Applying the 'Cognitive Bias Modification' concept to smoking cessation: A systematic review

Item does not contain fulltext
Background: In recent years, new neurocognitive explanatory approaches such as dual-process theories offer significant progress in understanding long-term relapse in substance use disorders. Based on such explanatory concepts stemming from basic research, novel methods of intervention have been deduced which focus on directly changing cognitive biases. The efficacy of these Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM) concepts has been evaluated in a growing number of studies in the context of different substance use and addictive disorders. By now, there are also first findings for using CBM in the context of smoking. Objectives: To evaluate the empirical evidence, whether CBM qualifies i) for reducing attentional or approach bias towards smoking-related cues, ii) for effectively reducing the high relapse rates in smoking cessation, iii) for the reduction of smoking behaviour and iv) craving. Methods: The systematic evidence search has been carried out in clinical databases (Cochrane Library, PsycArticles, PSYNDEX, PsycINFO, Medline) as well as via manual reverse search. Finally, 12 studies have been identified which met the inclusion criteria (RCT, CBM interventions for smokers; outcomes: change in attentional or approach bias, craving, number of cigarettes smoked, abstinence). Results: Despite the heterogeneity of the studies in terms of sample selection, realisation of interventions and methodological aspects, the findings collectively indicate that different forms and 'dosages' of CBM interventions can influence attentional or approach bias in smokers. Also, positive effects on craving and motivation to quit could be detected. Effects on smoking behaviour are inconsistent and often statistically non-significant. First online applications showed encouraging results. Discussion: The results concerning the efficacy of CBM in smoking cessation are still rudimentary and inconsistent. However, a large portion of the studies was not conducted under naturalistic conditions, but r