scholarly journals Does Tobacco Abstinence Decrease Reward Sensitivity? A Human Laboratory Test

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R Hughes ◽  
Alan J Budney ◽  
Sharon R Muellers ◽  
Dustin C Lee ◽  
Peter W. Callas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Studies ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
Reward Sensitivity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
List Type ◽  
Behavioral Measures ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
Operant Task ◽  
Rigorous Test ◽  
Human Laboratory

AbstractIntroductionAnimal studies report abstinence from nicotine makes rewards less rewarding; however, the results of human tests of the effects of cessation on reward sensitivity are mixed. The current study tested reward sensitivity in abstinent smokers using more rigorous methods than most prior studies.MethodsA human laboratory study compared outcomes for 1 week prior to quitting to those during 4 weeks post-quit. The study used smokers trying to quit, objective and subjective measures, multiple measures during smoking and abstinence, and monetary rewards to increase the prevalence of abstinence. Current daily smokers (n = 211) who were trying to quit completed an operant measure of reward sensitivity and a survey of pleasure from various rewards as well as self-reports of anhedonia, delay discounting, positive affect and tobacco withdrawal twice each week. A comparison group of long-term former smokers (n = 67) also completed the tasks weekly for 4 weeks. Primary analyses were based on the 61 current smokers who abstained for all 4 weeks.ResultsStopping smoking decreased self-reported pleasure from rewards but did not decrease reward sensitivity on the operant task. Abstinence also decreased self-reported reward frequency and increased the two anhedonia measures. However, the changes with abstinence were small for all outcomes (6-14%) and most lasted less than a week.ConclusionAbstinence from tobacco decreased most self-report measures of reward sensitivity; however, it did not change the objective measure. The self-report effects were small.ImplicationsAnimal research suggests that nicotine withdrawal decreases reward sensitivity. Replication tests of this in humans have produced inconsistent results.We report what we believe is a more rigorous testWe found smoking abstinence slightly decreases self-reports of reward sensitivity but does not do so for behavioral measures of reward sensitivity

Motivations for Emotions in Bipolar Disorder

2021 ◽  
pp. 216770262097958
Author(s):  
Yael Millgram ◽  
June Gruber ◽  
Cynthia M. Villanueva ◽  
Anna Rapoport ◽  
Maya Tamir
Keyword(s):  
Bipolar Disorder ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Affective Disorders ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Emotional Instability ◽  
Behavioral Measures ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
Similarities And Differences

Recent work has begun to examine the link between motivation for specific emotions and psychopathology. Yet research on this topic to date has focused primarily on depression. To understand patterns of motivation for emotions within and across affective disorders, we assessed motivation for emotions in adults at increased risk for and diagnosed with bipolar disorder (BD). We focused on motivation for negative (i.e., sadness) and positive (i.e., happiness) emotions and for emotional instability using self-report and behavioral measures. Both increased BD risk and diagnosis of BD were associated with increased motivation for sadness and decreased motivation for happiness as assessed by behavioral measures. Such motivational tendencies were less consistent when assessed by self-reports. Higher BD risk was associated with increased self-reported motivation for emotional instability (Studies 1–3), although this association was not evident in BD (Study 4). Findings suggest both similarities and differences in motivation for emotions in affective disorders.

scholarly journals Validity of the Comprehensive Assessment of Prospective Memory (CAPM) for Use With Adults With Traumatic Brain Injury

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Fleming ◽  
Sahra Kennedy ◽  
Rebecca Fisher ◽  
Hannah Gill ◽  
Matthew Gullo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Prospective Memory ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Memory Function ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Comprehensive Assessment ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Self Reports

AbstractObjective: To expand upon the existing psychometric properties of the Comprehensive Assessment of Prospective Memory (CAPM) for use with adults with traumatic brain injury by examining concurrent and criterion validity. Method: Participants were 45 adults with a traumatic brain injury. Participants and their relatives completed Section A of the CAPM and a measure of psychosocial integration. Participants were also administered two neuropsychological tests of prospective memory, the Cambridge Prospective Memory Test (CAM-PROMPT) and the Memory Intentions Screening Test (MIST). Concurrent validity was measured by comparing scores on the CAPM with scores on the CAM-PROMPT and MIST. Criterion validity was examined by correlating CAPM scores with level of psychosocial integration. Results: Participant self-reports on the CAPM were not significantly correlated with the CAM-PROMPT or MIST, but were significantly correlated with level of psychosocial integration. Relative reports on the CAPM were correlated significantly with total score on the MIST and CAM-PROMPT and level of psychological integration. Conclusions: The findings indicate that the concurrent validity of the self-report version of CAPM is low suggesting that self-reports alone do not provide an objective measure for assessing prospective memory function. The relative report version however, demonstrated reasonable concurrent and criterion validity, suggesting that the relative report version of the Section A of the CAPM is a useful means of evaluating frequency of prospective memory failure in adults with traumatic brain injury.

