Psychological and Physiological Addiction in Marijuana - Essay Example

Psychological and Physiological Addiction in Marijuana: A Comparison Disheng Tan – 301119139 PSYC 300 Spring TA: Candace Ann Bergstrom This paper will define and examine the psychological and physiological factors involved in addiction to marijuana, to help understand the growing popularity of marijuana in our society. It will argue that despite the fact that marijuana is successfully used in medicine, it still causes addiction with many individuals who tend use it for enjoyment, thus it is essential to address the factors, which influence human’s decision to start using marijuana. It will examine the outcomes of using marijuana by analysing the existing literature and medical conclusions. Previous studies demonstrating the impacts that priming, reinforcement, and social context have in relation to marijuana addiction will be reviewed. Neurobiological factors, which do play a role in addiction, will be discussed from a psychological perspective, as they are often dependent upon the social situation that the individual chooses to occupy. Further implications of the evidence presented include finding a reliable treatment option for addiction to marijuana, and attaining government funding to implement community and school programs which discourage its consumption amongst youth. The research will emphasise the importance of taking measures to decrease the use of marijuana among children and young people. Introduction Marijuana has been used as an agent for achieving euphoria since ancient times (Robinson, 2005). Like any other drug, the harmful and useful components of marijuana should be identified and tested to determine their effects on the body. It is generally used for its psychoactive effects, its ability to soothe and relax an individual (Suh, Ruffins, Robins, Albanese, and Khantzian, 2008), and its medicinal qualities (Clark, Fick, & Capuzzi, 2011). The immediate effects of taking marijuana include rapid heartbeat, disorientation, and lack of physical coordination, often followed by depression or sleepiness. Some users suffer panic attacks or anxiety (Robinson, 2005). With these negative effects in mind, addiction to marijuana can be seen as detrimental to the individuals, especially as it becomes more potent and increases in popularity amongst youth. This paper will argue that despite the fact that marijuana is successfully used in medicine, it still causes addiction with many individuals who tend use it just to have fun and represents a threat to human’s health, thus it is essential to address the factors which influence human’s decision to start using marijuana. The usual outcomes of addiction to marijuana Hicks, Pederson, Friedman, and McCarthy (2009) found that marijuana-outcome expectancies can influence cognitive abilities. Subjects were exposed to primes associated with marijuana, and were then given a math test to evaluate cognitive performance for marijuana users (those who had smoked marijuana in the past year) and non-users. Marijuana users had lower scores on cognitive tests than the non-users, because greater experience with the substance can facilitate activation of an expectancy association (Hicks, Pederson, Friedman, & McCarthy, 2009). Therefore, individuals primed to marijuana responded with feelings similar to those they would normally experience after consuming marijuana. This explains why those who did not smoke marijuana were left unaffected, thus demonstrates that even thinking about marijuana use can have an effect on everyday activities. Hicks, et al (2009) suggest that the best way to help an individual resolve a marijuana addiction is to challenge the positive expectancies about the drug. Using a psychological approach to quell addiction to marijuana highlights the idea that the cravings which stem from addiction are largely psychological, and that they form the basis of marijuana addiction. Reinforcement is crucial to the development and maintenance of any addiction. Positive and negative reinforcement models are known to be contributing factors. These depend upon the social situation, which determines factors such as the individual’s mood, cues which could activate cravings in the individual, and the availability of the substance. First marijuana consumption makes the user experience euphoria which eventually leads to recurrent use (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006). Individuals may enjoy the psychoactive effects that occur, and they will eagerly take advantage of the next opportunity marijuana is available. This is positive reinforcement, as the individual will seek to recreate the pleasurable psychoactive effects that were experienced previously with marijuana (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006). Second, consuming marijuana can reduce any negative feelings that may have afflicted the individual at that time (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006). This is an example of negative reinforcement, as the negative stimulus is being removed from the situation, and the individual may desire marijuana in the future when she has a change in mood for the worst. A downward spiral can occur, as evidenced by Green and Ritter (2000), who found that increased use of marijuana is ineffective when used in accordance with depressive symptoms. Another negative reinforcement model exists which focuses on the avoidance of withdrawal symptoms, but this is less relevant to marijuana