Contingency Factors in Negative Practice of Smoking

Abstract

100 cigarette smokers were randomly assigned to 1 of 5 treatment groups balancing the level of smokers within groups. To uncover the importance of chaining in overresponding or satiation treatments of cigarette smoking, 2 of these groups were required to double or triple their baserate in 2 or 3 cigarette chains while a third group simply doubled their daily consumption. For comparison, a fourth group received covert sensitization treatment of their smoking while a fifth group acted as an attention-monitoring control. Following 1 wk. of cigarette-by-cigarette baserate each group received 1 wk. of treatment and 3 wk. of follow-up meetings. Contacts with all subjects were also made 3 and 6 mo. after treatment. All groups significantly decreased smoking following treatment, but the 3-mo. follow-up showed no significant difference from baserate. Group differences were not statistically significant, although the attention-monitoring group was least effective at all posttreatment measurement points. Although subject reports indicate chaining increased the aversiveness of the negative practice regime, it showed no effect on treatment efficiency.