Effects of cigarette smoking on working memory

Aim of the study: The aim of the study is to understand whether there is an association between working memory and cigarette smoking. This will be assessed by Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) questionnaire and 2N Back task.

Hypothesis: We predict that heavy cigarette smokers will have a lower score on 2N-Back task.

Abstract

• Word count :250-300
• Summary of the entire research report
• The aim of the study
• A brief description of the sample
• A brief description of method
• The main result obtained
• The main discussion point: NOT NEEDED FOR THIS PAPER.

Introduction

• The first paragraph of the introduction sets the broad context of the study.
• The rest of the paragraphs should also summarise and consider the previous research that has been published, and why is it relevant to understanding your own study.
• Must include the following points.

1. Why the pieces of research relevant to justify your own research study?

• Why the reader needs to know about this study to understand your own study.

2. 2. What are the key methods and findings that are relevant to your own research study?

It is really important to clearly and concisely summarise the methodology and results of previous research, but really what aspects are necessary to understand the need for and design of your research study

3. What is wrong with the previous published research?

• You need to think how your own research is novel and differ from previous research.
• How will your study will improve up on this?

4. The final paragraph should give the hypothesis: We predict that heavy cigarette smokers will have a lower score on 2N-Back task.

Methods

1. Design

• The study used between-subjects design. There was one independent variable: cigarette smoking (with four levels: low, low-moderate, moderate and high dependence).
• The dependent variable is working memory score measured by 2N-back memory task.

2. Participants

• There were 39 participants;

Use this info for comment LB38 & LB40:

• how did you allocate them to each group ?
• Define what you mean by the first group ?
• There is no group , when we divide the participants according to the age ; 14 participants were between

18-23(M=4.86, SD=1.29) , 9 participants were between 24-29 (M=5.33,SD=0.87) and 16 participants were between 30-35(M=4.88,SD=1.7).

• There were 8 female (M=5.10,SD=1.42) and 31 male (M=4.50,SD=1.20)
• The participants need to speak English as non-English speakers might affect the study.
• The sample was randomised selected from the general population of students

Use this info for comment LB37: how did you get the email address ?

• All participants were university students and they were recruited via email, (I got the email address by contacting the participant from social media ) and they haven’t received any payment for taking part. They were fully volunteer.

Use this info for comment LB39: how do you know this?

• By asking the participants ; The sample included healthy adults who are not diagnosed with memory conditions.

3. Material (use this for comment LB41: Adding material section)

• Gorilla online software were used for both the FTND questionnaire and 2N-back task.

4. Procedure

First the participant were asked to fill out the FTND questionnaire consists of six questions and additional of three basic demographic questionnaire. The questionnaire will help find whether the participant smoke with the score of low dependence (0-2), low-moderate dependence (3-4), Moderate dependence (5-7) and high dependence (8+).  The time length was 10min in total. Pls see the attached file more detail on FTND questionnaire.

Then the participant was asked to perform 2Nback memory task on Gorilla software. In the 2N-Back task, participants are presented a sequence of stimuli one-by-one. For each stimulus, they need to decide if the current stimulus is the same as the one presented N trials ago. The N = 2trials ago. The higher the number, the more difficult the task. The factors that seem to influence the performance are not only the N, but also the speed of presentation. The time length 10min.

Ethical consideration

The total duration of the experiment will be about 20 minutes. The participant starts with Informed consent and they were debriefed at the end of the experiment. Ethical guidelines of anonymity and confidentiality were followed: the participants completed their questionnaires in private online; no identifying information was requested; they were informed that the anonymised data would only be shared with the research team.

Result

A one way ANOVA was conducted to determine if working memory score differ between groups of cigarette smokers.

Pls see the attached file more detail on FTND questionnaire.

Participants were classified into four groups: low (n=7), low-moderate (n=9), moderate (n=16) and high levels of smokers (n=7).

The data was normally distributed as assessed by Shapiro-Wilk test (p>.05); there was homogeneity of variances as assessed by Leven’s test of homogeneity of variances (p>.05).

Figure 1. The mean effect of smokers on working memory

Figure 1 suggest that the four groups of smokers differ on their working memory score , which increase from moderate, to low-mod , to low and to high.

There was a significant difference between cigarette smoking groups,

F(3,35)=3.286,p=.032,np²=.175.

Follow up turkey hoc test analysis revealed that a significant difference was found between moderate (M=4.25,SD=1.44) to high (M=5.86,SD=1.35) , p=.041. But no other group were statically significant (all ps >.05).