Cited by 911Smoking Behavior and CessationDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Measures of impulsivity in cigarette smokers and non-smokers

Mitchell, S. H.·1999·Psychopharmacology

Abstract

Rationale Drug users are thought to be more "impulsive" than non-users.Objectives This study examined whether regular smokers are more impulsive than never smokers using personality and behavioral measures of impulsivity.Methods Twenty regular smokers (>/=15 cigarettes/day) and 20 never smokers were recruited. Participants completed five personality questionnaires to assess impulsivity: Adjective Checklist, Barratt's Impulsivity Scale, the Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire, Eysenck's Personality Questionnaire, and the Sensation-Seeking Scale. Participants also performed three behavioral choice tasks designed to assess impulsivity. In the delay task, participants chose between small, immediate and large, delayed monetary rewards. Impulsivity was defined as a relative preference for the small, immediate alternative. In the probability task, participants chose between small, certain and large, uncertain monetary rewards. Impulsivity was defined as a relative preference for the large but more risky alternative. In the work task, participants chose between small monetary rewards obtained by performing a negligible amount of work and a larger amount of money requiring more work. Impulsivity was defined as a relative preference for the smaller, easier alternative.Results On the personality questionnaires, smokers had statistically higher impulsivity scores on most scales. On the behavioral choice tasks, smokers chose small, immediate money over large, delayed money more frequently, signifying greater levels of impulsivity. There were no differences between the groups' choices on the other tasks. Correlations between questionnaire and task data were small, as were correlations between data from each task.Conclusions Together, these results indicate that the smokers were more impulsive than never smokers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/pl00005491

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mitchell, S. H.
Affiliations
University of New Hampshire (US)
Corresponding author
Mitchell, S. H.
Venue
Psychopharmacology
Published
1999-10-21
Volume
146
Issue
4
Pages
455-464
ISSN
0033-3158 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2005412227
Cited by
911
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 64 · 2012: 71
FWCI
6.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (1r15hl058225-01)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI 058225)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
impulsivity, cigarette smokers, never smokers, personality traits, delay discounting, risk-taking, work effort, sensation seeking, Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, Adjective Checklist
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Male, Personality Tests, Smoking, Substance-Related Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review