Biological Explanations of Addiction
The biological model of addiction's basic premise is that addiction: is an illness; that it is irreversible; that you are either addicted or not (there are no slightly addicted individuals) and that treatment must be medical. There are many models of biological addiction mainly because current psychological research suggests that different areas of the brain are involved in different addictions (quashing the idea of an addictive personality per say). In this essay two biochemical theories will be discussed, plus the genetic model. The latter theory should not be seen as distinct from the biochemical theories as biologists would propose that any biochemical abnormalities that may predispose an individual to addiction are probably inherited. Thus studies looking at concordance rates of addictions in families, twins and adopted children would support all three of the models being discussed. One of the most popular theories of addiction is to do with the neurotransmitter Dopamine. Dopamine is involved with our pleasure/reward system. Anything we do of our volition that is pleasurable increases Dopamine. It is the release of dopamine that makes us feel Euphoria/pleasure. Drugs such as Cocaine, Alcohol and Heroin make Dopamine receptors release enormous amounts of Dopamine, so the user may feel intense pleasure. This however, does not explain addiction as many people drink or
Outline and evaluate psychological explanations of OCD
Outline and evaluate psychological explanations for OCD The cognitive approach assumes that OCD is a consequence of faulty and irrational ways of thinking taken to an extreme. Patients with OCD have different thinking patterns and more intrusive thoughts. The cognitive explanation stresses that everyone has unwanted thoughts from time to time, but OCD sufferers cannot ignore these thoughts and they are often misinterpreted, leading to self-blame and the obsessive symptoms of OCD. So that the negative thoughts and concerns associated with a particular anxiety do not come to pass, compulsions arise in an attempt to ‘neutralise’ the anxiety. The sufferer becomes more wary of having intrusive thoughts and their fear of them increases. As these ideas are constantly thought about, they become obsessive and a pattern of ritualistic, repetitive behaviour begins. A strength of this theory is that there is supporting evidence. For example, Wegner found that a group of students asked not to think of a white bear were more likely to do so than a group allowed to think about it. Salkoius found that when asking participants to suppress thoughts and on other days not to, the participants kept a diary of more intrusive thoughts when they had to be suppressed these findings support the idea that a deliberate attempt to suppress thoughts leads to an increase in these thoughts; supporting
Stress in the work place
Stress in the work place No work is without stressors, but some jobs seem to produce particular stress and to have clear risks to health. Air-traffic controllers and Marine Navigation Officers, for example, who must make split-second decisions that affect the lives of hundreds of people, have an extremely high turn-over rate and an incidence of gastric ulcers that is well above average. People who must adapt their sleep patterns to the changing hours of a rotating shift suffer stress as a result of the disruption of their circadian (daily) rhythms. Women who must balance the demands of a job with those of child care are twice as likely to suffer from coronary heart disease as housewives with the same number of children. Here are a few workplace stresses, Noise, Length of working day, Inherent danger, Such as relationship with co-workers, Organisation of work, Role responsibility There are many environmental factors in the workplace that increase aggression and stress. These include, the noise in which the workplace is at, the heat of the room, Poor lighting within your workplace making barriers of seeing, an overcrowded workplace The effect of unpredictable noise was demonstrated in a study by Glass et al. (1969). Sixty undergraduates completed various cognitive tasks in one of 5 conditions; loud or soft noise that was either random (unpredictable) or at fixed intervals
