How has neuroscience affected lay understandings of personhood? A review of the evidence

O’Connor, Clíodhna; Joffe, Hélène

doi:10.1177/0963662513476812

Cited by 90 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 114 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this previous work, we were interested in conceptualising the 'impact' of neuroscience information based on the public's unprompted accounts of addiction aetiology. Consistent with others' findings (Netherland, 2011;Pickersgill et al, 2011;Bröer and Heerings, 2013;O'Connor and Joffe, 2013), our interviewees saw the causes of addiction as multifactorial. We described participants' views as arising from various combinations of six causes that, in descending order of prevalence, were: 'character' (poor choices, lack of willpower and/or a weak or addictive personality); 'emotion-experience' (a drive for the 'thrill' or the 'buzz' and/or using drugs to escape or erase a traumatic past or obliterate the present); 'socialenvironment' (linked to certain forms of social dysfunction at various scales from the family to broader society and culture); 'rational-learning' (resulting from learned behaviour and knowledge); 'biologicalbody' (linked to genetic predispositions, the brain, an individual's biology and/or 'chemical imbalances'); and the addictive properties of the drugs themselves.…”

Section: Findings Neuroscience Information In Spontaneous Depictions supporting

confidence: 90%

“…O'Connor and Joffe (2013) point out that the impact of neuroscientific knowledge cannot be assessed by focussing solely on the uptake of neuroscientific narratives, but rather by looking at how individuals reconcile these narratives with pre-existing narratives of personhood. On the other hand, Vrecko (2010a, b) illustrates the importance of understanding the social and historical contexts that have produced addiction neuroscience.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What does ‘acceptance’ mean? Public reflections on the idea that addiction is a brain disease

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public responses to the dissemination of neuroscientific explanations of addiction and other mental disorders are an interesting sociocultural phenomenon. We investigated how 55 members of the Australian public deliberated on the idea that 'addiction is a brain disease'. Our findings point to the diverse ways in which the public understands and utilises this proposition. Interviewees readily accepted that drugs affect brain functioning but were ambivalent about whether to label addiction as a 'disease'. Contrary to the prediction of neuroscientific advocates and social science critics, acceptance of a neurobiological conception of addiction did not necessarily affect beliefs about addicted persons' responsibility for their addiction. We discuss the theoretical and applied implications of these findings. Theoretically, we examine the complexity surrounding how people adopt new knowledge and its role in reshaping ethical beliefs. We also discuss the implications of these findings for the ethics of communication of neuroscientific information to reduce stigma and enhance social support for the treatment of addicted individuals.

show abstract

Section: Findings Neuroscience Information In Spontaneous Depictions supporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What does ‘acceptance’ mean? Public reflections on the idea that addiction is a brain disease

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, critics argue that this example may be the exception rather than the rule. They argue that neuroscientific understandings are more likely to perpetuate pre-existing ways of viewing the self and others (O'Connor & Joffe, 2013), which in the case of addiction is morally stigmatised.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scepticism and hope in a complex predicament: People with addictions deliberate about neuroscience

Morphett

Carter

Lucke

et al. 2016

International Journal of Drug Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Please cite this article as: Meurk, C., Morphett, K., Carter, A., Weier, M., Lucke, J., and Hall, W.,Scepticism and hope in a complex predicament: people with addictions deliberate about neuroscience, International Journal of Drug Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.drugpo.2016.03.004 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. AbstractBackground According to the 'brain disease model of addiction', addiction is a chronic condition the symptoms of which reflect persistent changes in neural functioning produced by long-term drug use. Scholars have argued both for and against the validity and usefulness of this way of conceptualising addiction, which has been variously described as emancipatory and detrimental to addicted persons. In this paper we explore how people with addictions make sense of the brain disease concept and the extent to which they find it useful. Methods: We conducted 44 semi-structured interviews with persons in treatment for drug and alcohol addiction recruited through a variety of channels. Transcripts were analysed by combining a health identity approach with thematic analysis. Results: We describe participants' understandings of how they became addicted and what role, if any, neurobiological conceptions play in their explanations. Our findings highlight the hopeful and sceptical viewpoints of addicted individuals on the value of addiction neuroscience ideas and neurotechnologies. Conclusions: These viewpoints shed some light on the diverse and divergent ways that people with addictions make sense of neurobiological ideas and technologies. It also describes when, and how, neurobiological explanations and the 'brain disease' model can be helpful to addicted persons. Some of the limitations of the brain disease model become apparent in the complex ways in which neurobiological explanations and labels are incorporated into lay understandings. In order to be more useful to addicted persons, neurobiological explanations should be provided as part of a more complex explanation of addiction and the brain than the BDMA offers, and should not be given a 'disease' label.

