Is_Drug_Dependency_Socially_or_Biologically_Generated__Critically_Evaluate_Theoretical_Perspectives_and_Support_Your_Answer_with_Empirical_Evidence.

Is drug dependency socially or biologically generated' Critically evaluate theoretical perspectives and support your answer with empirical evidence. In this essay I will be discussing whether drug dependency is purely socially or biologically generated or whether it is actually multi-factorial. I will demonstrate this by first reviewing the theoretical perspectives for the social argument and the evidence supporting these. I will then review the biological theories and the supporting research. I will conclude by discussing the multi-factorial approach to drug dependency and also the difficulties which arise from this debate. Extrapersonal factors have been argued to be the cause of drug dependency. There are many environmental influences present and many of these factors are intertwined, therefore, only a few of the main factors will be discussed. One suggestion under the social bonding theory is the idea of the impact of school on young people’s behaviours. Success at school and ties to this social bond is believed to be a protective factor against drug use. In Fannery, Vazsonyi, Torquati and Fridrichs’ (1994) research into the risk of adolescents to substance use, they showed that “positive school adjustment and academic achievement can provide a context in which children and adolescents experience success and gain reinforcements for their efforts”. (p.209). This achievement reinforces their social bond. Similarly, “there are higher rates of drug misuse among persistent truants and excludees [of school]” (Every Child Matters: Change for Children: Young people and drugs, 2005, p.7). This shows support for this approach as the research surrounding school influence has been implemented in Government policy. In the Every Child Matters (2005) report, the strategy states to put into place interventions which aim to help the most vulnerable children, those who are not succeeding at school. A limitation of this approach is that it is unable to explain why adolescents who succeed at school and academia go on to use drugs, or those who don’t do well and truant, do not. As well as this, many studies into this area, such as Flannery et al (1994) use adolescents self-report measures to gain their data. This can be unreliable as the adolescents may be unwilling to admit they take, or have ever taken drugs, and may alter their answers to fit with the social norms. Therefore it cannot be a full explanation of the generation of drug dependency. Another social theoretical perspective in support of the social approach is Bandura's Social Learning Theory. This theory suggests that people use drugs as a result of vicarious learning, whereby they learn the behaviour from ‘role models’ such as peers and celebrities. Bandura’s theory can be seen to be influential to Government policy. For example, in the Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy for England (2004), it was stated that the alcohol industry must not use advertising or manufacture products which would appeal to young people, or promote excessive drinking. This supports the social learning theory, as the Government is expressing that young people can learn and imitate behaviour from adverts to start drinking alcohol. By banning the use of this type of advertising, it can be argued that they are trying to eliminate the possibility for young people to learn from this. Research has also taken place which supports the social learning theory of drug dependency. Akers (1996) conducted a longitudinal study into adolescent smoking, and found that “only the variables measuring social learning theory have significant effect on adolescents smoking behaviour”. (p.319). However, there are some issues with this theory which suggests that it cannot fully explain drug dependency. One such problem is that the theory ignores any biological factors which may have contributed. Furthermore, the theory fails to explain the occurrence of drug dependency when an individual has not been in an environment in which vicarious learning of drug use has taken place. For example, an individual may not have any family members or peers who use drugs, or have access to media, such as in a deprived area, but still uses drugs. The social learning theory is limited to explaining how the previous example of drug abuse would have occurred. On the other hand, it has been argued that drug dependency is biologically generated. One such theoretical perspective is that there is a genetic heritability to drug abuse. It is suggested that genetics can account for both predispositions to certain drugs and may also indirectly influence other factors such as an individual’s personality and temperament. Research into this area tends to be based on adoption studies of twins. Grove et al (1989) interviewed monozygotic twins reared apart and found that the drug scale used for analyses showed a significant level of heritability. Furthermore, “other genetics work suggests that brother-brother co-occurrence of alcoholism may be as high as 50 per cent” (Reich, 2000, as cited in Sussman and Ames, 2001, p.70). Such research as this gives support for the argument of genetic heritability, as the results have highlighted the genetic possibility and the research is usually based on adoption studies, which is thought to be more reliable as it eliminates the environmental influences, if the twins are raised apart. However it has also been argued that you can never truly remove the influence of the environment, as although the twins have been adopted out, it is likely to be into a similar environment, and so these influences may still occur. Another biological explanation is personality traits. For example, the personality trait of sensation-seeking suggests that people take drugs in order to achieve a particular feeling which they can’t otherwise achieve by normal means. Barnea, Teichman and Rahav (1992) found that sensation-seeking was the “only personality trait that significantly explains substance use” (p.195). The idea of sensation-seeking also links in with the neo-psychoanalytic view, which suggests that the Id causes the need for sensation-seeking to satisfy the pleasure principle. This view also