Addiction (AQA GCSE Psychology): Flashcards

Taking more than the recommended dose (e.g. too many sleeping pills to try to deal with sleeplessness); stopping a medication too soon; and using a drug for something other than its intended purpose (e.g. taking antidepressants to lose weight).

Substance misuse becomes substance abuse when the user takes the substance in order to get a ‘hit’ from it, i.e. feeling ‘high’.

It involves an individual ‘prescribing’ their own way of dealing with physical and/or psychological problems. The aim is for the individual to feel better and to experience relief from the situation or stressor.

According to ICD-10, a person can be diagnosed with substance abuse disorder if three or more of the six criteria have been present together at some time over the previous year.

The person experiences a sense of compulsion to use it.

The person may have problems stopping their use, and/or limiting how much they use.

False.

Persisting despite harm means the person continues using despite clear evidence of physical, psychological or emotional harm — and is aware of the nature and extent of that harm.

The person feels worse than normal when they stop using the substance, or cut down how much they take.

Withdrawal symptoms vary by substance, but may include vomiting, irritability, tiredness, headache and anxiety.

The person’s substance use matters more to them than other activities or responsibilities — hygiene, nutrition, their job and relationships may be neglected, as energy and commitment go towards sourcing and taking the substance.

The person requires increasingly high doses to achieve effects that lower doses used to produce.

A strong desire to use the substance; difficulty in controlling the use of it; persisting despite harm; experiencing withdrawal; the substance taking priority over everything else; and becoming tolerant to the substance.

The ICD is a diagnostic tool used by any medical professional qualified to give a diagnosis — e.g. doctors, clinicians and psychiatrists.

False.

The ICD is used to give a diagnosis pertaining to both physical and mental disorders.

It assumes that the genes a person inherits are responsible for their addiction — i.e. that addiction is hereditary.

False.

Variations or adaptations in some genes may affect the likelihood of someone becoming addicted — there is no ‘one gene’ that codes for addiction.

Then — given certain conditions — addiction may follow.

A genetic vulnerability increases a person’s risk of developing addiction, as explained in the diathesis-stress model.

Because they have identical DNA.

DZ twins share 50% of their DNA, so comparing the two measures the extent to which particular traits or behaviours may be inherited.

It is used as evidence for a biological basis to behaviour.

To investigate whether there is a genetic vulnerability for alcoholism — i.e. is alcoholism inherited?

310 male twins from Skåne, Sweden, identified where at least one twin was registered with the Swedish temperance board for alcohol problems. Including co-twins gave 384 individual participants — the numbers differ because in some pairs both twins were registered and in others only one was. 48 pairs were MZ and 126 pairs were DZ.

Kaij interviewed the registered twins — and in some cases their close relatives — to establish their drinking habits and whether each pair was MZ or DZ. There was no DNA testing available in the 1960s, so zygosity relied on this self-report.

In Kaij’s study, 61% of the MZ twins shared an addiction to alcohol, dropping to 39% for the DZ twins.

That the results support a genetic vulnerability to alcoholism, rather than pure heredity.

True.

Kaij found 61%, not 100% — which is why the findings support a genetic vulnerability rather than alcoholism being entirely genetic.

Alcoholic twins were overrepresented for social problems, suggesting that environmental factors also contribute.

Using a larger sample — 2,516 individual twins from the Swedish temperance register — they again found co-twins were more likely to also be alcoholic if MZ (48%) than if DZ (33%).

Further support for the view that genetic factors have a major influence on alcoholism in both males and females.

The study didn’t actually measure ‘alcoholism’ — temperance board registration only captured people arrested for public drunkenness, drink-driving or alcohol-related crime, so many real alcoholics without a public incident would be missing from the data.

Zygosity (MZ vs DZ) was determined by self-report from the twins or a family informant, not DNA testing — so classifications may have been inaccurate, which reduces the validity of the findings.

They can be misunderstood as deterministic — inheriting certain genes doesn’t make addiction inevitable, it increases vulnerability. The evidence shows both nature and nurture matter, so these explanations risk overstating how influential genes actually are.

Peers are your equals — e.g. in age or education. Peer influence is one of the most important factors in shaping young people’s behaviour.

Behaviour that is learned via experience.

Bandura proposed social learning theory (SLT).

How children are shaped by their environment via observation of role models.

When it seems the model was rewarded for it — e.g. they gained respect or some other benefit. This can happen unconsciously.

Someone we admire and identify with — e.g. a celebrity, a teacher, or a peer we look up to. Identification with peers is especially strong in adolescence.

When the person performing the behaviour is rewarded for it — e.g. Bob smuggles alcohol into school and their classmates think Bob is ‘cool’.

When the observer internalises the reward they have seen someone else receive — e.g. Rob thinks ‘I want people to think I’m cool as well’, and the next day brings in alcohol himself.

SLT can be a mechanism whereby the influence of a peer role model sets the wheels of addiction in motion.

They are at a time in their life when they are trying to establish a distinct identity. Peers offer a way to forge a new social identity — e.g. ‘one of the gang’ rather than someone’s son or daughter.

Social norms are the ‘rules about behaviour’ we learn from the people around us — they are ‘social’ because they come from other people. In terms of addiction, they tell us what’s acceptable within our social group.

False.

Individuals often overestimate how much their group actually drinks or uses substances — so what matters most is the perceived social norm, not the true one.

Because a significant part of who you are is defined by the social groups you belong to (friends, sports teams, etc.). To maintain group membership and stay accepted, you are drawn to behave and think like the group.

An example of a group norm an adolescent may feel pressure to conform to is ‘In our group it’s normal to smoke cannabis’.

By creating the opportunity for it — e.g. buying alcohol for underage group members, providing a safe place to take drugs, or giving direct instruction on what to do.

