INTRODUCTION: Behavioral economic purchase tasks are used to estimate the reinforcing value of drugs by asking participants how much they would purchase across a range of increasing prices. We sought to validate such a task for e-cigarettes in experienced users of advanced generation, tank-style devices. METHODS: Dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes (N = 54) and exclusive e-cigarette users (N = 59) attended one session during which they completed assessments including two versions of the E-cigarette Purchase Task: one that asked how many puffs of their e-cigarette they would purchase in 24 hours at varying prices and one that asked how many mLs of e-liquid they would purchase. We correlated purchase task outcomes with other measures of e-cigarette use. We also compared the tasks across dual and exclusive users. RESULTS: Indices derived from the mLs-based task were more likely to be correlated with self-reported use rates, e-cigarette dependence, and cotinine levels than the puffs-based task. Exclusive users showed greater demand on than dual users only on the mLs version when using an F-test comparison method, while multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) results showed that dual users showed greater demand only on the puffs task. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that the mLs version had greater validity than the puffs version in terms of clinical indices. Dual users may still be on a trajectory to fully switching to e-cigarettes; thus, puffs as a measure may be more intuitive, as this measure is shared by cigarettes and e-cigarettes. For exclusive users, the unit they purchase their e-liquid in may be the most relevant unit and better capture their demand for that product. IMPLICATIONS: Behavioral economic purchase tasks have been widely used to understand nicotine use. We have developed two versions of a purchase task for e-cigarette use and compared the two versions in users of advanced generation e-cigarette devices. We found that the mLs version of the task better-reflected use patterns relative to a puffs version, which suggests that participants struggle to place monetary value on a unit of consumption (ie, puffs). Validated measures of e-cigarette reinforcement will be important as researchers and regulators determine which features of these products contribute to reinforcing efficacy.
INTRODUCTION: Behavioral economic purchase tasks are used to estimate the reinforcing value of drugs by asking participants how much they would purchase across a range of increasing prices. We sought to validate such a task for e-cigarettes in experienced users of advanced generation, tank-style devices. METHODS: Dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes (N = 54) and exclusive e-cigarette users (N = 59) attended one session during which they completed assessments including two versions of the E-cigarette Purchase Task: one that asked how many puffs of their e-cigarette they would purchase in 24 hours at varying prices and one that asked how many mLs of e-liquid they would purchase. We correlated purchase task outcomes with other measures of e-cigarette use. We also compared the tasks across dual and exclusive users. RESULTS: Indices derived from the mLs-based task were more likely to be correlated with self-reported use rates, e-cigarette dependence, and cotinine levels than the puffs-based task. Exclusive users showed greater demand on than dual users only on the mLs version when using an F-test comparison method, while multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) results showed that dual users showed greater demand only on the puffs task. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that the mLs version had greater validity than the puffs version in terms of clinical indices. Dual users may still be on a trajectory to fully switching to e-cigarettes; thus, puffs as a measure may be more intuitive, as this measure is shared by cigarettes and e-cigarettes. For exclusive users, the unit they purchase their e-liquid in may be the most relevant unit and better capture their demand for that product. IMPLICATIONS: Behavioral economic purchase tasks have been widely used to understand nicotine use. We have developed two versions of a purchase task for e-cigarette use and compared the two versions in users of advanced generation e-cigarette devices. We found that the mLs version of the task better-reflected use patterns relative to a puffs version, which suggests that participants struggle to place monetary value on a unit of consumption (ie, puffs). Validated measures of e-cigarette reinforcement will be important as researchers and regulators determine which features of these products contribute to reinforcing efficacy.
Authors: L Cinnamon Bidwell; James MacKillop; James G Murphy; Jennifer W Tidey; Suzanne M Colby Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Jeffrey S Stein; Mikhail N Koffarnus; Sarah E Snider; Amanda J Quisenberry; Warren K Bickel Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2015-07-06 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: James MacKillop; Michael T Amlung; Lauren M Wier; Sean P David; Lara A Ray; Warren K Bickel; Lawrence H Sweet Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2012-05-26 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Elizabeth R Aston; Jane Metrik; Rochelle K Rosen; Robert Swift; James MacKillop Journal: Exp Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2020-02-27 Impact factor: 3.157
Authors: Nicole M Kuiper; Brett R Loomis; Kyle T Falvey; Doris G Gammon; Brian A King; Teresa W Wang; Todd Rogers Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2018-08-23 Impact factor: 2.830
Authors: Erin L Mead-Morse; Rachel N Cassidy; Cheryl Oncken; Jennifer W Tidey; Cristine D Delnevo; Mark Litt Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 4.591