Plain cigarette packs do not exert Pavlovian to instrumental transfer of control over tobacco-seeking.

Lee Hogarth,Olivia M Maynard,Marcus R Munafò

doi:10.1111/add.12756

Abstract

AimsTo gain insight into the potential impact of plain tobacco packaging policy, two experiments were undertaken to test whether ‘prototype’ plain compared with branded UK cigarette pack stimuli would differentially elicit instrumental tobacco-seeking in a nominal Pavlovian to instrumental transfer (PIT) procedure.Design, Setting and ParticipantsTwo experiments were undertaken at the University of Bristol UK, with a convenience sample of adult smokers (experiment 1, n = 23, experiment 2, n = 121).MeasurementIn both experiments, smokers were trained on a concurrent choice procedure in which two responses earned points for cigarettes and chocolate, respectively, before images of branded and plain packs were tested for capacity to elicit the tobacco-seeking response in extinction. The primary outcome was percentage choice of the tobacco- over the chocolate-seeking response in plain pack, branded pack and no-stimulus conditions.FindingsBoth experiments found that branded packs primed a greater percentage of tobacco-seeking (overall mean = 62%) than plain packs (overall mean = 53%) and the no-stimulus condition (overall mean = 52%; Ps ≤ 0.01, ŋp2s ≥ 0.16), and that there was no difference in percentage tobacco-seeking between plain packs and the no-stimulus condition (Ps ≥ 0.17, ŋp2s ≤ 0.04). Plain tobacco packs showed an overall 9% reduction in the priming of a tobacco choice response compared to branded tobacco packs.ConclusionsPlain packaging may reduce smoking in current smokers by degrading cue-elicited tobacco-seeking.

Highlights

Studies have shown that in current smokers, plain cigarette packs are less appealing [1], provoke less craving and motivation to purchase [2], reduce short-term selfreported smoking rates [3,4] and increase attention to health warnings [5,6] compared to branded packs
The outcome-specific Pavlovian to instrumental transfer (PIT) procedure provides an important assay of the discriminative control function of a stimulus, i.e. its ability to prime instrumental responding for the reinforcer signalled by the stimulus [8,9]
That there was no evidence of a difference in tobacco-seeking between the plain pack and the no-stimulus condition (F(1,22) = 0.97, P = 0.33, ŋp2 = 0.04)

Summary

Introduction

Studies have shown that in current smokers, plain cigarette packs are less appealing [1], provoke less craving and motivation to purchase [2], reduce short-term selfreported smoking rates [3,4] and increase attention to health warnings [5,6] compared to branded packs. Tobacco products arguably act as discriminative stimuli which set the occasion (signal) when instrumental tobacco-seeking is typically reinforced, and thereby come to elicit tobacco-seeking behaviour. From this viewpoint, switching to plain packs may degrade the discriminative control function of pack stimuli, weakening their capacity to elicit instrumental tobacco-seeking [7]. As the PIT test is conducted in extinction, stimuli arguably bias

Methods

Results

Conclusion