suggests that the Ego, to satisfy the reality principle, may be the reason why people self-medicate with drugs, to meet the needs of the Id. Consequently, mainstream psychology has generally dismissed this neo-psychoanalytic view of drug use, as the theory is based on the analysis of case studies, which can not be generalised. Furthermore in the research of personality traits, it has been suggested that adolescents who have personality disorders are also more likely to have a drug dependency as well. Reebye et al (1995, as cited in Swadi, 1999) found that over half of adolescents who met criteria for a conduct disorder also met criteria for a substance use disorder. Research such as this provides evidence that personality traits may have an influence on the development of drug dependency, as there has been shown to be a relationship between them. However, it has been disputed as to whether research into areas such as personality traits are actually social rather than biological, as it may be argued that personality traits and characteristics are a social construct, built from the family and society, not through biology. For example, Spooner (1999) suggested that personality traits which reflected a lack of social bonding, such as resistance to authority and low sense of social responsibility, were found to be predictive of early and frequent drug use. Therefore personality traits can be placed under the social heading, not just biological. In conclusion, drug dependency can be shown to be socially and biologically generated, as supported by empirical evidence. However, both of these approaches are unable to fully explain the development of drug dependency alone. Therefore it is argued that it is a multi-factorial approach, and should be explained using a combination of both social and biological factors. It is useful to view this approach as multi-factorial as intrapersonal and extrapersonal factors are often intertwined and can become difficult to distinguish whether one precedes the other or not. As such, within research and theory it can not always be clearly identified as to what is causing the drug use and dependency to occur. One such integrated theory of drug dependency is the risk and protective factors model. This model suggests that there are risk factors which can influence the use of drugs, such as genetic predisposition or failure at school, but there are also protective factors, such as attachment to parents, which reduce the risk of substance abuse. The concept is that the more risk factors that individuals have, the more likely it is that the person will use drugs (Bry et al, 1982, as cited in Sussman, 2001). Although this model has theoretical strength as it combines both social and biological factors, it still is unable to definitely predict what behaviours may occur of an individual, as different risk and protective factors will hold different significance for individuals. Another multi-factorial approach is the Triadic influence theory by Petraitis et al (1995, as cited in Sussman, 2001). Petraitis et al (1995) attempted to design an integrative model by researching fourteen multivariate theories of teenage drug use. The theory is broken down into three domains of interpersonal, attitudinal and intrapersonal factors. This theory takes into account both social and biological factors and draws a link between how they interact to cause drug use to occur. There are many other multi-factorial theories to explain drug dependency, and although they are considered theoretically rich in comparison to the single theories, they are still unable to provide a definite answer as to what causes drug dependency. Although there are many explanations provided, numerous of which are supported by empirical evidence, a prevention programme which incorporates these, and stops drug use has yet to be found. In relation to this, an overall problem with this debate is whether it is culturally specific or not. Much of the research surrounding drug use in the UK is done for the Government, so the results can be implemented in their policies. There is little research across cultures, and as many cultures view drugs differently, the same theory which may work in one culture, may not in another. For example in the Netherlands, the use of marijuana is legal, whereas in the UK it is classed as an illegal class B drug. As a result, it can be suggested that any research done, including those mentioned afore, a culturally specific to where the research was conducted, and cannot be generalised out. References: Akers, R.L. & Lee, G.. (1996). A longitudinal test of social learning theory: Adolescent Smoking. [Electronic version]. Journal of Drug Issues, 26(2), 317-343. Barnea, Z., Teichman, M., & Rahav, G. (1992). Personality, Cognitive, and Interpersonal Factors in Adolescent Substance Use: A Longitudinal Test of an Integrative Model. [Electronic version]. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21(2), 187-201. Department for Education and Skills. (2005). Every Child Matters: Change for Children: Young people and drugs. Retrieved January 20th, 2010, from http://drugs.homeoffice.gov.uk/young-people/strategy/'version=5 Flannery, D.J., Vazsonyi, A.T., Torquati, J., & Fridrich, A. (1994). Ethnic and gender differences in risk for early adolescent substance use. [Electronic version]. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23(2), 195-213. Grove, W.M., Eckert, E.D., Heston, L., Bouchard, T.J., Segal, N., & Lykken, D.T. (1989). Heritability of substance use and antisocial behaviour: A study of monozygotic twins reared apart. [Electronic version]. Biological Psychiatry, 27(12), 1293-1304. Home Office. (2004). Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy for England. Retrieved January 20th, 2010, from http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/cabinetoffice/strategy/assets/caboffce%20alcoholhar.pdf Spooner, C. (1999). Causes and Correlates of Adolescent Drug Abuse and Implications for Treatment. [Electronic version]. Drug and Alcohol Review, 18, 453-475. Sussman, S. & Ames, S.L. (2001). The social psychology of drug abuse. Buckingham: Open University Press. Swadi, H. (1995). Individual Risk Factors for Adolescent Substance Use. [Electronic version]. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 55, 209-224.