Commentary on Conde et al.: Evidence and gap map offer an important opportunity for dialogue and refinement of the gateway hypothesis controversy

IF 5.2 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Addiction Pub Date : 2024-08-12 DOI:10.1111/add.16645
Arielle Selya, Joe G. Gitchell
{"title":"Commentary on Conde et al.: Evidence and gap map offer an important opportunity for dialogue and refinement of the gateway hypothesis controversy","authors":"Arielle Selya,&nbsp;Joe G. Gitchell","doi":"10.1111/add.16645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The question of whether e-cigarette use promotes subsequent cigarette smoking among youth (commonly known as the ‘gateway hypothesis’) is critical for understanding e-cigarettes' net impact on population health. Unfortunately, it is also a highly polarized topic. Not only is there no clear resolution (yet) embraced by both sides [<span>1, 2</span>], but the many studies published on the topic do not seem to have changed anyone's mind. This seems to be a real-life example of the epistemological network model described by O'Connor and Weatherall [<span>3</span>] (see the figures, particularly the polarization one) whereby levels of social trust and conformity are such that more research does not lead to a convergence on truth.</p><p>We hope that researchers willing to devote the effort and take the risks to work with ‘adversaries’ will draw motivation from peers in other fields taking the same risks and efforts.</p><p><b>Arielle Selya:</b> Conceptualization; project administration; writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. <b>Joe G. Gitchell:</b> Conceptualization; writing—review and editing.</p><p>Through Pinney Associates, A.S. and J.G.G. provide consulting services on tobacco harm reduction to Juul Labs (JLI). A.S. also individually provides consulting services on behavioural science to the Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR) through ECLAT Srl, which received funding from the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW; now the Global Action to End Smoking [GA]). Neither JLI, CoEHAR, nor FSFW/GA had any role in, or oversight of, this commentary.</p>","PeriodicalId":109,"journal":{"name":"Addiction","volume":"119 10","pages":"1709-1710"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/add.16645","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addiction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.16645","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The question of whether e-cigarette use promotes subsequent cigarette smoking among youth (commonly known as the ‘gateway hypothesis’) is critical for understanding e-cigarettes' net impact on population health. Unfortunately, it is also a highly polarized topic. Not only is there no clear resolution (yet) embraced by both sides [1, 2], but the many studies published on the topic do not seem to have changed anyone's mind. This seems to be a real-life example of the epistemological network model described by O'Connor and Weatherall [3] (see the figures, particularly the polarization one) whereby levels of social trust and conformity are such that more research does not lead to a convergence on truth.

We hope that researchers willing to devote the effort and take the risks to work with ‘adversaries’ will draw motivation from peers in other fields taking the same risks and efforts.

Arielle Selya: Conceptualization; project administration; writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. Joe G. Gitchell: Conceptualization; writing—review and editing.

Through Pinney Associates, A.S. and J.G.G. provide consulting services on tobacco harm reduction to Juul Labs (JLI). A.S. also individually provides consulting services on behavioural science to the Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR) through ECLAT Srl, which received funding from the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW; now the Global Action to End Smoking [GA]). Neither JLI, CoEHAR, nor FSFW/GA had any role in, or oversight of, this commentary.

对 Conde 等人的评论证据和差距图为对话和完善网关假说之争提供了重要机会。
使用电子烟是否会促进青少年随后吸烟(俗称 "网关假说")的问题对于了解电子烟对人群健康的净影响至关重要。遗憾的是,这也是一个两极分化严重的话题。不仅双方都没有明确的解决方案(尚未)[1, 2],而且就该主题发表的许多研究似乎也没有改变任何人的想法。这似乎是奥康纳和韦瑟拉尔(O'Connor and Weatherall)[3]所描述的认识论网络模型(见图,尤其是两极分化模型)在现实生活中的一个例子,在这个模型中,社会信任度和一致性的水平决定了更多的研究并不会导致真理的趋同:构思;项目管理;写作-原稿;写作-审阅和编辑。乔-G-吉切尔通过 Pinney Associates 公司,A.S. 和 J.G.G. 为 Juul 实验室(JLI)提供减少烟草危害方面的咨询服务。A.S. 还通过 ECLAT Srl 单独为加速减害卓越中心(CoEHAR)提供行为科学方面的咨询服务,该中心得到了无烟世界基金会(FSFW;现为全球终止吸烟行动[GA])的资助。JLI、CoEHAR 和 FSFW/GA 均未参与或监督本评论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Addiction
Addiction 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
319
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Addiction publishes peer-reviewed research reports on pharmacological and behavioural addictions, bringing together research conducted within many different disciplines. Its goal is to serve international and interdisciplinary scientific and clinical communication, to strengthen links between science and policy, and to stimulate and enhance the quality of debate. We seek submissions that are not only technically competent but are also original and contain information or ideas of fresh interest to our international readership. We seek to serve low- and middle-income (LAMI) countries as well as more economically developed countries. Addiction’s scope spans human experimental, epidemiological, social science, historical, clinical and policy research relating to addiction, primarily but not exclusively in the areas of psychoactive substance use and/or gambling. In addition to original research, the journal features editorials, commentaries, reviews, letters, and book reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信