Standers… Write one sentence on each for the cognitive approach! You will be able to outline and evaluate the cognitive explanation of addiction By the end you will have created a burger paragraph for this approach!

Fold your paper in thirds. On the TOP third of your paper… Identify one of the models Write a paragraph describing how it explains addiction (AO1) Initiation, Maintenance and Relapse!

Evaluating a Theory: STANDERS S Situational vs Dispositional Is it the situation or personality? Think: Individual differences! Locus of Control? TType of DataQualitative or Quantitative? AApplication How could we apply this in the real world? E.g. treatments? NNature vs Nurture Is Genetics or Environment causing the behaviour? D Determinism vs Freewill Do we have a choice over the behaviour? E Ethonocentric Bias? Is the theory bias towards a certain culture? R Reductionism vs Holism Is the theory too simple or does it include lots of different perspectives? SScientific? Is the theory easy to operationalise and test? On the other two thirds… Create the other part of the Burger Paragraph… Question your evidence (AO1), is it strong evidence or are there problems? This matters because… USE STANDERS!!

Burger Paragraph! Possible paragraph layout: Present your evidence What does this evidence suggest Question your evidence, is it strong evidence or are there problems? This matters because

Possible paragraph layout: Present your evidence What does this evidence suggest Question your evidence, is it strong evidence or are there problems? This matters because The Learning approach to addiction originates from Skinner’s Theory of Operant Conditioning; the belief that any behaviour we are rewarded for is repeated. He based this on his studies with pigeons; rewarding them whenever they pecked a red button, which they continued to do until the reward was stopped. He found behaviour persisted the most when rewards were of a variable ratio; the timing of a reward is random and therefore unpredictable. This suggests that all addictions are based on the idea that they offer a positive reward; psychologically or physically. For example gambling rewards the player with money and a joyful feeling. Therefore, the approach can not only explain why people gamble again after winning, but why they also continue to gamble even after a number of loses; the individual believes ‘it could be the next time’, due to the variable nature of the reward ratio. We should be cautious when using the Learning Approach to explain addictive behaviour as it is a reductionist approach; saying that only behaviour that is rewarded will continue. It ignores other factors that play a part in our behaviour such as negative thought processes; addiction could be the result of a reaction to emotional trauma and used as coping mechanism. Furthermore if the development of an addiction was solely the outcome of reward; how is it that the prevalence rates for alcoholism in families is 36% compared to 9% of men and 4% of women in the general population. Similarly nicotine dependence has been shown to be 60% – 70% heritable. Alongside this the Learning Approach does not account for individual differences in rates of addiction that maybe accounted for by the inheritance of a more sensitive mesolimbic dopamine pathway (Liebman and Cooper, 1989). The Learning Approach allows for the development of effective treatments based on punishment and token economies; often used in rehabilitation centres. But it also ignores the possible underlying biological causes for the addiction which behavioural treatments may not tackle and therefore make relapse after treatment more likely.

Possible paragraph layout: Present your evidence What does this evidence suggest Question your evidence, is it strong evidence or are there problems? This matters because The Learning approach to addiction originates from Skinner’s Theory of Operant Conditioning; the belief that any behaviour we are rewarded for is repeated. He based this on his studies with pigeons; rewarding them whenever they pecked a red button, which they continued to do until the reward was stopped. He found behaviour persisted the most when rewards were of a variable ratio; the timing of a reward is random and therefore unpredictable. This suggests that all addictions are based on the idea that they offer a positive reward; psychologically or physically. For example gambling rewards the player with money and a joyful feeling. Therefore, the approach can not only explain why people gamble again after winning, but why they also continue to gamble even after a number of loses; the individual believes ‘it could be the next time’, due to the variable nature of the reward ratio. We should be cautious when using the Learning Approach to explain addictive behaviour as it is a reductionist approach; saying that only behaviour that is rewarded will continue. It ignores other factors that play a part in our behaviour such as negative thought processes; addiction could be the result of a reaction to emotional trauma and used as coping mechanism. Furthermore if the development of an addiction was solely the outcome of reward; how is it that the prevalence rates for alcoholism in families is 36% compared to 9% of men and 4% of women in the general population. Similarly nicotine dependence has been shown to be 60% – 70% heritable. Alongside this the Learning Approach does not account for individual differences in rates of addiction that maybe accounted for by the inheritance of a more sensitive mesolimbic dopamine pathway (Liebman and Cooper, 1989). The Learning Approach allows for the development of effective treatments based on punishment and token economies; often used in rehabilitation centres. But it also ignores the possible underlying biological causes for the addiction which behavioural treatments may not tackle and therefore make relapse after treatment more likely.