The mean age of the sample was 37.63 years (SD = 10.9). Thirty-eight percent of participants reported Black ethnicity, 27% reported Caucasian ethnicity, 26% reported Hispanic ethnicity, and 9% reported other ethnic thing backgrounds. Twenty-nine percent of participants had a high school education or lower, and 37% of the sample reported annual incomes of $20,000 or less. Participants smoked a mean of 17.14 cigarettes/day (SD = 8.71) for an average of 17.93 years (SD = 10.32). Mean Fagerstr?m score of the sample was 5.28 (SD = 2.17). For the most recent quit attempt, 26% reporting using nicotine replacement therapy, 68% reported using no assistance, and the remaining 6% reported using other approaches. Preliminary analyses revealed that demographic variables were not related to the duration of the most recent quit attempt nor were they related to perceived quit difficulty.

Gender, however, was related to expected cravings, with women displaying higher expected cravings (77.81 �� 8.18) in response to imaginal cues than men (63.88 �� 8.57): F(1, 152) = 5.79, p = .009. No other demographic variables were related to expected craving. Gender was included simultaneously with the primary variables in subsequent analyses. Not surprisingly, higher Fagerstr?m scores were related to a shorter most recent quit duration, F(1, 152) = 7.00, p = .018, as well as higher perceived quit difficulty: F(1, 152) = 4.51, p = .037. The remaining smoking-related variables (i.e., cigarettes per day, number of years having smoked, strength of imagery) were related to neither quit duration nor quit difficulty.

In addition, smoking-related variables were not related to expected cravings. Finally, none of the background variables were related to actual cravings (all p > .15). Relationships Between Expected Cravings and Actual Cravings Expected and actual craving levels in response to the imaginal and in vivo cues are reported in Table 1. Not surprisingly, a repeated measures ANOVA including three factors (neutral vs. smoking, imaginal vs. in vivo, expected vs. actual cravings) revealed a significant main effect of neutral versus smoking; F(1, 152) = 412.14, p < .0001, with overall mean craving levels being significantly higher following the smoking cue (M = 72.11, S E = 2.57) than following the neutral cue (M = 25.78, S E = 2.61).

Interestingly, the Cue �� Assessment interaction was not significant, indicating no overall difference in magnitude between expected and actual cravings; F(1, 152) = 2.17, p < .142. There was, however, a significant three-way interaction between the factors (see Figure 1). Further exploring this Entinostat interaction, pairwise comparisons revealed that actual cravings were slightly higher than expected cravings following imaginal smoking cue exposures but were comparable following in vivo cue exposures (see Tables 1 and and2,2, as well as Figure 1).