addiction as withdrawal symptoms are slight compared to drugs such as heroin, cocaine, and alcohol (Berridge & Robinson, 2000). . The damage marijuana causes to people’s health It is essential to determine how addiction to marijuana damages people’s health. Addiction can be divided into psychological and physiological dependence. Although symptoms of physiological dependence do occur in conjunction with marijuana abuse, psychological dependence plays a significant role in an individual’s development and maintenance of a habit. Both physiological and psychological addictions have powerful effects on individuals; it affects the human body and brain in different manners. Physiological dependence occurs when an individual develops tolerance to a substance, and requires larger dosages to reach the desired point of inebriation. Robinson and Berridge (2003) argue that tolerance and physiological dependence is actually a physiological adaptation, which develops with prolonged use of a substance. Some addicts also claim to take drugs not for the pleasure they experienced originally, but because they feel the need to avoid the withdrawal symptoms which will inevitably occur (Robinson & Berridge, 2003). Miller and Pechacek (1987) view psychological dependence as a coping strategy and the substance is seen to have a function to the individual, who is using it to achieve a desired and altered state. The individual relies on marijuana to cope and escape situations, and it is seen as a solution for the abuser. This is one of the underlying factors of why relapse is so common: individuals are unable to cope with their current situation; therefore, they either try to cope using maladaptive strategies, to use a different substance, or relapse to the original substance (Miller & Pechacek, 1987). This is especially significant for society’s youth, who are still developing and face many social stressors, and often have poor decision-making skills. Lauzon and Hales (2010) state that psychological dependence is the sensation of cravings for a drug because of its ability to relieve stress and anxiety whilst producing pleasurable feelings. This stresses Miller and Pechacek’s (1987) argument, as individuals will seek to reduce any feelings of stress and anxiety, while attempting to increase the intensity of their pleasure. Although addiction is divided into the dichotomy of psychological and physiological dependence, there is obvious overlap between the two. The American Psychiatric Association (APA) requires three of seven conditions to be met for an individual to be considered as having an addiction. There must be: symptoms of tolerance; symptoms of withdrawal; the use of a substance in progressively larger amounts or longer periods of time than intended; persistent desire or unsuccessful attempts to reduce or control use; the spending of considerable time in efforts to obtain the substance; a reduction in important social, occupational, or recreational activities because of drug use; and continued use of a substance despite attendant health, social, or economic problems (Cami & Farre, 2003). Unfortunately, a lack of further research has been conducted to examine the relationship between each symptom of the checklist and its implications to addiction. By examining the APA’s requirements for an individual to be considered addicted to a drug, it is clear that addiction is not synonymous with tolerance and withdrawal. As a result, at least one other condition must be met, and neither tolerance nor withdrawal must be listed (Cami & Farre, 2003). Gifford and Humphreys (2006) emphasize this point, arguing that dependence on a substance should not even be considered an addiction unless the individual compulsively seeks to fulfill her craving, even in the absence of withdrawal symptoms. Dodes (2009) stresses this further, by characterizing addiction as a compulsive urge to dispel the feelings of helplessness that are associated with it. These findings imply that there is always at least some psychological component related to addiction, and that it is possible to be completely psychologically addicted to a substance. This is problematic for society, as people will believe that because there are few severe physiological addictive symptoms in marijuana, it should not be taken seriously. While neurobiological factors may be more responsible for other addictions, they are still relevant to the social context that an individual is placed in. Cravings, which are defined as an intense desire for something (Franken, 2003), are often viewed as dichotomous, as individuals are thought to either extremely desire something or not. Franken (2003) posits that they should be viewed on a continuum, however, which would help researchers identify the degree to which one is addicted to a substance. He views cravings as a “conditioned appetitive motivational state” (Franken, 2003, pp. 564), which means that as we get closer to our goal, our desire for that goal increases until our brains reach a hypersensitized point (Franken, 2003). An area of further research may entail examining aspects of Franken’s proposed continuum in hopes of determining levels of psychological and physiological arousal and addiction associated with its respective place on the continuum. It is possible that an extreme addiction may be more controlled by physiological factors associated with it, as compared to a lesser addiction which may revolve primarily around psychological factors. Using drugs and the