Behavioral economic demand and delay discounting are differentially associated with cigarette dependence and use in adolescents. (April 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cassidy, Rachel N.; Aston, Elizabeth R.; Tidey, Jennifer W.; Colby, Suzanne M.
• Is Part Of: Addictive behaviors. Volume 103(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-04
• Subjects: Adolescents -- Smoking -- Behavioral economics -- Delay discounting -- Demand; Substance abuse -- Periodicals; Alcoholism -- Periodicals; Drug addiction -- Periodicals; Nicotine addiction -- Periodicals; Smoking -- Periodicals; Gambling -- Psychological aspects -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 362.29
• DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.106225
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0306-4603

Abstract

Highlights: The Reinforcer Pathology model has not yet been applied to adolescent smoking. Higher demand, but not discounting, was associated with greater cigarettes smoked. Both demand and discounting were significantly associated with greater dependence. This model holds promise for studying cigarette smoking in youth. Abstract: Introduction: The Reinforcer Pathology Model describes how two behavioral economic processes, increased sensitivity to immediate rewards (delay discounting) and excessive reward derived from a substance (demand), both contribute to problematic patterns of substance use. In a novel application of this model, the current cross-sectional study examined how these distinct processes relate to different facets of cigarette use in adolescents. Methods: Adolescent daily cigarette smokers ages 15 to 19 (Mean age 17.7, N = 50) completed a laboratory assessment of demand using a Cigarette Purchase Task for their usual brand cigarettes and an adjusting-amount delay discounting task. Demand was conceptualized as two factors (Amplitude and Persistence) and delay discounting was calculated as Area Under the Curve (log AUC). The two factors of demand and discounting AUC were included as statistical predictors of level of cigarette dependence and average number of cigarettes smoked per day in linear regression models. Results: Amplitude of demand was marginally significant predictor ( p = .06) of cigarettes smoked per day whereas neither Persistence of demand nor delay discounting significantly predicted this outcome. Both Amplitude of demand and delay discounting, but not Persistence, were associated with level of cigarette dependence. The effects of amplitude of demand and delay discounting on cigarette dependence or use did not significantly interact. Conclusions: Results of this study suggest that amplitude of cigarette demand may be a risk factor for both cigarette consumption and dependence, while discounting – a known risk factor for cigarette initiation – may relate specifically to level of dependence.