The participant answered demographics, smoking history (including participant��s stage of abstinence www.selleckchem.com/products/Sorafenib-Tosylate.html using former smoker version of contemplation ladder), and (baseline) smoking urges, then watched two sets of 6 ads. After each set of ads, the participant completed outcome measures for smoking urges, perceived ad effectiveness, and self-efficacy, attitude, and intention regarding smoking abstinence. Upon session completion, the participant was debriefed, compensated, and dismissed. Results Repeated measure ANOVA procedures were performed to test significant difference in smoking urges and perceived ad effectiveness between smoking-cue conditions, the groups of AS condition, and the smoking cue �� AS interaction. Smoking Urges Baseline smoking urges, measured before ad-viewing, were entered as a covariate.

The main effect of AS on smoking urges was significant, F(1, 102) = 4.382, p = .039, and �� 2 = .041. Participants who were exposed to weak argument ads reported higher smoking urges (M adjusted = 1.207) compared with those who were exposed to strong argument ads (M adjusted = 1.144). However, the main effect of smoking cues and the smoking cue �� AS interaction were not significant (F s < 1). Perceived Ad Effectiveness The main effect of smoking cues on perceived ad effectiveness was not significant (F < 1). However, the main effect of AS was significant, F(1, 90) = 22.817, p < .001, and �� 2 = .202. Participants reported greater perceived ad effectiveness to strong argument ads (M = 4.333) compared with weak argument ads (M = 3.918).

The smoking cue �� AS interaction was also significant, F(1, 90) = 4.495, p =.037, and �� 2 = .048. In both cue conditions, AS influences the changes in perceived ad effectiveness, as shown in Table 1. Specifically, in no-smoking-cue condition, perceived ad effectiveness did not significantly differ as a function of AS, however, in smoking-cue condition, perceived ad effectiveness significantly dropped as AS decreased. This result shows that smoking cues undermine perceived ad effectiveness when arguments are weak. Table 1. Mean and (Standard Error) on Outcome Variables (Scores Aggregated Across Times 1 and 2) Self-efficacy, Attitude, and Intention to Refrain from Smoking Former smokers�� smoking abstinence was explored using their self-reported self-efficacy, attitude, and intention to refrain from smoking.

These three variables were deemed Batimastat conceptually related, that is, each measures some aspect of strength of smoking abstinence, and, thus, a smoking cue (2) �� AS (2) MANOVA procedure was employed to test with stage of abstinence being treated as a covariate. The main effect of smoking cues was not significant on attitude, F < 1, approached significance on self-efficacy, F(1, 102) = 3.622, p = .060, and was significant on intention, F(1, 102) = 6.905, p = .010, and �� 2 = .063. Participants in smoking-cue condition reported lower self-efficacy (M adjusted = 3.