Indirect Assessment of Attitudes with Response-Time-Based Measures

2006 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 131-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliane Degner ◽  
Dirk Wentura ◽  
Klaus Rothermund
Keyword(s):  
Social Cognitive ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Implicit Measures ◽  
Scale Theory ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
Predicting Behavior ◽  
Social Cognitive Theories

Abstract: We review research on response-latency based (“implicit”) measures of attitudes by examining what hopes and intentions researchers have associated with their usage. We identified the hopes of (1) gaining better measures of interindividual differences in attitudes as compared to self-report measures (quality hope); (2) better predicting behavior, or predicting other behaviors, as compared to self-reports (incremental validity hope); (3) linking social-cognitive theories more adequately to empirical research (theory-link hope). We argue that the third hope should be the starting point for using these measures. Any attempt to improve these measures should include the search for a small-scale theory that adequately explains the basic effects found with such a measure. To date, small-scale theories for different measures are not equally well developed.

An Alternative to Self-Reports of Trait and State Affect

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 231-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Quirin ◽  
Regina C. Bode
Keyword(s):  
Self Report ◽  
Factorial Validity ◽  
Artificial Language ◽  
Cognitive Representation ◽  
Affective States ◽  
Novel Variants ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
State Affect ◽  
Affective Experiences ◽  
Automatic Activation

Self-report measures for the assessment of trait or state affect are typically biased by social desirability or self-delusion. The present work provides an overview of research using a recently developed measure of automatic activation of cognitive representation of affective experiences, the Implicit Positive and Negative Affect Test (IPANAT). In the IPANAT, participants judge the extent to which nonsense words from an alleged artificial language express a number of affective states or traits. The test demonstrates appropriate factorial validity and reliabilities. We review findings that support criterion validity and, additionally, present novel variants of this procedure for the assessment of the discrete emotions such as happiness, anger, sadness, and fear.

What Women Say They Want versus What Men Imagine They Do: A new and convenient method reveals novel insights about self-reported vs. perceived preferences

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Pierre Jago ◽  
Karen R. Dobkins
Keyword(s):  
Convenient Method ◽  
Physical Attractiveness ◽  
Romantic Partner ◽  
Self Report ◽  
New Method ◽  
Wealth Status ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Potential Partner ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
Opposite Gender

To appeal to the opposite gender, previous research indicates that men emphasize their wealth, status, and ambition, whereas women emphasize their physical attractiveness. Such behavior seems surprising given previous surveys in which men and women reported these traits to be less important than others such as trustworthiness, intelligence, and warmth. We addressed one potential reason for any disconnect, which is that men’s and women’s beliefs about what the opposite gender prefers are misguided—according to the opposite genders’ self-reports. Using a new method, we asked participants to both self-report the traits they prefer in a romantic partner and to indicate what they imagine the opposite gender prefers. The results reveal striking discrepancies between what people report wanting in a potential partner and what the opposite gender imagines they want. Additionally, women appear to be better at imagining men’s preferences, and we discuss several reasons why this might be the case.

scholarly journals Reporting on one's behavior: a survey experiment on the nonvalidity of self-reported COVID-19 hygiene-relevant routine behaviors

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Pelle Guldborg Hansen ◽  
Erik Gahner Larsen ◽  
Caroline Drøgemüller Gundersen
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Error ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Test Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Systematic Bias ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Policy Responses ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Self Reports

