The scores are calculated by averaging the items of each scale. Although Deltarasin? the Behavioral Choice�CMelioration scale has been dropped, negative reinforcement and positive reinforcement have been contracted into a single subscale labeled affective enhancement. The second author of this report performed a translation/back-translation procedure of WISDM-68. Moreover, we received help from Megan Piper who compared the result of the back translation and the original scale and also provided clarification where mismatches in meaning occurred. Hungarian versions of both WISDM-68 and WISDM-37 are available from the second author of this report. ��Heaviness of Smoking Index (HSI)�� (Heatherton, Kozlowski, Frecker, Rickert, & Robinson, 1989) measures the number of cigarettes smoked per day and the time from waking to the first cigarette of the day.

The scale ranges from zero to six, where a higher score means a higher level of dependence. Internal consistency of this index varies ranges from 0.49 to 0.72 (Meneses-Gaya, Zuardi, Loureiro, & Crippa, 2009); the internal consistency is satisfactory (Cronbach’s �� = .61) in the present sample. ��Tobacco Dependence Screener (TDS)�� (Kawakami, Takatsuka, Inaba, & Shimizu, 1999) is a self-report questionnaire based on International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10), DSM-III-R, and DSM-IV dependence criteria. Each question asks about a symptom of nicotine dependence and should be answered with a dichotomous response category (i.e., yes or no). If the question was not applicable to the subject (e.g.

, a question on withdrawal symptoms for those who have never quit smoking), the subject was instructed to answer ��no.�� The sum of the score is the number of affirmative responses, and therefore, it generates a continuous score. No identified cutoff score for this questionnaire is available to distinguish dependent and nondependent smokers. The items in the TDS were translated to Hungarian and back-translated to English, and differences were resolved. Cronbach’s �� of this scale is .64 in this sample. Data Analyses In the first step in our analysis, confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were used to assess the factor structure and item performance of both WISDM-68 and WISDM-37. We also compared the degree of fit of two measurement models: one contains 11 correlating factors and the other includes further two second-order factors, which were called primary and secondary dependence motives (Piper et al.

, 2008). Our sample size is adequate for this type of analysis as it is larger than the recommended 10 cases per indicator (Brown, 2006). Internal consistencies were assessed by Cronbach’s ��, which was considered satisfactory if the values were at least .70 (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). The evaluation of internal consistency also depends, however, Cilengitide on the number of items of the scale in question (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).