Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Intolerance for smoking abstinence among nicotine-deprived, treatment-seeking smokers.

Addictive Behaviors 2018 September
INTRODUCTION: The Intolerance for Smoking Abstinence Discomfort Questionnaire (IDQ-S) assesses distress tolerance specific to nicotine withdrawal. Though developed to assess withdrawal-related distress, the IDQ-S has not been validated among nicotine-deprived, treatment-seeking smokers. The present study extended previous research by examining the predictive utility of the IDQ-S among abstinent, motivated-to-quit smokers.

METHODS: Abstinent, treatment-seeking smokers completed the IDQ-S Withdrawal Intolerance and Lack of Cognitive Coping scales, assessments of nicotine dependence and reinforcement, and smoking history at baseline. At baseline and at 24-h, 2-week, and 1-month follow-up, participants completed a smoking cue-reactivity task (collection of cue-elicited craving and negative affect), and assessments of cigarettes per day (CPD; daily diaries at follow-up), carbon monoxide (CO), and cotinine.

RESULTS: Greater IDQ-S Withdrawal Intolerance was associated with younger age, higher nicotine dependence and reinforcement, and less smoking years (ps < .03). Greater IDQ-S Lack of Cognitive Coping was associated with less education, lower nicotine dependence and reinforcement, higher baseline CPD, and no prior quit attempts (ps < .04). IDQ-S scales did not significantly predict cue-elicited craving or negative affect, CPD, CO, or cotinine levels at follow-up (ps > .10).

CONCLUSIONS: Withdrawal intolerance and lack of cognitive coping did not predict smoking outcomes among nicotine-deprived, treatment-seeking smokers, but were associated with smoking characteristics, including nicotine dependence and reinforcement. Withdrawal intolerance and lack of cognitive coping may not be especially useful in predicting craving and smoking behavior, but future studies should replicate the present study's findings and assess the stability of the IDQ-S before forming firm conclusions about its predictive utility.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app