The Case for Pay to Quit written by Theresa M. Marteau and Eleni Mantzari in Nature is about a randomized trial testing to see the rates of cigarette smokers being able to quit from smoking if given a financial incentive. Four different trials were observed during the research. Two trials gave people the opportunity to gain eight hundred US dollars if they had quit smoking. One was for individuals, and the second was group-based. Similarly, there were individual and group-based observances for a required refundable one hundred fifty US dollar deposit, and then a six hundred fifty US dollar reward if they were successful in quitting. Results showed that there was a ninety percent more acceptance rate for the straight cash rewards than for those who had to deposit their own money. In comparison with individual and group-based trials, there was no difference. Ultimately, results showed that there was an overall quit rate ranging from nine to sixteen percent. This was higher than the usual six percent success rate when done with what the authors name “usual-care.”

Within this article, the topic was financial incentives for cigarette smokers, and the research question was asking about the success rate of giving these smokers a monetary inventive for quitting. To answer this question, the researchers needed acts and behavior and they did this by simple observation. They did mention that they checked cotinine levels in saliva to validate whether a person had quit or not, and so reports and observation would work for that also. Lastly, comparison between two different types of incentive trials was the method for analyzing the data.

In my opinion, I think this is a new and smart idea to influencing people to quit smoking. Everyone can use extra cash and so if given the opportunity to gain some and also become a healthier person, you would think there would be an obvious answer. The only problem that I see with this is how the smoke-free public might take it. This ultimately incentivizes smokers for smoking in the first place and so there would need to be serious discussion if implemented into society.