Paul T Harrell1, Nicole S Marquinez2, John B Correa2, Lauren R Meltzer3, Marina Unrod3, Steven K Sutton4, Vani N Simmons5, Thomas H Brandon5. 1. Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; paul.harrell@moffitt.org. 2. Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL; 3. Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; 4. Department of Biostatistics, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; 5. Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL; Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL; Department of Oncologic Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Use of e-cigarettes has been increasing exponentially, with the primary motivation reported as smoking cessation. To understand why smokers choose e-cigarettes as an alternative to cigarettes, as well as to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)--approved nicotine replacement therapies (NRT), we compared outcome expectancies (beliefs about the results of drug use) for the three nicotine delivery systems among vapers, i.e., e-cigarette users, who were former smokers. METHODS: Vapers (N = 1,434) completed an online survey assessing 14 expectancy domains as well as perceived cost and convenience. We focused on comparisons between e-cigarettes and cigarettes to determine the attraction of e-cigarettes as a smoking alternative and between e-cigarettes and NRT to determine perceived advantages of e-cigarettes over FDA-approved pharmacotherapy. RESULTS: Participants believed that e-cigarettes, in comparison to conventional cigarettes, had fewer health risks; caused less craving, withdrawal, addiction, and negative physical feelings; tasted better; and were more satisfying. In contrast, conventional cigarettes were perceived as better than e-cigarettes for reducing negative affect, controlling weight, providing stimulation, and reducing stress. E-cigarettes, compared to NRT, were perceived to be less risky, cost less, cause fewer negative physical feelings, taste better, provide more satisfaction, and be better at reducing craving, negative affect, and stress. Moderator analyses indicated history with ad libitum forms of NRT was associated with less positive NRT expectancies. CONCLUSIONS: The degree to which expectancies for e-cigarettes differed from expectancies for either tobacco cigarettes or NRT offers insight into the motivation of e-cigarette users and provides guidance for public health and clinical interventions to encourage smoking-related behavior change.
INTRODUCTION: Use of e-cigarettes has been increasing exponentially, with the primary motivation reported as smoking cessation. To understand why smokers choose e-cigarettes as an alternative to cigarettes, as well as to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)--approved nicotine replacement therapies (NRT), we compared outcome expectancies (beliefs about the results of drug use) for the three nicotine delivery systems among vapers, i.e., e-cigarette users, who were former smokers. METHODS: Vapers (N = 1,434) completed an online survey assessing 14 expectancy domains as well as perceived cost and convenience. We focused on comparisons between e-cigarettes and cigarettes to determine the attraction of e-cigarettes as a smoking alternative and between e-cigarettes and NRT to determine perceived advantages of e-cigarettes over FDA-approved pharmacotherapy. RESULTS:Participants believed that e-cigarettes, in comparison to conventional cigarettes, had fewer health risks; caused less craving, withdrawal, addiction, and negative physical feelings; tasted better; and were more satisfying. In contrast, conventional cigarettes were perceived as better than e-cigarettes for reducing negative affect, controlling weight, providing stimulation, and reducing stress. E-cigarettes, compared to NRT, were perceived to be less risky, cost less, cause fewer negative physical feelings, taste better, provide more satisfaction, and be better at reducing craving, negative affect, and stress. Moderator analyses indicated history with ad libitum forms of NRT was associated with less positive NRT expectancies. CONCLUSIONS: The degree to which expectancies for e-cigarettes differed from expectancies for either tobacco cigarettes or NRT offers insight into the motivation of e-cigarette users and provides guidance for public health and clinical interventions to encourage smoking-related behavior change.
Authors: Matthew M Clark; Richard D Hurt; Ivana T Croghan; Christi A Patten; Paul Novotny; Jeff A Sloan; Shaker R Dakhil; Gary A Croghan; Edward J Wos; Kendrith M Rowland; Albert Bernath; Roscoe F Morton; Sachdex P Thomas; Loren K Tschetter; Stewart Garneau; Philip J Stella; Larry P Ebbert; Donald B Wender; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2005-08-30 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Megan E Piper; Tanya R Schlam; Jessica W Cook; Megan A Sheffer; Stevens S Smith; Wei-Yin Loh; Daniel M Bolt; Su-Young Kim; Jesse T Kaye; Kathryn R Hefner; Timothy B Baker Journal: Psychopharmacology (Berl) Date: 2011-03-18 Impact factor: 4.530
Authors: Maciej Lukasz Goniewicz; Jakub Knysak; Michal Gawron; Leon Kosmider; Andrzej Sobczak; Jolanta Kurek; Adam Prokopowicz; Magdalena Jablonska-Czapla; Czeslawa Rosik-Dulewska; Christopher Havel; Peyton Jacob; Neal Benowitz Journal: Tob Control Date: 2013-03-06 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Bárbara Piñeiro; John B Correa; Vani N Simmons; Paul T Harrell; Nicole S Menzie; Marina Unrod; Lauren R Meltzer; Thomas H Brandon Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Paul T Harrell; Vani N Simmons; Barbara Piñeiro; John B Correa; Nicole S Menzie; Lauren R Meltzer; Marina Unrod; Thomas H Brandon Journal: Addiction Date: 2015-08-18 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Peter S Hendricks; Christopher B Thorne; Sara N Lappan; Noah W Sweat; JeeWon Cheong; Rekha Ramachandran; Connie L Kohler; William C Bailey; Kathleen F Harrington Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Karen O Brandon; Vani N Simmons; Lauren R Meltzer; David J Drobes; Úrsula Martínez; Steven K Sutton; Amanda M Palmer; Christopher R Bullen; Paul T Harrell; Thomas H Brandon Journal: Addiction Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Paul T Harrell; Syeda Mahrukh Hussnain Naqvi; Andrew D Plunk; Ming Ji; Silvia S Martins Journal: Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse Date: 2016-09-26 Impact factor: 3.829