Individual Differences Associated With Drink and Drug Use - Coursework Example

Practical Report for Personality and Individual Differences: Individual differences associated with drink and drug use behaviours Executive Summary Various research reports concur that many personal traits predict the use of substances and subsequent impacts. However, the motives for use mediate the associations. This research studied personality measures organized conceptually by the behavioural approach and inhibition theory systems (BAS and BIS) proposed by Gray. The study also examines the associations of the two theories with substance abuse and drinking motives as well as consequences among college students (n = 643). Latent variables of inhibition and approach appear in separate models that predict drinking motives applied in use of substances and influences of substance abuse. Introduction Scholars hold that Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) is a significant tool for comprehending the use of alcohol besides challenging drinking habits among undergraduates. An established link exists between alcohol use and the behavioural approach system (BAS), but few scholars covered the role played by the behavioural inhibition system (BIS). Limited research in the role of the behavioural inhibition system (BIS) results to mixed findings on the topic. The behavioural approach system (BAS) can apply to moderate the relationship between knotty drinking and behavioural inhibition system (BIS) if researchers stick to the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST). However, scarce tests on the interaction of BIS and BAS continue to impede the realization of appropriate results. This research made a hypothesis that high Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS) constitutes a risk factor leading to resultant drinking challenges together with an enhanced Behavioural Approach System (BAS). Similarly, Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS) is likely to protect against resultant challenges of alcohol consumption within the pretexts of low levels of Behavioural Approach System (BAS). Statistics trace alcohol with sex offences, malevolent mischief, and breaking and entering as well. Other crimes include unplanned sexual interactions, acquaintance rape, motor vehicle accidents, injuries, and assault. The survey found that thirty-six percent of undergraduates drove while under the influence of alcohol. Researchers also associate alcohol with lesser problems including missing lectures, forgetting things after doing them while drunk, fights, unnecessary arguments, and hangovers. Frequency of intake and quantity of alcohol use are hitherto indicators of use of other substances. The substances mainly have negative influences (Gray 2000). The research associates violent behaviour, emotional distress, psychological problems, occupational, and interpersonal issues with the general use of illicit substance. Other things associated with alcohol abuse in college are increased dropouts and lower scores in examinations and other tests. The use of Cannabis Sativa and tobacco is a predictor of perilous sexual behaviour. Methodology Undergraduate students who drink (n= 643, 67% female students) from two highest institutions of learning took part in the survey. The research included online measures of consumption of alcohol, behavioural approach system, behavioural inhibition system, and matriculation problems of alcohol. It only took one month to conduct the research. Results The first figure is a demonstration of the relationship between BAS scores and alcohol use. The second figure is an illustration of the relationship between BIS scores and alcohol use. The researcher carried out regression analysis of the use of alcohol and resulting consequences using Behavioural approach System, Behavioural Inhibition System, and the interaction between BAS and BIS acting as predictors (Gray 2000). In the cross-sectional structures (T1 alcohol results), the interaction of the two did not play a major role in terms of statistics. However, it played a major role during the prospective predictor of T2 results of alcohol use although marginal in addition to the problems under the T2 study. Analyses of simple slopes showed Behavioural Inhibition System as having a positive predictor of the T2 tests of both the use of alcohol and associated problems (Carver 1994). The whole process did not reveal low levels of Behavioural Approach System (BAS) as much as the effect was less reliable. Discussion Research shows that the use of alcohol among college students including young adults and adolescents continues to decline. However, the rate of using illicit drugs remains steady over the past one-and-a-half decades. The decrease does not rhyme with high rates of binge drinking in the same category, as it remains all-time high. An average of fifty-two percent between the age of eighteen and twenty consume alcohol every month. Sixty-seven percent falls between the age of twenty-one and twenty-five while thirty-six percent of those between eighteen and twenty years indulged in binge drinking. Forty-seven percent of those in binge drinking are between twenty-one and twenty-five years. In the United States, almost half of those drinking fall below the limited drinking age. Use of illicit drugs is not as profound as the consumptions of alcohol as much as not the level that can be ignored. To most young adults and adolescents, substance abuse takes place out of curiosity as a part of normal processes of experimentation. Research demonstrates that follow-ups from early through to late adolescents reveal that it is easy for those experimenting with drugs by eighteen years to adjust compared to those abstain completely. Complete abstainers remained always anxious often getting maladjusted. The other category consists of heavy users who are often motional impulsivity and distress besides alienation or stigmatization by others. Further studies show that most of those introduced to drugs in during late adolescents and early adulthood reduce the intake as they grow (Hagopian & Ollendick 1994). Among many factors leading to reduction are increase in the number of adult roles such as marriages, careers, and parenthood as well. The effects of using substances among adolescents do not extend to impair the psychological wellbeing in adulthood. On the contrary, a few users develop addiction and dependence from adolescence through to adulthood. In the process, they develop problematic effects resulting from substance abuse. Generally, alcohol causes many problems across the population with special attention of undergraduates. Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory and use of alcohol: Findings Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory explains two important systems of temperament with particular efficacy for comprehending challenges associated with drinking. They constitute the Behavioural Inhibition System (BAS) and the Behavioural Approach (activation) System (BIS). Based on the concepts of the theory, the behavioural approach system relies on dopaminergic repayment circuits in the brain. The system gives direction for positive influences, approach motivation, and enhances the processes of learning. People with enhanced behavioural approach system are always sensation seekers, they respond to cues related to compensation such as alcohol. It comes with increase in approach motivation and positive influences (Allegri 2000). An enhanced BAS increases the risk of increased drinking because of motivated positive compensation. Besides this study, other scholars find self-reports of increased BAS linked to challenges of drinking alcohol. The amygdale and hippocampus house the behavioural inhibition system. BIS has the biggest responsibility of reducing approach-related behaviour and offers the rise to touching sorrow with special attention to anxiety. Initial studies linked BIS hypersensitivity to cues conditioned for punishment resulting pervasive fear and anxiety. Gray (2000) revised the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST). In revising the theory, Gray made BIS a system of resolving conflicts. It became an inhibitory gadget that punishment and reward as mechanisms of activation. Significantly, BIS hinders existing behaviour from developing into permanent character in the midst of punishment and reward as catalysts. Furthermore, it helps in evaluating what to pursue between avoidance and approach to achieve goals. Gray characterises people with high BIS as filled with anxiety and uncertainty while responding to a mixture of compensation and punishment (OConnor & Colder 2005). Associating BIS with negative influences and trait anxiety is not new as Gray inherited from the original RST theory. The revised and original RST concur that BIS breeds anxiety in terms of personality traits. Trait anxiety among people with high BIS helps in comprehending the role played by BIS in behaviours originating from drinking. The Five-Factor Model and Personality McDougal discovered original personality traits and called them character, intellect, disposition, temperament, and temper. Other scholars came to the same conclusions albeit using different names such as referring to the factors as topics. The common agreement among many researchers is that the five factors represent the definitions of personality traits. Sensation Seeking A review of literature on risk factors associated with drug and substance abuse finds most of the work focusing on sensation seeking. It is the desire for narrative experiences and the urge to take risks to find other experiences. Initial measures of sensation seeking are adventure and thrill seeking, susceptibility to boredom, dis-inihibition, and seeking experience. Sensation seeking plays a big role in foreseeing the ability of a person taking part in risky behaviour (Caseras 2006). A high degree of sensation seeking increasing the chances of an individual participating in arousing characters including drug and substance abuse, sex, and frequent eating compared to those scoring lowly in sensation seeking. Besides frequent involvement, they also consume large amounts of alcohol, drugs, and food in every session. It is easy to use sensation seeking to forecast reckless driving, sexual behaviour, theft, use of drugs, and vandalism among college students. Research found out that using sensation seeking could help in understanding initiation of substance use at a younger age. A large mass of evidence exists to link various aspects of drug and substance use and sensation seeking. For instance, individuals with high degree of sensation seeking use large amounts of drugs, consume more alcohol at one sitting, frequently use drugs, and use various types of drugs compared to those with low sensation seeking. Anxiety and Anxiety Sensitivity The consequences of using drugs among adolescents do not extend to impair the psychological wellbeing in adulthood. On the contrary, a few users develop addiction and dependence from adolescence through to adulthood. In the process, they develop problematic effects resulting from substance abuse. The behavioural approach system (BAS) can apply to moderate the relationship between knotty drinking and behavioural inhibition system (BIS) if researchers stick to the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST). However, scarce tests on the interaction of BIS and BAS continue to impede the realization of appropriate results. Behavioural Approach System (BAS) and Behavioural Inhibition (BIS) enhance the increase in awkward drinking behaviour over time outlining the need for specific interventions during the first year of students in the university. Scholars feel that genetic factors influence personality traits and start early in the life of an individual. Furthermore, they participate in predicting various types of relatives, and depict stability. The amygdale and hippocampus house the behavioural inhibition system (Castilla 1999). BIS has the biggest responsibility of reducing approach-related behaviour and offers the rise to touching sorrow with special attention to anxiety. Scholars associate alcohol with sex offences, malevolent mischief, and breaking and entering as well. Other crimes include unplanned sexual interactions, acquaintance rape, motor vehicle accidents, injuries, and assault. Conclusions Findings of this study reinforce the interpretation of the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) as it highlights the connection between risks associated with challenges of drinking and Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS) but using Business Approach System (BAS) to moderate the entire process. The nature of associations leads to the conclusion that Behavioural Approach System (BAS) and Behavioural Inhibition (BIS) enhance the increase in awkward drinking behaviour over time outlining the need for specific interventions during the first year of students in the university. Scholars feel that genetic factors influence personality traits and start early in the life of an individual. Furthermore, they participate in predicting various types of relatives, and depict stability. Predicted behaviours include challenges associated with alcohol consumption. Such challenges are indulging in uncontrolled drinking often with negative consequences. The Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory by Gray (1982) covering personality continues to receive attention from other researchers studying the use of substance. The theory offers a link between negative and positive mechanisms of reinforcement regarding the use of substances. According to theory, individual differences in personality emanate from sensitivities touching on the brain system and crucial in reacting to punishment and reward. Therefore, they influence primary motivational, learning, as well as emotional procedures in an individual. The Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) constitutes inferences for the salience for negative and positive results of consumption of alcohol. It increases the value of the theory as an important tool for explaining individual differences in emotional and motivational processes enhances challenges originating from drinking. References Allegri, R. (2000). Attention and neglect: Neurological basis, assessment and disorders. Revue Neurologique, 30,491–494. Carver, C.S. (1994). Behavioural inhibition, behavioural activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319–333. Caseras, F. (2006). Influence of individual differences in the behavioural inhibition system and stimulus content on affective startle reflex modulation. Biological Psychology, 72, 251-256. Castilla, J.(1999).Drug and alcohol consumption and sexual and high school students. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 168, 465-469. Gray, J. (2000). A critique of Eysencks theory of personality. A Model for Personality,1, 246-276. Hagopian, L., & Ollendick, T. (1994). Behavioural inhibition and test anxiety: An empirical investigation of Grays theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 597-604 OConnor, R., & Colder, C. (2005). Predicting alcohol patterns in first-year college students through motivational systems and reasons for drinking. Psychology of Addictive Behaviours, 19, 10-20 Read More