show abstract

“…Research in other fields indicates people are more likely to incorporate neuroscience information into their existing models of human behaviour, than to radically alter their mental models to account for biological research findings (Choudhury et al, 2012;O'Connor & Joffe, 2013;Pickersgill, 2013). Our findings are consistent with this, in that most participants did not think that an emphasis on the neurobiological basis of nicotine dependence would change their own treatment preferences or their smoking behaviour.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…While some have been enthusiastic about the potential for brain-based explanations of behaviour to alter societal and individual attitudes towards drug use, empirical evidence thus far does not support these claims (O'Connor & Joffe, 2013). It is important to assess how lay understandings may be influenced by neurobiological ideas in specific fields.…”

Section: Chapter 7 a Qualitative Study Of Smokers' Views Of Brain-bamentioning

confidence: 99%

The biomedicalisation of smoking cessation: a mixed methods study of lay perspectives on nicotine addiction

Morphett¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomedical models of addiction are becoming increasingly prevalent in public discourse about cigarette smoking, however there is some concern that smoking is becoming overly medicalised. Neuroscience research has revealed that nicotine use is associated with longlasting changes in the brain, and these findings are being presented in the media and in advertising campaigns for smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. The "brain disease model of addiction", which posits that chronic drug use leads to long-term changes in brain networks that make it very difficult to quit, is increasingly being applied to tobacco dependence. This is controversial in the tobacco control field, where population-based strategies have been successful in reducing the prevalence of smoking. Proponents of a biomedical model of tobacco dependence believe that it will lead to increased treatment seeking, more efficacious treatments, and a reduction in stigma. Critics of a biomedical model of nicotine addiction have expressed concerns that it will reduce individual responsibility for smoking, increase stigma, and undermine individuals' beliefs in their ability to quit. While these competing views on the impacts of biomedical models of addiction have been debated in the academic literature, it is unknown to what extent members of the public endorse a biomedical model of tobacco dependence, and have incorporated it into their everyday understandings of smoking.This research examined the influence of biomedical discourses of smoking on lay beliefs of Australian smokers and non-smokers about tobacco dependence and its treatment. It also explored daily smokers' attitudes to the labelling of nicotine addiction as a "brain disease." A mixed methods approach was used to ascertain the extent to which biomedical understandings of smoking have been incorporated into lay discourse on smoking and quitting; how Australian smokers understand nicotine addiction and the role of the brain; and how endorsement of the brain disease model of addiction may be related to smokers' attitudes towards smoking cessation and preferences for quitting methods.The thesis is comprised of three studies. Firstly, a secondary analysis of data from interviews with 55 members of the general public, including never smokers, ex-smokers and current smokers. The data was analysed to ascertain public attitudes on the best methods for quitting smoking. Results revealed that while cessation medications were frequently described as a helpful means to quit, the role of willpower, choice, and motivation were seen as central.iii Medications were often described as a "second line of defence", or as aids to be used alongside counselling or behavioural strategies.A second qualitative study involved in-depth interviews with 29 daily smokers about their views on smoking cessation and their understanding of the role of the brain in smoking. The results revealed positive attitudes to quitting without assistance. Cessation medications were not perceived as magic bullets, and willpower and perso...

show abstract

How has neuroscience affected lay understandings of personhood? A review of the evidence

Cited by 90 publications

References 114 publications

What does ‘acceptance’ mean? Public reflections on the idea that addiction is a brain disease

What does ‘acceptance’ mean? Public reflections on the idea that addiction is a brain disease

Scepticism and hope in a complex predicament: People with addictions deliberate about neuroscience

The biomedicalisation of smoking cessation: a mixed methods study of lay perspectives on nicotine addiction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About