Abstract Surveys based on self-reported hygiene-relevant routine behaviors have played a crucial role in policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. In this article, using anchoring to test validity in a randomized controlled survey experiment during the COVID-19 pandemic, we demonstrate that asking people to self-report on the frequency of routine behaviors are prone to significant measurement error and systematic bias. Specifically, we find that participants across age, gender, and political allegiance report higher (lower) frequencies of COVID-19-relevant behaviors when provided with a higher (lower) anchor. The results confirm that such self-reports should not be regarded as behavioral data and should primarily be used to inform policy decisions if better alternatives are not available. To this end, we discuss the use of anchoring as a validity test relative to self-reported behaviors as well as viable alternatives to self-reports when seeking to behaviorally inform policy decisions.

scholarly journals Comparison of In-Situ and Retrospective Self-Reports on Assessing Hearing Aid Outcomes

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Hsiang Wu ◽  
Elizabeth Stangl ◽  
Octav Chipara ◽  
Anna Gudjonsdottir ◽  
Jacob Oleson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
Outcome Difference ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Ecological Momentary

Abstract Background Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a methodology involving repeated surveys to collect in-situ self-reports that describe respondents' current or recent experiences. Audiology literature comparing in-situ and retrospective self-reports is scarce. Purpose To compare the sensitivity of in-situ and retrospective self-reports in detecting the outcome difference between hearing aid technologies, and to determine the association between in-situ and retrospective self-reports. Research Design An observational study. Study Sample Thirty-nine older adults with hearing loss. Data Collection and Analysis The study was part of a larger clinical trial that compared the outcomes of a prototype hearing aid (denoted as HA1) and a commercially available device (HA2). In each trial condition, participants wore hearing aids for 4 weeks. Outcomes were measured using EMA and retrospective questionnaires. To ensure that the outcome data could be directly compared, the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile was administered as an in-situ self-report (denoted as EMA-GHABP) and as a retrospective questionnaire (retro-GHABP). Linear mixed models were used to determine if the EMA- and retro-GHABP could detect the outcome difference between HA1 and HA2. Correlation analyses were used to examine the association between EMA- and retro-GHABP. Results For the EMA-GHABP, HA2 had significantly higher (better) scores than HA1 in the GHABP subscales of benefit, residual disability, and satisfaction (p = 0.029–0.0015). In contrast, the difference in the retro-GHABP score between HA1 and HA2 was significant only in the satisfaction subscale (p = 0.0004). The correlations between the EMA- and retro-GHABP were significant in all subscales (p = 0.0004 to <0.0001). The strength of the association ranged from weak to moderate (r = 0.28–0.58). Finally, the exit interview indicated that 29 participants (74.4%) preferred HA2 over HA1. Conclusion The study suggests that in-situ self-reports collected using EMA could have a higher sensitivity than retrospective questionnaires. Therefore, EMA is worth considering in clinical trials that aim to compare the outcomes of different hearing aid technologies. The weak to moderate association between in-situ and retrospective self-reports suggests that these two types of measures assess different aspects of hearing aid outcomes.

scholarly journals A Systematic Review of Self-Report Instruments for the Measurement of Anxiety in Hospitalized Children with Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 1911
Author(s):  
Gomolemo Mahakwe ◽  
Ensa Johnson ◽  
Katarina Karlsson ◽  
Stefan Nilsson
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Setting ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Hospitalized Children ◽  
Abstract Concepts ◽  
Children With Cancer ◽  
Language Difficulties ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
Psychometric Quality ◽  
Communication Challenge

Anxiety has been identified as one of the most severe and long-lasting symptoms experienced by hospitalized children with cancer. Self-reports are especially important for documenting emotional and abstract concepts, such as anxiety. Children may not always be able to communicate their symptoms due to language difficulties, a lack of developmental language skills, or the severity of their illness. Instruments with sufficient psychometric quality and pictorial support may address this communication challenge. The purpose of this review was to systematically search the published literature and identify validated and reliable self-report instruments available for children aged 5–18 years to use in the assessment of their anxiety to ensure they receive appropriate anxiety-relief intervention in hospital. What validated self-report instruments can children with cancer use to self-report anxiety in the hospital setting? Which of these instruments offer pictorial support? Eight instruments were identified, but most of the instruments lacked pictorial support. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Pediatric Quality of Life (PedsQL™) 3.0 Brain Tumor Module and Cancer Module proved to be useful in hospitalized children with cancer, as they provide pictorial support. It is recommended that faces or symbols be used along with the VAS, as pictures are easily understood by younger children. Future studies could include the adaptation of existing instruments in digital e-health tools.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document