Addiction as vulnerabilities in the decision process

Abstract

In our target article, we proposed that addiction could be envisioned as misperformance of a decision-making machinery described by two systems (deliberative and habit systems). Several commentators have argued that Pavlovian learning also produces actions. We agree and note that Pavlovian action-selection will provide several additional vulnerabilities. Several commentators have suggested that addiction arises from sociological parameters. We note in our response how sociological effects can change decision-making variables to provide additional vulnerabilities. Commentators generally have agreed that our theory provides a framework within which to site addiction and treatment, but additional work will be needed to determine whether our taxonomy will help identify and treat subpopulations within the addicted community.

Immediate Survival Focus: Synthesizing Life History Theory and Dual Process Models to Explain Substance Use

“…Expectancies are sometimes formulated quickly, with little deliberation and even without conscious awareness, but are also formulated slowly, with greater deliberation and more penetrating insight (MacDonald, 2008;Redish et al, 2008). Expectancies are Evolutionary Psychology -ISSN 1474-7049 -Volume 10(4).…”

“…-734-translated into behaviors both automatically (i.e., implicitly) and deliberately (i.e., explicitly; MacDonald, 2008;Munafo and Albery, 2006;Redish et al, 2008). When automatic, human cognition seems to respond better to contexts requiring quick responses to threats or available resources, while deliberative cognition appears to respond better to contexts requiring planful and cooperative responses to such stimuli (Gilbert, 1998).…”

An immediate survival focus : linking substance abuse, fight, flight, and prosocial behavior.

“…One result of this application is that dual process models, where explicit (i.e., deliberative) cognitive processes are modeled as relatively distinct from implicit (i.e., automatic) cognitive processes, have been used to explain and predict substance abuse behaviors (e.g., Munafo & Albery, 2006;Redish, Jensen, & Johnson, 2008;Stacy & Wiers, 2006). Recent research has also applied evolutionary life history theory to the understanding of behaviors often conceived of as prosocial (i.e., cooperative) or antisocial (i.e., uncooperative; e.g., Figueredo et at, 2005;Ellis, Figueredo, Brumbach, Schlomer, 2009;Rushton, Bons, & Hur, 2008).…”

Ecological and Evolutionary Principles for Secondary Education: Analyzing Career and Tech Ed

“…Expectancies contain the value of rewards, along with the probability of achieving them through particular behavioral strategies (Goldman et al 2006;Higgins and Spiegal 2004;Redish et al 2008;Eccles and Wigfield 2002). The FC is responsible for the hierarchical integration of contextually related expectancies into networks or cognitive schemas, which associate salience (i.e., wanting) with long-term goals and current behavioral alternatives (Carbon and Albrecht 2012;Conrey and Smith 2007;Goldman et al 2006;Lende and Smith 2002;Ross and Hill 2002;Stacy and Wiers 2006).…”