Andrea C Johnson1, Melissa Mercincavage2, Valentina Souprountchouk2, Anupreet K Sidhu2, Andrea C Villanti3, Cristine D Delnevo3, Andrew A Strasser4. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; University of Pennsylvania-Rutgers University Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: andrea.johnson1@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; University of Pennsylvania-Rutgers University Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. University of Pennsylvania-Rutgers University Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Rutgers Center for Tobacco Studies, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. 4. Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; University of Pennsylvania-Rutgers University Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Subjective ratings are inconsistently associated with behavioral outcomes such as tobacco use and there is no current standard. The Cigarette Ratings Scale is an ideal measure for further evaluation because it has been widely used in tobacco regulatory science and tobacco industry research. PURPOSE: This study investigated the construct validity of the Cigarette Ratings Scale and associations with tobacco use and product feature outcomes. METHODS: Using secondary analysis of baseline data from five research trials, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis in one sample and validated the factor solution in a second sample. We then examined the relationship of the averaged subscales with tobacco outcomes and cigarette product features among current adult cigarette smokers (N = 752) who smoked ≥ 5 cigarettes daily for ≥ 5 years. RESULTS: The results supported a three-factor solution: 1. Product harshness evaluation, 2. Smoking satisfaction, and 3. Positive sensory experience. Multivariable general linear models indicated that cigarettes per day was associated with a lower harshness rating b = -0.29 (95% CI: -0.51, -0.07) and higher positive sensory experience b = 0.32 (95% CI: 0.08, 0.56). FTND average dependence scores were associated with a more positive sensory experience b = 1.08 (95% CI: 0.28, 1.89). CO boost was associated with smoking satisfaction b = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.30, 1.26). CONCLUSIONS: The Cigarette Ratings Scale subscales were primarily associated with behavioral outcomes, biological exposure, and nicotine dependence. This can help addiction efforts to determine how subjective evaluations of tobacco products relate to use behaviors.
BACKGROUND: Subjective ratings are inconsistently associated with behavioral outcomes such as tobacco use and there is no current standard. The Cigarette Ratings Scale is an ideal measure for further evaluation because it has been widely used in tobacco regulatory science and tobacco industry research. PURPOSE: This study investigated the construct validity of the Cigarette Ratings Scale and associations with tobacco use and product feature outcomes. METHODS: Using secondary analysis of baseline data from five research trials, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis in one sample and validated the factor solution in a second sample. We then examined the relationship of the averaged subscales with tobacco outcomes and cigarette product features among current adult cigarette smokers (N = 752) who smoked ≥ 5 cigarettes daily for ≥ 5 years. RESULTS: The results supported a three-factor solution: 1. Product harshness evaluation, 2. Smoking satisfaction, and 3. Positive sensory experience. Multivariable general linear models indicated that cigarettes per day was associated with a lower harshness rating b = -0.29 (95% CI: -0.51, -0.07) and higher positive sensory experience b = 0.32 (95% CI: 0.08, 0.56). FTND average dependence scores were associated with a more positive sensory experience b = 1.08 (95% CI: 0.28, 1.89). CO boost was associated with smoking satisfaction b = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.30, 1.26). CONCLUSIONS: The Cigarette Ratings Scale subscales were primarily associated with behavioral outcomes, biological exposure, and nicotine dependence. This can help addiction efforts to determine how subjective evaluations of tobacco products relate to use behaviors.
Authors: Joseph C Cappelleri; Andrew G Bushmakin; Christine L Baker; Elizabeth Merikle; Abayomi O Olufade; David G Gilbert Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2006-07-27 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; Megan L Saddleson; Emily Gup; Angela Halstead; Darren Mays; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2017-02-03 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Andrew A Strasser; Rebecca L Ashare; Lynn T Kozlowski; Wallace B Pickworth Journal: Pharmacol Biochem Behav Date: 2005-10-06 Impact factor: 3.533
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; E Paul Wileyto; Megan L Saddleson; Kirsten Lochbuehler; Eric C Donny; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Addiction Date: 2017-02-23 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Richard O'Connor; Clifford H Watson; Gary E Swan; Destiney S Nettles; Rebecca C Geisler; Tabitha P Hendershot Journal: Tob Control Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; Valentina Souprountchouk; Kathy Z Tang; Rachel L Dumont; E Paul Wileyto; Steven G Carmella; Stephen S Hecht; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-04-27 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Andrew A Strasser; Rebecca L Ashare; Madeline Kaufman; Kathy Z Tang; A Clementina Mesaros; Ian A Blair Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2013-01-18 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Julia Kim; Yasaman Kambari; Anmol Taggar; Lena C Quilty; Peter Selby; Fernando Caravaggio; Fumihiko Ueno; Edgardo Torres; Jianmeng Song; Bruce G Pollock; Ariel Graff-Guerrero; Philip Gerretsen Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-10-27 Impact factor: 4.492