Smoking expectancy mediates the conditioned responses to arbitrary smokingcues

Smokers' responses to smoking cues may be the result of a classical conditi oning process. There is evidence that classical conditioning may not procee d in human subjects unless subjects are consciously aware of the stimulus ( CS)-reinforcer (UCS) contingencies. In two experiments the role of CS ct UC S contingency awareness in the expression of conditioned responses (craving , salivation, and skin conductance) was studied. A discriminative classical conditioning paradigm was used during which subjects were presented with o ne stimulus (the CS +) always paired with cigarette smoking (the UCS) and a nother (the CS -) never paired with cigarette smoking. Half of the subjects were given instructions to discover the CS ct UCS contingencies (group 'aw are', AWR), whereas the other half were not (group 'unaware', UWR), In expe riment 1, all subjects responded to the CS + with increased cigarette cravi ng relative to the CS -; this effect was more pronounced in the AWR group c ompared to the UWR group. A lower amount of salivation in response to the C S + compared to the CS - was found in the UWR group, These between-group di fferences were interpreted as a consequence of the enhanced expectancies of smoking in the presence of CS + in group AWR compared to group UWR, In exp eriment 2, the observed craving responses to CS + and CS - were consistent with those seen in experiment 1, but no discriminative salivary response to the stimuli was found. When, after conditioning training, subjects' expect ancies of smoking were removed by instructions, and their responses to CS and CS - were again measured, the discriminative craving response to CS and CS - was eliminated and all subjects demonstrated a lower amount of sal ivation in response to the CS + compared to the CS -, These data suggest th at presentation of arbitrary cues previously paired with cigarette smoking can elicit CRs and that facilitation of awareness of the CS ct UCS continge ncy by instructions can potentiate craving CRs, In addition, these data sug gest that craving CRs can be eliminated, whereas compensatory CRs can be fa cilitated, when cigarette expectancy is removed with instructions. (C) 2001 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.