Learning Theory as an Explanation for Nicotine Addiction (AQA A Level Psychology): Revision Note

The role of classical conditioning & cue reactivity in nicotine addiction

• Classical conditioning suggests that nicotine addiction, like all behaviour, is learned through the process of association

• The pleasurable effect of nicotine is the unconditioned stimulus, producing an unconditioned response of pleasure which is intrinsically rewarding and not learned

  • Any stimulus present at the same time or just before becomes associated with this pleasurable effect, and these other stimuli are called secondary reinforcers because they take on the properties of the primary reinforcer

• Cigarette smoking often occurs in certain environments such as pub gardens and with certain people such as friends, and over time these repeated associations make them secondary reinforcers

• There are plenty of other secondary reinforcers too:

  • A favourite lighter

  • The ritual elements of lighting up

  • The boxy feel of a cigarette packet

  • The tobacco smell

• Social learning theory can also explain how smoking or vaping starts, as young people observe and imitate role models (e.g., parents, peers, celebrities) around them who smoke/vape and vicarious reinforcement leads them to expect enjoyment from smoking/vaping

• These stimuli act as cues because their presence produces a similar physiological and psychological response to nicotine itself, and cue reactivity refers to this response, which has three main elements:

  • Self-reported subjective desire or craving for a cigarette

  • Physiological signs of reactivity including autonomic responses such as heart rate and skin temperature

  • Objective behavioural indicators such as how many 'draws' are taken on a cigarette and how strongly

• Cue reactivity is particularly important when  an individual is trying to give up smoking/vaping, as just being in certain places or with certain people can trigger the desire very strongly, as the location or the people act as cues

The role of operant conditioning in nicotine addiction

• Operant conditioning explains why smoking continues through positive reinforcement, as nicotine stimulates the release of dopamine in the nucleus accumbens, producing a feeling of mild euphoria which the smoker finds rewarding

  • Koob & Le Moal (2008) argue that positive reinforcement can therefore explain both the early stages of smoking addiction and how people take up smoking in the first place

• If the individual does not smoke/vape for a few hours, then the feelings of agitation and anxiety (withdrawal symptoms) that arise act as  negative reinforcement

• Therefore, smoking another cigarette is negatively reinforcing because it stops an unpleasant stimulus, and smokers become quite skilled at anticipating the symptoms of withdrawal and avoiding them altogether by regulating their nicotine intake

Research which investigates the learning theory of nicotine addiction

• Bynner (1969) found that media images of smoking created perceptions of smoking behaviour being attractive and ‘macho’, increasing motivation to smoke, and this lends support to social learning theory being implicated in smoking

• DiBlasio & Benda (1993) found that adolescents who smoked also had friends who smoked and were more likely to conform to the social norm of a smoking group, lending support to the social learning theory argument of vicarious reinforcement

• Engelmann et al. (2012) conducted a meta-analysis of studies using fMRI: smokers who were given smoking-related cues showed a more pronounced, intense neural response compared to when neutral cues were shown 

Evaluation of the learning theory of nicotine addiction

Strengths

• Learning theory has real-world applications, as treatment programmes based on conditioning principles include aversion therapy, which counterconditions nicotine addiction by associating the pleasurable effects of smoking with an aversive stimulus such as a painful electric shock

  • Smith (1988) gave participants aversive electric shocks whenever they engaged in smoking-related behaviours, and after one year 52% were still abstaining, a much higher proportion than the 20–25% of people who continue not to smoke after deciding to give up

• There is research support for cue reactivity, e.g., Carter & Tiffany (1999) conducted a meta-analysis of 41 studies which presented dependent and non-dependent smokers with images of smoking-related cues such as lighters, ashtrays and cigarette packets

  • Dependent smokers reacted most strongly to cues presented to them, reporting high levels of craving and increased physiological arousal, as predicted by cue reactivity theory

Limitations

• Despite the apparently overwhelming power of positive reinforcers to initiate nicotine addiction, the fact remains that no more than half of people who experiment with smoking in adolescence go on to become dependent

  • Many adolescents smoke cigarettes occasionally, even daily, but few are dependent to the extent that they experience withdrawal symptoms when they don't smoke, which is difficult for any theory seeking to explain addiction in terms of a limited number of factors or processes

• It has often been observed that women are generally less successful at giving up smoking than men, e.g., Carpenter et al. (2014) suggest that young women are more sensitive to smoking-related cues, which makes it more difficult for them to stop smoking and to prevent relapse after a period of abstention

  • This could be explained by self-efficacy, as female smokers may have less confidence in their ability to give up smoking, which undermines their attempts to do so

Issues & Debates

• The learning theory emphasises the role of nurture in addiction development, particularly via social learning and environmental cues, rather than biological predispositions

  • This is useful for understanding the initial onset of smoking, especially in adolescents, but is less effective in explaining long-term dependency or relapse

• Learning theory can be seen as environmentally reductionist, as it oversimplifies complex addictive behaviours into stimulus-response associations and reinforcement

  • It ignores the role played by biological, emotional and cognitive factors (e.g., genetics, personal beliefs, motivations) in addiction