Sustained reduction of attentional bias to smoking cues by smartphone-delivered attentional bias modification training for smokers.

OBJECTIVE: Cigarette smoking is thought to be at least partially maintained by the attentional bias (AB) toward smoking cues that develops as a consequence of drug dependence. This study evaluated the impact of smartphone-delivered, in-home attentional bias modification (ABM) to reduce AB to smoking cues and to reduce smoking behavior and withdrawal-related symptoms when used as an adjunct to conventional smoking cessation treatment. METHOD: Participants (N = 246) were treatment-seeking smokers who completed up to 13 days of either ABM designed to train attention away from smoking cues, using a modified dot-probe task, or sham training, followed by 8 weeks of nicotine replacement therapy and counseling. Outcomes measured at baseline, 1-day post-ABM training, and 8 weeks post-ABM training included AB to smoking images and words using the dot-probe and smoking Stroop tasks, respectively, along with cigarettes per day, craving, and smoking abstinence. RESULTS: We found that ABM training reduced AB to smoking stimuli on both the dot-probe task, ηp² = 0.056, 90% CI [0.024, 0.097], and the smoking Stroop task, ηp² = 0.017, 90% CI [0.002, 0.044], up to 8 weeks after ABM training when covarying for baseline response, but did not concurrently decrease smoking behavior or craving. CONCLUSIONS: Thirteen days of smartphone-delivered ABM training, as an adjunct to smoking cessation treatment, reduced AB to both modality-specific and cross-modality smoking cues but did not impact smoking-related behavior. While ABM can reduce AB to smoking cues across modalities, it is unclear whether it has therapeutic potential as an adjunct to conventional smoking cessation therapy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Behavioral Economic Assessment of Alcohol and Cigarette Demand in Smokers With Alcohol Use Disorder.

Background and Objectives: Behavioral economic purchase tasks are widely used to assess drug demand in substance use disorder research. Comorbid alcohol use is common among cigarette smokers and associated with greater difficulty in quitting smoking. However, demand for alcohol and cigarettes in this population has not been fully characterized. The present study addressed this gap by examining alcohol and cigarette demand among treatment-seeking smokers with alcohol use disorder (AUD). Methods: Alcohol and cigarette demand was assessed among 99 smokers with AUD. We conducted Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and correlational analyses on the demand indices. Results: Participants showed higher demand for alcohol than for cigarettes, as evidenced lower elasticity (resistance to increasing price) and higher Omax (maximum response output for drug). PCA revealed a two-factor structure (Persistence and Amplitude) for both alcohol and cigarette demand indices. Cigarette-related demand indices were positively correlated with nicotine dependence, but alcohol-related demand indices were not associated with alcohol dependence, suggesting dissociation between alcohol demand and use behaviors. Discussion and Conclusions: Our results suggest that smokers with AUD were more resistant to price elevations in relation to reducing alcohol consumption as compared to cigarette consumption, suggesting preferential demand for alcohol over cigarettes. However, it is unclear how acute substance exposure/withdrawal impacts the demand indices. Scientific Significance: Potentially differential alcohol and cigarette demands among smokers with AUD should be considered in the concurrent treatment of smoking and alcohol.

Prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has a domain-specific impact on bilingual language control.

Researchers debate whether domain-general cognitive control supports bilingual language control through brain regions such as the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a method to alter brain activity, which can lead to causal attribution of task performance to regional brain activity. The current study examined whether the DLPFC enables domain-general control for between-language switching and nonlinguistic switching and whether the control enabled by DLPFC differs between bilinguals and monolinguals. tDCS was applied to the DLPFC of bilingual and monolingual young adults before they performed linguistic and nonlinguistic switching measures. For bilinguals, left DLPFC stimulation selectively worsened nonlinguistic switching, but not within-language switching. Left DLPFC stimulation also resulted in higher overall accuracy on bilingual picture-naming. These findings suggest that language control and cognitive control are distinct processes in relation to the left DLPFC. The left DLPFC may aid bilingual language control, but stimulating it does not benefit nonlinguistic control. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).