for cigarette smoking, though few have been evaluated for their psychometric properties.
Never-smoking ECIG users (N = 134) participating in an online survey completed four dependence measures: Penn state electronic cigarette dependence index (PSECDI), e-cigarette dependence scale (EDS-4), diagnostic and statistical manual for tobacco use disorder (DSM-5), and Glover Nilsson behavioral questionnaire (GNBQ). They also reported on their ECIG use characteristics (eg, behaviors and reasons).
Internal consistency was highest for the EDS-4 (Cronbach's α = 0.88) followed by the GNBQ (α = 0.75), PSECDI (α = 0.72), and DSM (α = 0.71). Confirmatory factor analyses revealed a single-factor structure for the PSECDI, EDS-4, and GNBQ. For the DSM-5, however, two items did not load significantly (ECIG use interferes with responsibilities; reduce/give up activities because of ECIG use). Significant correlations were observed between all measures and the number of ECIG use days/week and/or years using ECIGs, as well as between DSM-5 scores and the number of ECIG quit attempts and initiation age. Endorsement of using ECIGs because "I like flavors" was correlated positively with DSM-5 and GNBQ scores.
All dependence measures evaluated herein demonstrated adequate reliability and construct validity. Future work should focus on determining which aspects of dependence are those that are unique to ECIG use, and subsequently developing a more comprehensive measure of ECIG dependence.
The measures assessed herein-PSECDI, EDS-4, DSM-5, and GNBQ-demonstrated adequate to good reliability and construct validity among a sample of never-smoking ECIG users. The dependence domains covered across measures were related yet distinct. Findings demonstrate the need for future evaluation of these different domains to determine which are the most salient characteristics of ECIG dependence.
现有的电子烟（ECIG）依赖衡量标准在很大程度上是从为吸烟设计的衡量标准改编而来的，尽管很少有研究评估其心理测量特性。
从未吸烟的 ECIG 用户（N=134）参加在线调查，完成了四项依赖衡量标准：宾夕法尼亚州电子烟依赖指数（PSECDI）、电子烟依赖量表（EDS-4）、《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》（DSM-5）和格洛弗·尼尔森行为问卷（GNBQ）。他们还报告了他们的 ECIG 使用特征（例如行为和原因）。
EDS-4 的内部一致性最高（Cronbach's α=0.88），其次是 GNBQ（α=0.75）、PSECDI（α=0.72）和 DSM（α=0.71）。验证性因子分析显示 PSECDI、EDS-4 和 GNBQ 具有单一因素结构。然而，对于 DSM-5，有两个项目没有显著加载（ECIG 使用干扰责任；因为 ECIG 使用而减少/放弃活动）。所有衡量标准与 ECIG 使用天数/周和/或使用 ECIG 年限以及 DSM-5 分数与 ECIG 戒烟尝试次数和起始年龄之间均存在显著相关性。因为“我喜欢口味”而使用 ECIG 的观点与 DSM-5 和 GNBQ 得分呈正相关。
评估的所有依赖衡量标准都表现出足够的可靠性和构念效度。未来的工作应侧重于确定哪些依赖方面是 ECIG 使用所特有的，随后开发更全面的 ECIG 依赖衡量标准。
本文评估的衡量标准-PSECDI、EDS-4、DSM-5 和 GNBQ-在从未吸烟的 ECIG 用户样本中表现出足够到良好的可靠性和构念效度。衡量标准涵盖的依赖领域是相关的，但又是不同的。研究结果表明，需要进一步评估这些不同的领域，以确定哪些是 ECIG 依赖的最突出特征。