social life of teenagers Social context plays an undervalued role in marijuana addiction, and can be seen as both a positive and negative contributor to its prevalence. In the modern society is a tendency to consider marijuana to be harmless, while the facts mentioned above prove the opposite. Legalising marijuana contributed much to the positive attitude towards it in the society that is transferred to children and youth. The social context can consist of family, peer and friend networks, work settings, and neighbourhood and cultural groups, which can then be divided into “risk” and “protective” factors. It is possible to state that the use of drugs negatively influence the social development of teenagers as the same time as social influence the decision of teenagers if to start using drugs or not. Risk factors, which describe the progression of marijuana addiction through a social context, include initiation, escalation, maintenance, and relapse. Initiation is the first time marijuana is introduced to the individual (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006), for example at a party or through friends. Escalation occurs as the individual becomes more curious about the potential effects of marijuana, and the individual begins to associate with other people who also enjoy its effects. Maintenance is a continuation of this; individuals begin to find themselves craving both marijuana and the social context it was first used in. Finally, relapse transpires when individuals have achieved abstinence, but find themselves in a social context they associate with marijuana and its effects (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006). In a study conducted by Shrier, Walls, Kendall, and Blood (2012), it was found that individuals were less likely to desire marijuana consumption when with their parents or when they were alone, contrary to if they were with friends. This exemplifies how crucial one’s social group and environment is, and the impact that it can have upon an individual’s choices. Protective factors, which encourage abstinence and rehabilitation for marijuana, include prevention, treatment, and long-term resolution (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006). For one to avoid marijuana, the best choice may be to avoid the situations where it is likely present. Regarding treatment and long-term resolution (abstinence), it is also necessary for individuals to avoid scenarios where they are likely to receive cues related to marijuana use. Cami and Farre (2003) demonstrate the importance of social context and how it can affect individuals, who conducted an experiment in which a mouse was drugged in a chamber with two compartments. Following its drugging, the researchers recorded the amount of time the mouse spent in each chamber, and noted that it continually sought to spend time in the chamber it was drugged in. The mouse was seeking to recreate the effects of the drug, so it went after the only available cues it had from the first occurrence, which was the location (Cami & Farre, 2003). These findings can be extrapolated to society: an individual who has an enjoyable experience with marijuana will be more likely to return to the situation in which it was found in the first place, in an attempt to achieve similar effects to those felt during the first experience. This once again stresses the importance of the social situation in addiction to marijuana. It is important to note that a changed environment often leads to a changed behavioural response in any drug users. Even restricting access to marijuana which may be more difficult can deter individuals; if the cost is seen as too high; individuals will see other activities as more attractive (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006). Even though they may feel cravings at first, it will not be possible to find marijuana, and they will understand that attempts are futile. This is part of the reason why rehabilitation centers are so effective: they place severe restrictions upon their patients, which forces them to take part in other activities. A concept which is an intricate component to the study of psychological addiction is functional behaviourism. This implicates Herrnstein’s Matching Law, which states that in a situation with multiple positive reinforcers, it is less likely for an individual to desire marijuana because there are many different avenues to achieve pleasurable sensations. Herrnstein’s law requires the context to be examined, and demonstrates the necessity to view the entire situation as a whole (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006). This once again emphasizes the importance of one’s context when dealing with marijuana addiction, as the simple feeling of boredom can lead individuals to the idea smoking marijuana. Selective attention also plays an important role in the desire of marijuana and relates to the concept of social context. It implies that as indivduals are undertaking a task, their attention is focused not on the task at hand, but on a secondary task or object (Franken, 2003). It allows individuals to pay attention to cues which they are interested in, and will distract their attention from the original task and lead to the development of further cravings. This can be taken in conjunction with Herrnstein’s Matching Law, as the social context one is placed in will determine how their attention will be divided. This is further supported by Hicks, Pederson, Friedman, and McCarthy (2009) in their experiment, and helps to explain why students exposed to cues related to marijuana performed worse on their cognitive arithmetic test, unlike those students in the control group who were not primed. This further supports the argument that the social situation one is placed in will determine one’s response to addictive stimuli such as marijuana, and that it will help to predict how one’s attention will be distributed within the situational context. Many researchers believe that physiological factors control addiction, and that marijuana addiction traces back to neurobiological factors. Robinson and Berridge (2000) review these factors, and argue that addiction can in fact change the brain, especially the systems controlling incentive motivation and reward. As exposure to the substance continues, the neuroadaptations that occur with addiction alter the reward systems to become hypersensitive to any drugs or drug-related stimuli. These hypersensitive systems do not mediate the pleasurable sensations associated with the drug, but instead mediate a yearning for it. This is called incentive salience (Robinson & Berridge, 2000), and it can be used to explain why individuals addicted to marijuana do not even desire the pleasurable sensations they experienced when they first tried it. Despite the evidence presented, neurobiological factors can ultimately be explained using psychological reasoning. Addiction to marijuana can be seen as a learned response to the drug and the environment associated with its consumption. Studies of the mesolimbic dopamine reinforcement systems which have an influence on emotions and motivation, and largely affect one’s behaviour [Pierce & Kumaresan, 2006] have revealed that marijuana may actually be evaluated as more rewarding than a general reinforcer (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006). It is also seen that the cues associated with reinforcers such as marijuana can increase one’s actions dramatically to develop an addiction, maintain it, and especially relapse, once abstinence has been attained. One suggested reason for this is cortisol-releasing factor, which is released when the body undergoes stressful periods. As the individual continues to abstain from marijuana, the release of the neuropeptide will stimulate the individual to become more perceptive to cues related to marijuana and its effects (Gifford & Humphreys, 2006). Conclusion The research proves that marijuana may cause problems in daily life or worsen a person’s existing problems. The use of marijuana by young people and children should be stopped and it should not be considered harmless. It was proved that heavy marijuana users generally report lower life satisfaction; more relationship problems, and less academic and career success (Robinson, 2005). Psychological addiction and social contexts are more responsible for cravings and addiction compared to physiological addiction due to conscious decisions regarding our choices. Also, situations that we are placed in can largely affect what we decide to do. Although pharmacotherapies and behavioural treatments such as cognitive behavioural therapy and motivational enhancement therapy have shown potential to manage and reduce marijuana addiction, none have demonstrated the ability to consistently result in abstinence (Sofuoglu, Sugarman, & Carroll, 2010). It is crucial for researchers to further investigate treatment options available to addicted individuals and determine which ones are most effective. As mentioned, an investigation into the degree of an addiction may help develop our understanding of the relationship between the human mind, body, and the addictive substance. This research also implies the importance for the government to raise awareness regarding marijuana addiction and its consequences, especially in today’s high schools, where rates of marijuana consumption are steadily rising (Roten, Baker, & Gray, 2013). Funding should be provided to encourage and enforce abstinence from marijuana amongst society’s youth, and to implement proper intervention strategies. Promoting community centers with counselors is a good first step, especially for children in urban areas. Inviting motivational speakers to discuss the dangers of drugs at school assemblies can also have a profound impact upon children and teenagers, and can entirely alter their perception of marijuana and the individuals associated with it. References Cami, J. & Farre, M. (2003). Drug addiction. The New England Journal of Medicine, 349(10), 975-86. Gifford, E. & Humphreys, K. (2007). The psychological science of addiction. Addiction, 102(3), 352-361. Green, B. & Ritter, C. (2000). Marijuana use and depression. Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, 41, 40-49. Hales, D., & Lauzon, L. (Ed. 3). (2013). An invitation to health. United States: Nelson Educated Ltd. Hicks, J. A., Pederson, S. L., McCarthy, D. M., & Friedman, R. S. (2009). Marijuana primes, marijuana expectancies, and arithmetic efficiency. J Stud Alcohol and Drugs, 70 (3), 391-399. Robinson, T. & Berridge, K. (2000). The psychology and neurobiology of addiction: an incentive-sensitization view. Addiction, 95(2), 91-117. Robinson, T. E. & Berridge, K. C. (2002). Addiction. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 25-53. Roten, A., Baker, N., & Gray, K. (2013). Marijuana craving trajectories in an adolescent marijuana cessation pharmacotherapy trial. Addictive Behaviours, 38(3), 1788-1791. Read More