Cognitive Explanations of Addiction.

Gottdiener et al conducted a meta-analysis of 10 studies which focused on the main part of the model which is ego control. He found that all the participants who were substance abusers had a loss of ego control; they thought they were better advised to treat their psychological problems themselves; using drink or drugs. As this is a collection of studies it is more likely to be reliable as all the results are consistent and it will contain a large sample. It is also a recent study conducted in 2008 which means that it is still relevant and applicable to today’s society. Sanjuan’s 2009 study supports the self medication model; he found that women who had been sexually abused were more likely to use drugs or alcohol to relieve inhibitions before sex than those who had not been sexually abused. The self medication model also states that drugs are chosen for their affect on an individual, this disregards the theory that gateway drugs such as cannabis lead to harder addictions such as heroin. The self medication model is highly reductionist as it does not take into account any other theories or models for example it discredits totally the dopamine hypothesis, saying that addiction is purely disordered thinking. Cause and effect can also be debated with this model as it is difficult to explain why an addictive behaviour has been initiated when no major psychological problems are present, however this could be argued as a matter of opinion due to stress being a subjective experience and so can be judged by none other the individual.

Another theory which falls under the cognitive umbrella is the rational choice theory. West et al in 2006 said that an addiction was when a specific behaviour was excessively frequent or the costs clearly outweigh the benefits but the behaviour persists.  Becker and Murphy testified that people choose to engage an addictive behaviour after weighing up the costs and benefits. The model uses the concept of a 'Utility', from economics which is a measurement of satisfaction relative to the consequences of the action. They finally stated that people who conducted the behaviour had a positive view on a negative occurrence, hence faulty thinking. They said that initiation was a rational choice based on the utility of the drug, after weighing up the positives and negatives. Becker and Murphy declared that addicts maintained behaviour as they reason that the utility of the addiction is still high. This supports the deterministic side of the debate as it says that if your lifestyle allows the utility of the drugs to be high then you will b a user. The nature side of the nurture debate is

            This theory is supported by the fact that some users are able to one day stop taking drugs all together, when they realise the utility has fallen; but fails to encompass those who want to stop their behaviour but are unable for some reason. According to this theory making a drug illegal should decrease the utility and so prevent many people from using, this clearly is not the case as there is still a high number of users. This theory cannot fully apply to gambling as the costs outweigh the benefits, however this again is a subjective opinion as the 'rush' they get from gambling may be enough and it may not all be about the financial benefits. The Rational Choice theory is again disproved as in the Netherlands 9.7% of young adults, 15 to 14 consume cannabis once a month, comparable to 15.8% in the UK; surely where cannabis is legal in the Netherlands use should be higher as its utility is higher. This however is ethnocentric and so ungeneralizable to all and does not take into account the different attitudes towards drugs held in the Netherlands.