↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative study of smokers’ views on brain-based explanations of tobacco dependence

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Drug Policy, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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.
Title
A qualitative study of smokers’ views on brain-based explanations of tobacco dependence
Published in
International Journal of Drug Policy, March 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.12.011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kylie Morphett, Adrian Carter, Wayne Hall, Coral Gartner

Abstract

The role the brain plays in the creation and maintenance of tobacco dependence has become increasingly prominent in explanations of smoking that are presented to the public. The potential for brain-based explanations of smoking to influence smokers' understandings of their addiction, their sense of self-efficacy, and perhaps even their treatment preferences, has been raised by some working in the addiction field. However, little empirical evidence exists in this area. This paper reports on semi-structured interviews with 29 daily smokers. Participants were shown a brief presentation about the neuroscience of nicotine dependence. They were then queried about their awareness of the role of the brain in smoking, and the consequences of this knowledge for their understandings of smoking and their treatment preferences. Our results indicated that many participants displayed some awareness of the link between the brain and addiction. While there was a diversity of ideas about the potential impacts of neuroscience knowledge about smoking, there was an overall tendency to maintain pre-existing treatment preferences, and to assert individual responsibility for smoking. Emergent themes that arose were the brain as a special organ, the discourse of the "other" smoker, and the distinction between physical and psychological facets of addiction. While brain-based explanations of smoking are unlikely to revolutionise lay understandings of smoking, neuroscience information should be presented in a way that does not negate people's sense of agency and self-efficacy in relation to quitting smoking.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 5%
United Kingdom 1 5%
Unknown 17 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 21%
Student > Master 4 21%
Student > Bachelor 3 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Other 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 47%
Social Sciences 4 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Computer Science 1 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Other 2 11%

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 20 December 2015.
All research outputs
#9,823,981
of 12,301,191 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Drug Policy
#1,432
of 1,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,434
of 331,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Drug Policy
#65
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,301,191 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,546 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 331,569 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.