Addiction (Peer Influences) Flashcards
Social Learning Theory
Behaviour is learned either through classical conditioning or operant conditioning
Two types of learning can explain why people continue to take addictive substances
Classical conditioning means that the pleasant feeling gained from taking a particular substance is associated with the stimuli associated with it
Operant conditioning means that the consequences of a particular behaviour may reinforce that behaviour
While they are good at explaining why people continue to engage in addictive behaviours, they cannot really explain why the individual initiated the behaviour to begin
Ignores the role that other people play in the initiation and maintenance of addiction
First proposed by Bandura (1977) developed from behaviourist ideas of conditioning
Includes the ideas of reinforcement and learning, but is based on the idea that we learn behaviour not just through our own experiences but through the observation of role models
Learning through observation, imitation and modeling of another person
Initially based his experiments with children, but expanded to explain different human behaviour
SLT takes into account the thoughts and mental process of an individual
Attention - behaviour to be imitated must be observed and paid attention to
Must observe a role model engaging in the behaviour, if it is not observed, it cannot be copied
Retention - Observed behaviour needs to be remembered, various aspects or steps involved in the behaviour
The person must be able to retain the knowledge of the actions they have observed
Reproduction - Individual must be able to repeat the behaviour they have observed
Need the physical ability to imitate it and the equipment necessary
Motivation - Individual must be motivated to repeat the behaviour
Motivation
More likely to imitate behaviour if the model we are observing it the same gender/age, powerful or of a high status, friendly or likeable
Motivated not just by the behaviour, but by the consequences for the person we are observing
Punished for a behaviour, we are less likely to do that behaviour ourselves, and the opposite way
Vicarious - we have only observed the reward / punishment, we have not experienced it ourselves
Vicarious reinforcement - reinforcement which is received indirectly by observing another person who is being rewarded
Vicarious punishment - Stopping doing a behaviour after observing another person be punished
Vicarious extinction - Stopping doing a behaviour after observing another person receive no benefit for it
Percieved Social Norms
Addiction may vary from culture to culture
Some cultures hold attitudes towards what is considered normal behaviour that would be cause for concern in another culture
Alcohol / drinking culture in the UK
The acceptability of substance use or addictive behaviours depends a lot on the culture that you are in
Within a culture, there are subcultural groups that have their own social norms
Some social groups may hold attitudes that encourage behaviour that increases the chances of addiction
They may also see it as ‘normal’
Borsari and Carey (2001) made a distinction between the 2 types of social norm
Descriptive norms - an individual’s perception of how much other engage in behaviour
Injunctive norms - what an individual perceives as others approval of the behaviour
People may overestimate the descriptive and injunctive norms of the people around them
Overestimate the amounts that others are drinking, assuming that a high percentage of those around them believe that getting drunk is cool
If people hold these false views about their peer group, they are likely to view their addictive behaviour as normal and will see no need to change it
Perkins and Berkowitz (1986) found that a high proportion of student they surveyed believed that being intoxicated was only acceptable in certain circumstances
A high proportion also believed that their peers thought that it was acceptable
Evaluation
Have a lot of evidence to support it
Fergusson and Horwood (1997) found that peer attitudes to drug use are highly predictive of adolescent drug use
Simon - Morton et al (2010) reviewed 40 prospective studies into the relationship between peers and smoking and found that all but one showed a positive correlation between the two
Biggest influence came from ‘best friends’
Smith (2012) found that rats showed that they were more likely to self administer cocaine if they were with another rat that also had access to cocaine, compared with a rat that was present but did not have access to cocaine
Ennett and Bauman (1994) found that participants who were non - smokers at the start of the study and who had smoking friends were more likely to smoke at the follow up
Individuals who had changed friendship groups in line with their smoking / non - smoking behaviour
Suggests that both peer influence and selection are important processes in addictive behaviours
Theory underplays the importance that family may play in moderating the effects of peer influence
In Simon - Morton’s review, he concluded that research into adolescent smoking shows that parents are an important influence. Parents provided a protective effect from the effect of negative peer influence
Parental smoking was shown to be a big influence on the likelihood of the adolescent smoking
Hawkins et al (1992) found that parent’s drug use has been associated with the initiation and frequency of drug and alcohol use
If parents hold permissive attitudes towards the use of drugs by their children, the children will be more likely to use drugs
Cannot explain all cases of addiction
Not all people who socialise with substance users develop an addiction themselves
It is limited in its ability to explain the maintenance of addiction
Institute of Medicine (1996) found no evidence for a peer influence on the development or maintenance of drug dependence
Issues with generalisability
Many of the studies into peer influences were conducted over ten years ago
