EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
Home All issues Volume 29 / No 11 (Novembre 2013) Med Sci (Paris), 29 11 (2013) 1042-1050 References
Free Access
Issue
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 29, Number 11, Novembre 2013
Page(s) 1042 - 1050
Section Forum
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/20132911022
Published online 20 November 2013
  1. Cour des Comptes. Rapport d’évaluation. Les politiques de lutte contre le tabagisme. Paris : Cour des Comptes, 2012 : 332 p. [Google Scholar]
  2. Beck F, Guignard R, Richard J, et al. Premiers résultats du baromètre santé 2010. Évolutions récentes du tabagisme en France. Saint Denis : Inpes, 2010 : 14 p. [Google Scholar]
  3. Organisation Mondiale de la Santé. Convention-cadre pour la lutte antitabac. Genève : OMS, 2003 : 38 p. [Google Scholar]
  4. Hammond D. Health warning messages on tobacco products: a review. Tob Control 2011 ; 20 : 327–337. [Google Scholar]
  5. Ruiter R, Kok G. Saying is not (always) doing: cigarette warning labels are useless. Eur J Pub Health 2005 ; 15 : 329. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Steinhart Y, Carmon Z, Trope Y. Warnings of adverse side effects can backfire over time. Psychol Sci 2013 ; 24 : 1842–1847. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Gallopel-Morvan K, Gabriel P, Gall-Ely M, et al. The use of visual warnings in social marketing: the case of tobacco. J Bus Res 2011 ; 64 : 7–11. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. TNS Opinion and social. Eurobarometer 385-Attitudes of Europeans towards tobacco. Bruxelles : Commission européenne, 2012 : 102 p. [Google Scholar]
  9. Sambrook research International. A review of the science base to support the development of health warnings for tobacco packages. Newport : Sambrook Research International, 2009 : 46 p. [Google Scholar]
  10. TNS Qual+. Avertissements relatifs à la santé sur les emballages de produits du tabac. Bruxelles : Commission européenne, 2012 : 110 p. [Google Scholar]
  11. Tversky A, Kabneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974 ; 185 : 1124–1131. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Bargh JA, Schwader KL, Hailey SE, et al. Automaticity in social-cognitive processes. Trends Cogn Sci 2012 ; 16 : 593–605. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Nisbett RE, Wilson TD, Kruger M, et al. Telling more than we can know: verbal reports on mental processes. Psychol Rev 1977 ; 84 : 231–259. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. Johansson P, Hall L, Sikström S, et al. How something can be said about telling more than we can know: on choice blindness and introspection. Conscious Cogn 2006 ; 15 : 673–692. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Falk EB, Berkman ET, Mann T, et al. Predicting persuasion-induced behavior change from the brain. J Neurosci 2010 ; 30 : 8421–8424. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Calvert G, Gallopel-morvan K, Sauneron S. Dans le cerveau du fumeur : neurosciences et prévention du tabagisme. In : Oullier O, Sauneron S, eds. Nouvelles approches de la prévention en santé publique : l’apport des sciences comportementales, cognitives et des neurosciences. Paris : La Documentation Française, 2010 : 86–107. [Google Scholar]
  17. Oullier O, Sauneron S. Nouvelles approches de la prévention en santé publique : l’apport des sciences comportementales, cognitives et des neurosciences. Paris : La Documentation Française, 2010 : 192 p. Téléchargement légal et gratuit : http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/rapports-publics/104000139/index.shtml [Google Scholar]
  18. Institut National du Cancer. Les changements de comportements à risque de cancer et leurs déterminants individuels et collectifs. Boulogne-Billancourt : Inca, 2012 : 68 p. [Google Scholar]
  19. Falk E, Berkman ET, Lieberman MD. From neural responses to population behavior: neural focus group predicts population level media effects. Psychol Sci 2012 ; 3 : 439–445. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Berkman ET, Falk, EB. Beyond brain mapping: using the brain to predict real-world outcomes. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2013 ; 22 : 45–50. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Lust SA, Bartholow, BD. Self-reported and P3 event-related potential evaluations of condoms: does what we say match how we feel? Psychophysiology 2009 ; 46 : 420–424. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Basso F, Oullier O. Différences individuelles, variabilités et limites actuelles du recours à l’imagerie cérébrale fonctionnelle par les tribunaux. In: Oullier O, ed. Le cerveau et la loi : analyse de l’émergence du neurodroit. Paris : Centre d’analyse stratégique, 2012 : 119–136. [Google Scholar]
  23. Petit O, Basso F, Huguet P, et al. Apport des « neurosciences de la décision » à l’étude des comportements alimentaires et de l’obésité. Med Sci (Paris) 2011 ; 27 : 1000–1008. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Oullier O. Neuroéconomie et neuroéthique. In : Claeys A, Vialatte JS, eds. La Loi bioéthique de demain. Paris : Rapport de l’Opecst, 2008 ; tome 2 : 196–202. [Google Scholar]
  25. Poldrack RA. Inferring mental states from neuroimaging data: from reverse inference to large-scale decoding. Neuron 2011 ; 72 : 692–697. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Logothetis NK. What we can do and what we cannot do with fMRI. Nature 2008 ; 453 : 869–878. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Wakefield M, Morley C, Horan JK, et al. The cigarette pack as image: new evidence from tobacco industry documents. Tob Control 2002 ; 11 : I73–I80. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Laviolette SR, van der Kooy D. The neurobiology of nicotine addiction: bridging the gap from molecules to behaviour. Nat Rev Neurosci 2004 ; 5 : 55–65. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Brehm JW. A theory of psychological reactance. New York : Academic Press, 1966 : 136 p. [Google Scholar]
