Fig. 4: Replication study: smokers perceived and inaccurately under-estimated the influence of their current choices on future interactions in an independent online sample.

In the controllable condition of the task (a) smokers’ (n = 72) offers increased trial-by-trial but remained below non-smokers’(n = 147) offer sizes. Shaded patches indicated SEM. b A non-parametric test shows that mean offer sizes were significant lower for smokers ($5.53 ± 1.85) compared to non-smokers ($6.06 ± 1.68; p = 0.0266; Cohen’s d = −0.30). Error bars indicate SEM. c Overall rejection rates were not significantly different between smokers (51.57 ± 12.36) and non-smokers (53.97% ± 9.85; p > 0.05; Cohen’s d = −0.21). Error bars indicate SEM. d However, when rejection rates were divided and categorized by low ($1–$3), medium ($4–$6) and high ($7–$9) offers, a non-parametric bootstrapping test shows that smokers had a significantly lower rejection rate for medium offer sizes (57.59% ± 29.34) compared to non-smokers (66.40% ± 27.24; p = 0.0175; Cohen’s d = −0.31). e Perceived controllability rated on a scale of 1% to 100% after each condition of the task was significantly lower among smokers (52.68% ± 34.46) compared to non-smokers (61.32% ± 34.63; p = 0.0442; Cohen’s d = −0.25). Error bars indicate SEM. f The parameter of interest, estimated influence, estimated from the 2-step forward thinking model in the ‘Controllable’ condition of the task, was significantly lower for smokers (1.119 ± 1.016) compared to non-smokers (1.351 ± 0.833; p = 0.0447; Cohen’s d = 0.25). Error bars indicate SEM. For figure source data refer to (Supplementary Data 1).