Table 4.

Studies contributing effect size data for the meta-analysis of alerting attention-response time

Study	Task/outcome	Hedges’s g	Standard error	n	Agea	% male	Smoking status	Cigarettes per daya	Nicotine dose, mg	Route of administration
Barr et al. 2008b	Signal detection	0.38	0.19	30	39	53	NSm	NA	14	Transdermal
Bates et al. 1995	Choice RT	0.47	0.23	19	21	32	Sm	5–25	0.8	Inhalation-cigarette
File et al. 2001	RVIP	0.37	0.35	32	21	50	NSm	NA	2	Inhalation-inhaler
Foulds et al. 1996b	RVIP	1.42	0.33	18	25	50	NSm	NA	0.6	Subcutaneous
Kelemen and Fulton 2008	RVIP	0.28	0.18	32	24	69	Sm	>10	2	Buccal
Kleykamp et al. 2005b	ANT	−0.16	0.22	20	20	45	NSm	NA	4	Buccal
Lawrence et al. 2002	RVIP	0.07	0.24	15	22	53	Sm	22	21	Transdermal
Le Houezec et al. 1994	Choice RT	0.50	0.29	12	27	100	NSm	NA	0.8	Subcutaneous
Levin et al. 1998	CPT	0.10	0.28	11	23	91	NSm	NA	7	Transdermal
Myers et al. 2008b	CPT	0.27	0.20	25	36	52	Sm	22	2	Intranasal
Poltavski and Petros 2006	CPT	0.38	0.36	30	20	100	NSm	NA	7	Transdermal
Rusted and Alvares 2008	RVIP	0.64	0.29	48	22	44	NSm	NA	1	Intranasal
Thiel et al. 2005b	Cued target detection	0.27	0.22	19	24	42	NSm	NA	2	Buccal

Nsm nonsmoker, Sm smoker, NA not applicable, RVIP rapid visual information processing, ANT attention network test, CPT continuous performance test

^aMean value

^bAdministered multiple active nicotine doses