  30. Festinger L. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford : Stanford University Press, 1957 : 292 p. [Google Scholar]
  31. Kessels LTE, Ruiter RAC, Jansma BM. Increased attention but more efficient disengagement: neuroscientific evidence for defensive processing of threatening health information. Health Psychol 2010 ; 29 : 346–354. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Ruiter RAC, Schmitt B, Wouters L. Attention effects during the perception of threatening health video scenes: an event related potential approach. Los Angeles : The 4th Annual Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  33. Langleben DD, Loughead JW, Ruparel K, et al. Reduced prefrontal and temporal processing and recall of high sensation value ads. NeuroImage 2009 ; 46 : 219–225. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Uncapher MR, Wagner AD. Posterior parietal cortex and episodic encoding: insights from fMRI subsequent effects and dual-attention theory. Neurobiol Learn Mem 2009 ; 91 : 139–154. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Munafò MR, Roberts N, Bauld L, et al. Plain packaging increases visual attention to health warnings on cigarette packs in non-smokers and weekly smokers but not daily smokers. Addiction 2011 ; 106 : 1505–1510. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Maynard OM, Munafò MR, Leonards U. Visual attention to health warnings on plain tobacco packaging in adolescent smokers and non-smokers. Addiction 2012 ; 108 : 413–419. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Volkow ND, Li TK. Drug addiction: the neurobiology of behaviour gone awry. Nat Rev Neurosci 2004 ; 5 : 963–970. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Chiu PH, Lohrenz TM, Montague PR. Smokers’ brains compute, but ignore, a fictive error signal in a sequential investment task. Nat Neurosci 2008 ; 11 : 514–520. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Bickel WK, Odum AL, Madden GJ. Impulsivity and cigarette smoking: delay discounting in current, never, and ex-smokers. Psychopharmacology 1999 ; 146 : 447–454. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Field M, Cox WM. Attentional bias in addictive behaviors: a review of its development, causes, and consequences. Drug Alcohol Depend 2008 ; 97 : 1–20. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Robinson TE, Berridge KC. The neural basis of drug craving: an incentive-sensitization theory of addiction. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 1993 ; 18 : 247–291. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Stippekohl B, Winkler M, Mucha RF, et al. Neural responses to BEGIN- and END-stimuli of the smoking ritual in nonsmokers, nondeprived smokers, and deprived smokers. Neuropsychopharmacology 2010 ; 35 : 1209–1225. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Partos TR, Borland R, Yong HH, et al. Cigarette packet warning labels can prevent relapse: findings from the international tobacco control 4-country policy evaluation cohort study. Tob Control 2012 ; 22 : e43–e50. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Kober H, Mende-Siedlecki P, Kross EF, et al. Prefrontal-striatal pathway underlies cognitive regulation of craving. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010 ; 107 : 14811–14816. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  45. Chua HF, Ho SS, Jasinska AJ, et al. Self-related neural response to tailored smoking-cessation messages predicts quitting. Nat Neurosci 2011 ; 14 : 426–427. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Hare TA, Camerer CF, Rangel A. Self-control in decision-making involves modulation of the vmPFC valuation system. Science 2009 ; 324 : 646–648. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Hare TA, Malmaud J, Rangel A. Focusing attention on the health aspects of foods changes value signals in vmPFC and improves dietary choice. J Neurosci 2011 ; 31 : 11077–11087. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Volkow ND, Wang G-J, Telang F, et al. Low dopamine striatal D2 receptors are associated with prefrontal metabolism in obese subjects: possible contributing factors. NeuroImage 2008 ; 42 : 1537–1543. [Google Scholar]
  49. Amiaz R, Levy D, Vainiger D, et al. Repeated high-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex reduces cigarette craving and consumption. Addiction 2009 ; 104 : 653–660. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Eichhammer P, Johann M, Kharraz A, et al. High-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation decreases cigarette smoking. J Clin Psychiatry 2003 ; 64 : 951–953. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Rose JE, McClernon FJ, Froeliger B, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the superior frontal gyrus modulates craving for cigarettes. Biol Psychiatry 2011 ; 70 : 794–799. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Brown SL, Richardson M. The effect of distressing imagery on attention to and persuasiveness of an antialcohol message: a gaze-tracking approach. Health Educ Behav 2012 ; 39 : 8–17. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Oullier O. Clear up this fuzzy thinking on brain scans. Nature 2012 ; 483 : 7. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Basso F, Oullier O. Smokers are suckers: should incongruous metaphors be used in public health prevention? Am J Public Health 2011 ; 101 : 203–204. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Hill C. Épidémiologie du tabagisme. Rev Prat (Paris) 2012 ; 62 : 325–329. [Google Scholar]
  56. Commission Européenne (DG SANCO). Applying behavioural insights to policy-making. Conférence internationale organisée à Bruxelles le 30 septembre 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_consumer/information_sources/consumer_affairs_events_en.htm [Google Scholar]
  57. Oullier O. Behavioural insights are vital to policy-making. Nature 2013 ; 501 : 463. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.