Brief Description:
• Etter, Le Houezec, and Perneger (2003)
• Shares the conceptual framework of the DSM-IV and the ICD-10 for dependence (compulsion, loss of control, neglect of other activities, persistence despite harm, time allocation, and withdrawal symptoms) with the exception of tolerance.
Versions:
• English
• French
• Norwegian
• Two Versions: CDS-5 and the CDS-12
Type of Measure:
• Self-completed
• 5- and 12-item versions
• Continuous and multiple choice items
Target Population:
• Adult
Scoring:
• Scored using an algorithm.
• For the CDS-5 scores range from 5 (low dependence) to 25 (high dependence).
• For the CDS-12 scores range from 12 (low dependence) to 60 (high dependence).
Psychometrics:
Source reference: Etter et al. (2003): 3009 participants (daily smokers and occasional smokers) from France, Switzerland, Belgium and Canada.
• Reliability: Cronbach’s alpha for CDS-5 = 0.84 and for CDS-12 = 0.90; Test-retest of 578 participants over a median of 18 days was 0.83 for both the CDS-5 and CDS-12.
• Validity: Construct validity – daily smokers had higher scores than occasional smokers across all dependence items for both the CDS-5 and the CDS-12; Content validity – most components of DSM and ICD dependence criteria were covered by the CDS-5 and CDS-12; Demonstrated sensitivity to change in dependence scores with smoking behaviour comparison; CDS-5 and CDS-12 proved to be better at differentiating daily from occasional smokers, had higher test-retest and internal constancy, were more sensitive to change, and were more strongly associated with severity of craving over the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND).
• Both the CDS-5 (factor explained 55% of variance) and the CDS-12 (factor explained 45% of variance) are uni-dimensional.
Staven et al. (2008): A general representative population sample from Norway completed a telephone survey. Of 1265 respondents, 290 were daily smokers and included in this study. Results are for the CDS-12.
• Reliability: Cronbach’s alpha = 0.81; Test-retest after 12 months = 0.97.
• Validity: Correlation with total score on the CDS-12 and the maximum amount a participant would be willing to pay for a cigarette after going a day without smoking = 0.45.
Utility for Prevalence Surveys:
• Good – used in a prevalence survey in Norway (2008).
Research Applicability:
• The CDS appears to be widely adopted, despite being a more recently developed scale.
Copyright, Cost, and Source Issues:
• Available in source reference.
Source References:
Etter, J. -F., Le Houezec, J., & Perneger, T. V. (2003). A self-administered questionnaire to measure dependence on cigarettes: The cigarette dependence scale. Neuropsychopharmacology, 28(2), 359-370.
Supporting References:
Stavem, K., Rogeberg, O.J., Olsen, J.A., & Boe, J. (2008). Properties of the cigarette dependence scale and the Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence in a representative sample of smokers in Norway. Addiction, 103(9), 1441-1449.
Strengths:
• Shares the DSM-IV and ICD-10 conceptual model of dependence.
• Short and longer versions of the scale.
Weaknesses:
• No cut-scores.