Addiction AO3 Flashcards
Risk factor AO3
Genetic vulnerability
+ Kendler & Prescott, (twins) cocaine use - MZ=54% DZ=42%, cocaine dependence MZ=35% DZ=0%
- Diathesis stress model, genetics=vulnerability but not only cause e.g. stress ~(not full explanation of onset of addiction)
Stress
+ Tavolacci, high stressed uni students related to regular smoking & alcohol abuse
- Cause and effect, by product or causal factor e.g. gambling- stress is a result
Personality
+ Bahlman, 18 alcohol dependent APD’s diagnosed 4 years prior
- Idiographic approach (may be more helpful to have client led therapy focus on individual personality traits) Most treatments are nomethetic e.g. drug treatments
Family influences
+ Dunn & Goldmann, expectancies of 7-18 yr old, mirrored adults in their environment
- Other factors e.g. cognitive influences (‘should i take this drug’)
Peers
- Kobus, literature review, peer influence more subtle than thought. Peers encourage/deter smoking but psychological process needs more research
- Other factors - deprivation e.g. gambling more rife in deprived areas (greater need for escape?)
Psychological interventions
+ Aversion - ethical issues (severe ppts reaction)
- (CP) covert sensitization more ethical - ppts retain dignity & self-esteem
+ (CP) Asham & Donner- 40% ppts (alcohol) still abstinent compared to 0% control group
- CS not appropriate for everyone - need high motivation & ability to imagine
- CS & Aversion don’t treat root cause/motivation - increases likelihood of relapse
Explanations for nicotine addiction: Brain chemistry
+ Research support - McEvoy - smoking behaviour in Sz taking antipsychotics (dopamines antagonist) increased smoking as low dopamine levels
- (CP) explanations are limited, not just dopamine explains - Watkins GABA and serotonin
+ Real world app, NRT (explain how they work), effective treatment
-Determinist (biologically), suggests addiction is inevitable in any smoker
CP - Individual differences, some find it easier to stop - personality
Reducing addiction - drug addiction
-Mclellan - 69% group only receiving methadone withdrawn for taking heroin (groups receiving psychological intervention responded better)
-Methadone is always suitable? Preggo women need to be considered - harm to the foetus? Although better than original drug (heroin)
+ Stead - NRT significantly reduced impact of addiction compared to placebo
- Side effects - sleep disturbance, dizziness, headaches
+ Convenience of drug treatments
- Heroin addicts struggle with organisation of regular meds
Reducing addiction; CBT
+ Petry - face to face CBT for 8 sessions, reduced gambling behaviour 12 months later compared to control group
- Cowlishaw - meta-analysis of 11 studies, CBT no more effective than control (long-term). More effective short-term
- Cuijpers - drop out x5 more than other therapies, demanding (need to complete homework), clients drop out when they think crisis is ‘solved’
Explanations for gambling addiction: Cognitive theory
+Grffiths introspection, compare cognitive process of regular slot machine gamblers vs occasional users. Ppts verbalised thoughts, gamblers irrational, non-gamblers irrational (degree of skill) illusion of control, overestimation
+Support - 30 addicts in clinic vs non-addicts. Gamblers sig higher biases & impulsivity
+Support - stroop task, addicts took longer to perform task when words related to gambling
-‘thinking aloud’ - self-report method used a lot (may be social-desirability bias) misleading impression
-not full explanation, only proximate causes, need find ultimate explanation (may be biological)
-reductionism?
Prochaska’s six stage model
+ Velicer (meta analysis) found 22-26% success rate (smoking) which compares favourably. No demographic differences
+ Application - URICA has scale to measure stages to target interventions (practical app)
-Taylor (NICE) stage based approach not more effective than alternatives, should be ‘discarded’
Explanations for gambling addiction: Learning theory
+ Explains why gambling addiction is maintained, conditioning is ‘automatic’ process (passive), giving up goes against conditioning process
-Doesn’t explain some types of gambling, explains it when there isn’t delay between placing bet and knowing outcome (scratchcards), harder to explain when outcome isn’t known for a while after placing bet (less effective)
-Brown - learning theory struggles to explain how it begins, people experience same reinforcements as addicted people, so other factors involved
+ Research from outside lab situation, compared high frequency vs low frequency gamblers and high frequency more likely to place bets last minute (more exciting), evidence for +ve reinforcement in real world
-Methodological shortcomings, inter-observer reliability
Explanations for nicotine addiction; Learning theory
+ Animal studies, rats lick water spouts one has nicotine other has no reward, rats licked nicotine spout significantly more often, shows positively reinforced
+ conditioning mechanisms same in humans and other mammals
- Human - animal comparisons are flawed- humans more complex (cognitive factors), humans think about reinforcers
+ Treatment programmes based on CC, e.g. aversion therapy (aversive stimuli) - electric shocks when smoking, saves resources and lives
- Didn’t use control/placebo, not valid measure of effectiveness, can’t claim to be more beneficial, short-lived
Theory of planned behaviour
+ Hagger - found all 3 factors predicted intentions to limit drinking (intent influenced behaviour)
+ Widely used - health psychology, practitioners accept predictive benefits, cost-saving, can be used to decide if an intervention is effective
-Miller and Howell found intentions & 3 factors were linked but predictions of actual gambling behaviour weren’t found. Does it predict behavioural change?
