Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Jun;16(3):207-14.
doi: 10.1037/1064-1297.16.3.207.

Proximal versus distal cues to smoke: the effects of environments on smokers' cue-reactivity

Cynthia A Conklin  1 , Nathalie Robin, Kenneth A Perkins, Ronald P Salkeld, F Joseph McClernon
Affiliations

Proximal versus distal cues to smoke: the effects of environments on smokers' cue-reactivity

Cynthia A Conklin et al. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008 Jun.

Abstract

Smokers are highly reactive to smoking-related cues that are directly linked, or most proximal, to actual smoking behavior (e.g., lit cigarettes). However, over the course of smoking, proximal cues may not be the only stimuli to become strongly associated with smoking. Distal cues, such as the environments in which smoking occurs (e.g., bar) might also gain associative properties and come to evoke robust reactivity from smokers. To test this, a pilot study was first conducted to develop standard pictorial stimuli of smoking and nonsmoking environments, all of which were completely devoid of proximal smoking cues. A comparison set of smoking and nonsmoking proximal cues was then created. Using the 12 total pictorial cues developed, 62 adult smokers participated in a cue-reactivity study during which they viewed and rated pictorial smoking and nonsmoking environment and proximal cues. Results demonstrate that, similar to proximal cues, environments associated with smoking can alone function as stimuli capable of evoking strong subjective reactivity from smokers. This work supports a broader conceptualization of drug-related cues in cue-based research and treatment development that includes proximal and distal cues as distinct categories. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved).

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Craving as a function of stimulus cue (smoking, non-smoking) and type (proximal, distal) depicting significant main effects of cue and type.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Brandon TH, Herzog TA, Irvin JE, Gwaltney CJ. Cognitive and social learning models of drug dependence: Implications for the assessment of tobacco dependence in adolescents. Addiction. 2004;99:51–77. - PubMed
    1. Brandon TH, Juliano LM, Copeland AL. Expectancies for tobacco smoking. In: Kirsh I, editor. How expectancies shape experience. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1999. pp. 263–299.
    1. Brandon TH, Piasecki TM, Quinn EP, Baker TB. Cue exposure treatment in nicotine dependence. In: Drummond DC, Tiffany ST, Glautier S, Remington B, editors. Addictive behaviour: Cue exposure theory and practice. New York: Wiley; 1995. pp. 211–227.
    1. Burton SM, Tiffany ST. The effect of alcohol consumption on imaginal and in vivo manipulations of smoking urges. Addiction. 1997;92:15–26. - PubMed
    1. Carter BL, Tiffany ST. Meta analysis of cue reactivity in addiction research. Addiction. 1999;92:15–26. - PubMed

Publication types