INTRODUCTION: Craving is useful in the diagnosis of drug dependence, but it is unclear how various items used to assess craving might influence the diagnostic performance of craving measures. This study determined the diagnostic performance of individual items and item subgroups of the 32-item Questionnaire on Smoking Urges (QSU) as a function of item wording, level of craving intensity, and item stability. METHODS: Nondaily and daily smokers (n = 222) completed the QSU on 6 separate occasions, and item responses were averaged across the administrations. Nicotine dependence was assessed with the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives. The discriminative performance of the QSU items was evaluated with receiver-operating characteristic curves and area under the curve statistics. RESULTS: Although each of the QSU items and selected subgroups of items significantly discriminated dependent from nondependent smokers, certain item subgroups outperformed others. There was no difference in discriminative performance between use of the specific terms urge and crave or between items assessing intention to smoke relative to those assessing desire to smoke, but there were significant differences in the two major factors represented on the QSU and in craving items reflecting more intense relative to less intense craving. Stability of the item scores was strongly related to the discriminative performance of craving. CONCLUSIONS: Items indexing stable, high-intensity aspects of craving that reflect the negative reinforcing effects of smoking will likely be most useful for diagnostic purposes. Future directions and implications are discussed.
INTRODUCTION: Craving is useful in the diagnosis of drug dependence, but it is unclear how various items used to assess craving might influence the diagnostic performance of craving measures. This study determined the diagnostic performance of individual items and item subgroups of the 32-item Questionnaire on Smoking Urges (QSU) as a function of item wording, level of craving intensity, and item stability. METHODS: Nondaily and daily smokers (n = 222) completed the QSU on 6 separate occasions, and item responses were averaged across the administrations. Nicotine dependence was assessed with the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives. The discriminative performance of the QSU items was evaluated with receiver-operating characteristic curves and area under the curve statistics. RESULTS: Although each of the QSU items and selected subgroups of items significantly discriminated dependent from nondependent smokers, certain item subgroups outperformed others. There was no difference in discriminative performance between use of the specific terms urge and crave or between items assessing intention to smoke relative to those assessing desire to smoke, but there were significant differences in the two major factors represented on the QSU and in craving items reflecting more intense relative to less intense craving. Stability of the item scores was strongly related to the discriminative performance of craving. CONCLUSIONS: Items indexing stable, high-intensity aspects of craving that reflect the negative reinforcing effects of smoking will likely be most useful for diagnostic purposes. Future directions and implications are discussed.
Authors: Timothy B Baker; Megan E Piper; Danielle E McCarthy; Matthew R Majeskie; Michael C Fiore Journal: Psychol Rev Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 8.934
Authors: Chris R E Coggins; E Lenn Murrelle; Richard A Carchman; Christian Heidbreder Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2009-10-03 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Megan E Piper; Danielle E McCarthy; Daniel M Bolt; Stevens S Smith; Caryn Lerman; Neal Benowitz; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Megan E Piper; Daniel M Bolt; Su-Young Kim; Sandra J Japuntich; Stevens S Smith; Jeff Niederdeppe; Dale S Cannon; Timothy B Baker Journal: J Abnorm Psychol Date: 2008-11