↓ Skip to main content

The Neurobiology and Genetics of Nicotine and Tobacco

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 7: A Hierarchical Instrumental Decision Theory of Nicotine Dependence
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
A Hierarchical Instrumental Decision Theory of Nicotine Dependence
Chapter number 7
Book title
The Neurobiology and Genetics of Nicotine and Tobacco
Published in
Current topics in behavioral neurosciences, February 2015
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-13665-3_7
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-913664-6, 978-3-31-913665-3
Authors

Lee Hogarth, Joseph R. Troisi II, Hogarth L, Troisi Ii JR, Hogarth, Lee, Troisi II, Joseph R.

Abstract

It is important to characterize the learning processes governing tobacco-seeking in order to understand how best to treat this behavior. Most drug learning theories have adopted a Pavlovian framework wherein the conditioned response is the main motivational process. We favor instead a hierarchical instrumental decision account, wherein expectations about the instrumental contingency between voluntary tobacco-seeking and the receipt of nicotine reward determines the probability of executing this behavior. To support this view, we review titration and nicotine discrimination research showing that internal signals for deprivation/satiation modulate expectations about the current incentive value of smoking, thereby modulating the propensity of this behavior. We also review research on cue-reactivity which has shown that external smoking cues modulate expectations about the probability of the tobacco-seeking response being effective, thereby modulating the propensity of this behavior. Economic decision theory is then considered to elucidate how expectations about the value and probability of response-nicotine contingency are integrated to form an overall utility estimate for that option for comparison with qualitatively different, nonsubstitute reinforcers, to determine response selection. As an applied test for this hierarchical instrumental decision framework, we consider how well it accounts for individual liability to smoking uptake and perseveration, pharmacotherapy, cue-extinction therapies, and plain packaging. We conclude that the hierarchical instrumental account is successful in reconciling this broad range of phenomenon precisely because it accepts that multiple diverse sources of internal and external information must be integrated to shape the decision to smoke.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Japan 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 31 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 24%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Professor 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 44%
Neuroscience 4 12%
Unspecified 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 6 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2015.
All research outputs
#15,321,186
of 22,787,797 outputs
Outputs from Current topics in behavioral neurosciences
#315
of 488 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,602
of 352,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current topics in behavioral neurosciences
#18
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,787,797 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 488 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,111 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.