Shiffman S, Paty J A, Gnys M, Kassel J A, Hickcox M
University of Pittsburgh, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania 15260, USA.
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1996 Apr;64(2):366-79. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.64.2.366.
Studies of smoking relapse and temptation episodes have relied on retrospective recall and confounded between- and within-subject variability. Real-time data on temptations and lapses to smoke were gathered using palm-top computers. We made within-subject comparisons of the initial lapse, a temptation episode, and base rate data obtained through randomly scheduled assessments. Negative affect discriminated all three situations, with lapses worse than temptations, and temptations worse than random situations. Participants attributed lapses to negative mood and smoking cues, whereas temptations were more often attributed to behavioral transitions. Participants were 12 times more likely to report coping in temptations than in lapses. However, only cognitive (vs. behavioral) coping strategies were effective. Lapses (vs. the other situations) were more likely to occur when smoking was permitted, when cigarettes were easily available, and in the presence of other smokers. The results have clinical implications, and the computerized monitoring methods may be applicable to an array of clinical research problems.
对吸烟复发和诱惑发作的研究一直依赖于回顾性回忆,并且混淆了个体间和个体内的变异性。使用掌上电脑收集了关于吸烟诱惑和失误的实时数据。我们对首次失误、一次诱惑发作以及通过随机安排的评估获得的基础比率数据进行了个体内比较。消极情绪在这三种情况中都有显著差异,失误比诱惑更严重,而诱惑比随机情况更严重。参与者将失误归因于消极情绪和吸烟线索,而诱惑更多地归因于行为转变。参与者在诱惑情境中报告采用应对策略的可能性是失误情境中的12倍。然而,只有认知(而非行为)应对策略是有效的。当允许吸烟、香烟容易获取以及有其他吸烟者在场时,失误(与其他情况相比)更有可能发生。这些结果具有临床意义,并且计算机化监测方法可能适用于一系列临床研究问题。