» Articles » PMID: 26953688

Executive Functions in Tobacco Dependence: Importance of Inhibitory Capacities

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2016 Mar 9
PMID 26953688
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Executive functions are linked to tobacco dependence and craving. In this cross-sectional study, we assessed the impact of three executive functions: updating, inhibition and shifting processes on tobacco craving and dependence.

Method: 134 tobacco consumers were included in this study: 81 moderately (Fagerström score <7) and 53 heavily dependent (Fagerström score >7). Dependence was assessed with the Fagerström test and craving with the tobacco craving questionnaire (TCQ 12). We used the Stroop test and the Hayling test to measure inhibition, the Trail Making Test to measure shifting processes and the n-back test to measure updating processes. A multivariate logistic model was used to assess which variables explained best the level of nicotine dependence.

Results: Inhibition (p = 0.002) and updating (p = 0.014) processes, but not shifting processes, were associated with higher tobacco dependence. Inhibition capacity had a significant effect on the nicotine dependence level independently of age, education, time since last cigarette, intellectual quotient, craving, updating and shifting process.

Conclusions: Nicotine dependence level seems better explained by inhibition capacities than by craving and updating effects. The capacity to inhibit our behaviours is a good predictor of the severity of tobacco dependence. Our results suggest a prefrontal cortex dysfunction affecting the inhibitory capacities of heavy tobacco dependent smokers. Further studies are needed to investigate the application of these findings in the treatment of tobacco dependence.

Citing Articles

Exploring the therapeutic potential of tDCS, TMS and DBS in overcoming tobacco use disorder: an umbrella review.

Orru G, Baroni M, Conversano C, Gemignani A AIMS Neurosci. 2025; 11(4):449-467.

PMID: 39801797 PMC: 11712234. DOI: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2024027.


The role of executive functioning in smoking cessation: A scoping review.

Viola N, Lundine J, Kirihara S, Nemeth J Drug Alcohol Rev. 2024; 44(2):626-639.

PMID: 39689911 PMC: 11814367. DOI: 10.1111/dar.13991.


The Executive Functioning Paradox in Substance Use Disorders.

Jakubiec L, Chirokoff V, Abdallah M, Sanz-Arigita E, Dupuy M, Swendsen J Biomedicines. 2022; 10(11).

PMID: 36359247 PMC: 9687962. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10112728.


Prepared and reactive inhibition in smokers and non-smokers.

Schultz K, Mantell B, Berkman E, Swann N Behav Brain Res. 2022; 437:114120.

PMID: 36181947 PMC: 9926641. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2022.114120.


Difficulties With Executive Function Are Associated With Risky Health Behaviors Among Young Adult Congenital Heart Defect Survivors.

Fox K, Vannatta K, Jackson J J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2022; 38(1):60-69.

PMID: 36037294 PMC: 9771948. DOI: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000941.


References
1.
Hofmann W, Schmeichel B, Baddeley A . Executive functions and self-regulation. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012; 16(3):174-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2012.01.006. View

2.
Collette F, Van der Linden M . Brain imaging of the central executive component of working memory. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2002; 26(2):105-25. DOI: 10.1016/s0149-7634(01)00063-x. View

3.
Craig T, Van Natta P . The association of smoking and drinking habits in a community sample. J Stud Alcohol. 1977; 38(7):1434-9. DOI: 10.15288/jsa.1977.38.1434. View

4.
Bari A, Robbins T . Inhibition and impulsivity: behavioral and neural basis of response control. Prog Neurobiol. 2013; 108:44-79. DOI: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.06.005. View

5.
Nigg J, Wong M, Martel M, Jester J, Puttler L, Glass J . Poor response inhibition as a predictor of problem drinking and illicit drug use in adolescents at risk for alcoholism and other substance use disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2006; 45(4):468-75. DOI: 10.1097/01.chi.0000199028.76452.a9. View