Most electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) aerosolize a nicotine-containing liquid that users inhale. Few experimental studies have examined e-cig abuse liability (the extent to which use of these products may lead to persistent and/or problematic use). In this study, 24 experienced male e-cig users completed 4 sessions that differed byproduct used: own e-cig (OWN), an eGo e-cig filled with participants' own brand/flavor liquid in 0 mg/mL nicotine (e-cig0), an eGo e-cig filled with the highest nicotine concentration available in participants' own brand/flavor (e-cighighest), and a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved nicotine inhaler (IN). Outcome measures included crossover point on the multiple-choice procedure, plasma nicotine delivery, and subjective effect profile. After 10 puffs, a significantly higher mean crossover point was observed for OWN at $1.35 (SD = 0.90) compared to e-cighighest at $0.88 (SD = 0.89), e-cig0 at $0.83 (SD = 0.79), and IN at $0.72 (SD = 0.84). Significant increases in mean plasma nicotine concentration were observed for OWN at 7.94 ng/mL (SD = 6.19) and e-cighighest at 7.51 ng/mL (SD = 5.39). Significant reductions in abstinence symptom suppression and higher ratings of satisfaction were observed for OWN and e-cighighest, with significantly less suppression and lower ratings of satisfaction for e-cig0 and IN. These findings suggest that human laboratory methods can be used to assess e-cig abuse liability and that nicotine-containing e-cigs have greater abuse liability than nicotine-free e-cigs and the IN. Potential regulations intended to limit e-cig abuse liability should be tested using these or similar procedures. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).