Reviewing 40 studies on the relationship between peers and smoking, they found all but one showed a positive association. An association doesn’t prove peer influence causes addictive behaviour, but it does suggest peer influence is a risk factor.

Comparing two substance-abuse prevention programmes — one teaching resistance skills, the other normative education (correcting perceived norms about peer acceptability) — they found the normative education programme more successful, demonstrating the practical value of the social norms explanation.

False.

It may be peer selection rather than peer influence — individuals with addictive tendencies may actively select friendship groups whose members already behave as they do. Shared addictive behaviour could therefore be a consequence of addiction rather than its cause.

The principles of classical conditioning.

Classical conditioning is learning via association — a neutral stimulus is substituted for the original unconditioned stimulus to produce a conditioned response.

False.

An unconditioned stimulus produces a natural, unforced response.

The dog is given food (unconditioned stimulus) and salivates when it sees and smells it (unconditioned response). A bell (neutral stimulus) is sounded every time the food is presented, and after repeated pairings the dog salivates when it hears the bell alone.

After repeated pairings with food, the bell in Pavlov’s study became the conditioned stimulus.

To break the individual’s pleasurable association with the addictive substance, and replace it with a negative association.

In aversion therapy for alcoholism, the alcoholic is given the drug Antabuse, which causes them to feel nauseous and eventually vomit.

Just before they vomit, the patient is given an alcoholic drink — often whisky, for its strong taste and smell — so that the vomiting and the alcohol become paired together. Repeating this strengthens the association, until the individual no longer wants to drink: alcohol, once associated with pleasure, becomes associated with something unpleasant and is avoided.

Before learning: Antabuse (UCS) → vomiting (UCR). During learning: Antabuse (UCS) + alcohol (NS) → vomiting (UCR). After learning: alcohol (now CS) → vomiting (now a CR).

The smoker sits in a closed room and inhales cigarette smoke rapidly and deeply until they feel disgust and nausea.

The feelings of disgust and nausea become associated with smoking more generally — so that afterwards, just looking at a cigarette triggers disgust or nausea, now a conditioned response.

The gambler writes gambling-related phrases on cards, which are mixed into a pack with non-gambling phrases (e.g. ‘I ate dinner’). They read each card aloud, and on a gambling-related phrase they receive a mild but painful electric shock — at a level they have selected beforehand.

The shock is the UCS and the pain is the UCR. The gambling-related phrases (originally a neutral stimulus) become the CS, and pain becomes the CR.

Aversion therapy can be combined with CBT for greater effectiveness.

Aversion therapy targets the addictive behaviour directly, while CBT addresses the underlying causes of the addiction and provides coping strategies for when the person feels close to relapse — giving longer-lasting support alongside aversion therapy’s removal of the immediate urge to use.

The aversive stimulus has to be genuinely unpleasant to work, so many addicts drop out before treatment is complete.

Participants who remain in studies tend to be those with a stronger desire to quit — making it hard to draw general conclusions about the therapy’s effectiveness.

False.

They found it was much more effective after one month than after one year — at one year it was no more effective than a placebo, suggesting aversion therapy lacks lasting effectiveness.

Programmes that require no specialist leader, leaving individuals to organise their own treatment.

An individual taking charge of their own journey to beating their addiction.

Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), over 65 years ago — and it is still based on the same spiritual principles today.

The only requirement for membership in AA is a desire to stop drinking alcohol.

They surrender control to a higher power — see steps 2, 3, 6 and 7.

False.

Even though the higher power is a religious concept, many non-religious people have found the programme helpful — the key is letting go of your own will.

Members of the group, and the higher power, hear these confessions and agree to accept the person despite them.

Members support each other and keep a book of names and numbers to call if they feel the urge to drink — offering a safe harbour against relapse (steps 10, 11 and 12).

False.

Members see addiction as never fully ‘cured’ — more that it is held in check through continued attendance and this lifelong process.

Admitting you have no power to stop or control the addictive behaviour; gaining hope that a higher (spiritual) power can help you; and giving control over to that higher power.

Taking a personal inventory focusing on the wrongs you’ve done; sharing it with the higher power and one other person; being prepared for the higher power to correct any shortcomings in your character; asking it to take away your faults; making a list of people you have hurt; and making amends to them if possible.

Continuing to be alert and mindful of your faults, recognising wrongs immediately; using prayer and meditation to continue your connection with the higher power; and carrying the message of the 12 Steps to others in need.

A group made up of people who share the same problems and who regard each other as equals (‘peers’) — not led by an expert or professional therapist.

Examples of self-help groups include Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Gamblers Anonymous and Overeaters Anonymous.

False.

They are separate organisations that have each adapted AA’s 12 steps, rather than sub-programmes ‘within’ AA.

To avoid its religious element or to engage local cultural values — e.g. the Native American method for alcoholics, which combines the 12 Steps with the Native American concept of the Medicine Wheel.

SMART (Self-Management and Recovery Training) is a key adaptation that drops the ‘higher power’ and focuses on internal control instead — self-empowerment and self-reliance.

A trained facilitator who is themselves a recovering addict — so the meetings remain peer-led.

They emphasise the whole person and how addiction impacts their life and those around them — which contrasts with more reductionist approaches such as aversion therapy, which targets stimulus-response links rather than the person as a whole.

Ferri et al. found no significant difference in effectiveness between AA and other treatments. AA’s own data claims 33% of 8,000 North American members stayed sober for 10+ years, but doesn’t report how many left the programme unsuccessfully — making it hard to get clear data on overall effectiveness.

Self-help is demanding — continued attendance requires high motivation, and some people don’t want to share their experiences and emotions with a group. It may therefore only suit a particular type of person.