Cited by 34Cognitive Functions and MemorySmoking Behavior and CessationMemory Processes and Influences

Smoking and everyday prospective memory: a comparison of self-report and objective methodologies

Heffernan, Thomas, O’Neill, Terence, Moss, Mark·2010·Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Abstract

Aims To examine whether persistent smoking leads to impairments in self-reported and objective measures of prospective memory (PM: the cognitive ability to remember to carry out activities at some future point in time).Methods An opportunity sample of 18 existing smokers and 22 who had never smoked were compared. An existing-groups design was utilised, comparing a smoking group with a never-smoked control group as the independent factor. Scores on the sub-scales of the Prospective and Retrospective Memory Questionnaire (PRMQ) and scores on the Cambridge Prospective Memory Test (CAMPROMPT) constituted the dependent factors. Age, mood, other drug use, strategy scores and IQ were also measured. Each participant was tested in a laboratory setting. Self-reported PM lapses were measured using the PRMQ. The CAMPROMPT was used as an objective measure of PM. Alcohol and other drug use were assessed by a Recreational Drug Use Questionnaire. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale gauged levels of anxiety and depression. A strategy scale measured the number of strategies used to aid memory. The National Adult Reading Test measured IQ.Results After observing no between-group differences on age, mood, alcohol use, strategy use, and IQ, smokers and the never-smoked did not differ on the self-reported lapses measured on the PRMQ. However, smokers recalled significantly fewer items on the CAMPROMPT than the never-smoked group.Conclusion The results of the present study suggest that persistent smoking leads to impairments in everyday PM.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2010.06.012

Cites

31 of 31 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
Heffernan, T., O’Neill, T., & Moss, M.
Affiliations
Northumbria University (GB)
Corresponding author
Heffernan, Thomas
Venue
Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-12
Volume
112
Issue
3
Pages
234-238
ISSN
0376-8716 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2007634260
Cited by
34
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Drug and Alcohol Dependence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
smoking, prospective memory, everyday memory, memory impairment, never smokers, anxiety and depression, memory strategies
MeSH terms
Adult, Affect, Anxiety, Depression, Female, Humans, Intelligence Tests, Male, Memory, Memory Disorders, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Surveys and Questionnaires, Smoking, Young Adult, Self Report

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