Observational study identifies links between environmental stress and cigarette cravings in smokers, highlighting childhood experiences' role.
Cigarette cravings have emerged as a critical factor contributing to the difficulties encountered in smoking cessation. Previous studies have demonstrated a link between environmental stress and smoking cravings in smokers. Nevertheless, a substantial body of research posits that the relationship between stress and increased smoking cravings may not be universally applicable to all smokers. Based on the perspective of evolutionary psychology, this study explores the underlying mechanism of differences in cigarette cravings among smokers in response to stress. One hundred and thirty Chinese current smokers were randomly assigned to a stress group or a control group. Environmental stress was induced through validated news material that depicted unpredictable events and employment challenges, while participants in the control group read a news report about searching for a lost key. Cigarette cravings, childhood environmental unpredictability, and sense of control were assessed by self-report questionnaire. A mediated moderation II was developed to test our hypotheses. Individuals exposed to stressful circumstances exhibited heightened smoking cravings. This effect was moderated by childhood environmental unpredictability. Furthermore, the moderating effect of childhood environmental unpredictability was mediated by sense of control. Specifically, high childhood environmental unpredictability undermines individuals' sense of control, thereby amplifying their cigarette cravings under stress. Grounded in life history theory, this study elucidates the mechanisms through which environmental stress affects cigarette cravings, providing novel insights into their underlying determinants. Interventions may involve targeted training to modify life history strategies and bolster smokers' sense of control, thereby reducing stress susceptibility and ultimately diminishing cigarette craving.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Feng et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: