Addiction - Theories of Behaviour Change Flashcards
What are the key features of the theory of planned behaviour applied to addiction?
- intention to change must be deliberate and linked to three key influences
- personal attitudes: favourable and unfavourable
- subjective norms: what is normal?
- perceived behavioural control: self-efficacy
What is the theory of planned behaviour applied to addiction?
Ajzen’s (1985; 1991) theory of planned behaviour (TPB) suggests that changes in addictive behaviour depend on exercising self-control and deliberate behaviours.
Central to the model is a person’s intention to change. Subsequent behaviour can be predicted from a person’s intentions.
These intentions arise from three key influences:
- personal attitudes towards the addiction
- subjective norms: perception of what others think
- perceived behavioural control: beliefs about ability to quit
What are personal attitudes?
Personal attitudes refers to the entire collection of the addicted person’s attitudes towards their addiction.
The addict’s overall attitude is formed from weighing up the balance of favourable and unfavourable attitudes.
What are subjective norms?
Ideas of ‘normality’ are based on what key people in the addict’s life believe to be ‘normal’ behaviour.
For example, in the case of gambling: do others gamble? how much? what views have they expressed about it?
If the addict concludes that others are unhappy about their gambling, this would make them less likely to intend to gamble.
How are subjective norms about perception?
The most influential aspect of subjective norms is the person’s perception of whether the people closest to them approve or disapprove of their gambling.
For example, parents may express favourable attitudes towards something in general (e.g. getting drunk) but disapprove of their own children doing it. Nevertheless the perception is that they approve.
What is perceived behavioural control?
Perceived behavioural control is about how much control we think we have over our behaviour. This is called self-efficacy.
For example, does the addicted gambler believe they are capable of giving up gambling?
This may be related to their perception of resources available to them (e.g. support, time, skill, determination).
How can perceived behavioural control be direct or indirect?
According to the theory of planned behaviour, perceived behavioural control has two possible effects:
- it can influence behaviour directly: the greater the perceived control, the longer and harder the addict will try to stop.
- it can influence intentions to behave: the stronger the self-efficacy, the stronger the intention to stop the gambling
What are the strengths of applying the theory of planned behaviour to addiction?
- some research support
What are the weaknesses of applying the theory of planned behaviour to addiction?
- does not explain the intention-behaviour gap
- prediction of long-term changes makes it not entirely valid
- methodological issues
- assumes behaviour is rational
- difficult to measure
What research support is there for the theory of planned behaviour?
Hagger et al. (2011) found that the the TPB’s three factors all predicted an intention to limit drinking. Intentions were also found to influence actual alcohol consumption after one and three months.
However, the time periods between intention and behaviour were relatively short. Also, the theory was not able to predict behaviour related to all addictions (e.g. binge drinking).
Therefore, the success of TPB may depend on the addiction that is being studied.
How does the theory of planned behaviour not explain the intention-behaviour gap?
Howell (2005) found strong support for the element of TPB that predicts gambling intentions from attitudes, norms and perceived behavioural control in underage teenagers.
However, the model did not predict the occurrence of actual gambling behaviour. Psychologists now question whether TPB is an effective model of behaviour change.
If the theory can’t predict behaviour change, it is difficult to create drug-related interventions that bridge the gap between intention to reduce the behaviours and the actual behaviours themselves.
How does the theory of planned behaviour not predict long-term changes?
McEachan et al. (2011) conducted a meta-analysis of 237 studies and found that the strength of correlation between intention and behaviour varied according to the length of time between the two.
Intention to stop drinking, for example, may be a good predictor of giving up, but only if the time between intention and behaviour is short (i.e. less than five weeks). If the time span was longer then intention was not a good predictor.
This may help to explain why the research evidence for the TPB is mixed. Therefore the TPB cannot be accepted as an entirely valid explanation of addictive behaviour.
What methodological issues are there to applying the theory of planned behaviour to addiction?
The TPB is based on measurement of attitudes, norms and perceived behavioural control which are subject to social desirability.
Also correlational studies do not allow us to conclude that drug-related intentions cause drug-related behaviours. It may even be that behaviours influence our attitudes.
If the evidence on which the TPB is based is flawed, this affects the validity of the theory.
How does the theory of planned behaviour assume behaviour is rational?
The TPB explanation of drug-related behaviours is limited because it emphasises rational reasoning in decision-making.
It has difficulty in accounting for less rational factors such as emotions, cognitive biases and past experiences.
Therefore, the TPB lacks explanatory power for the different ways that people think about their behaviour.
What are the key features of Prochaska’s six-stage model of behaviour change?
- each stage represents differences in readiness to change
- stage 1: pre-contemplation
- stage 2: contemplation
- stage 3: preparation
- stage 4: action
- stage 5: maintenance
- stage 6: termination
What is Prochaska’s six-stage model of behaviour change?
Prochaska and DiClemente (1983) suggest a six-stage model in which overcoming addiction is a cyclical process.
Some stages may be reached in order but there is also some backtracking or even missing out of stages.
The model is based on two insights about behavioural change:
- people differ in how ready they are to change
- the usefulness of a treatment intervention depends on the stage the person has reached
What is stage 1 of Prochaska’s six-stage model of behaviour change (pre-contemplation)?
People in this stage are not thinking about changing their addiction-related behaviour within the next sixth months. This could be due to denial or demotivation.
Intervention should focus on helping the addicted person to consider the need for change.
What is stage 2 of Prochaska’s six-stage model of behaviour change (contemplation)?
Someone at this stage is thinking about making a change to their behaviour in the next sixth months. They are aware of both the benefits of change and the costs.
Intervention should focus on helping the person see that the pros outweigh the cons and help them reach a decision to change.
What is stage 3 of Prochaska’s six-stage model of behaviour change?
Now the individual believes that the benefits are greater than the costs and has decided to make a change within the next month. However, they have not decided how to do this.
Intervention is support in constructing a plan (e.g. to see a drugs counsellor, to ring a helpline, to see a GP).
What is stage 4 of Prochaska’s six-stage model of behaviour change?
People at this stage have done something to change their addictive behaviour in the last six months. For example, they may be having cognitive treatment or have done something less formal such as remove alcohol from the house.
Intervention should focus on coping skills needed to quit.
What is stage 5 of Prochaska’s six-stage model of behaviour change?
The person has maintained some behavioural change (e.g. stopped gambling) for more than six months.
Intervention should focus on relapse prevention by encouraging application of coping skills and offering support.
What is stage 6 of Prochaska’s six-stage model of behaviour change?
At this stage abstinence is automatic and the person no longer returns to addictive behaviours to cope with anxiety, stress, loneliness and so on.
Intervention is not required at this stage but it may not be possible or realistic for everyone to reach this point.
What are the strengths of the application of Prochaska’s model to addictive behaviour?
- this model recognises the nature of addictive behaviour
- the attitude to relapse
What are the weaknesses of the application of Prochaska’s model to addictive behaviour?
- contradictory research
- arbitrary nature of the stages
- the model’s lack of predictive validity