SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Psychopharmacology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Heather, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Heather, N.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
Medline Plus Health Information
*Drug Abuse
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

A conceptual framework for explaining drug addiction

Nick Heather

Centre for Alcohol and Drug Studies, Newcastle City Health NHS Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

The aim of this paper is to describe a conceptual framework of questions which an adequate theory of drug addiction must attempt to answer. First, a satisfactory definition of addiction is sought and it is concluded that it is best defined by repeated failures to refrain from drug use despite prior resolutions to do so. This definition is consistent with views of addiction that see decision-making, ambivalence and conflict as central features of the addict's behaviour and experience. On this basis, a three-level framework of required explanation is set out, consisting of (1) the level of neuroadaptation, (2) the level of desire for drugs and (3) the level of 'akrasia'or failures of resolve. The crucial argument is made that explanatory concepts used at the 'lower' levels in this framework can never be held to be sufficient as explanations at higher levels, i.e. the postulation of additional determinants is always required at Levels 2 and 3. In particular, it is a failure to address problems at the highest level in the framework that marks the inadequacy of most existing theories of addiction. The paper concludes by considering the relevance of the ideas presented to the concept of 'compulsive drug use' and concludes that this concept is no longer useful in the explanation of addiction.

Key Words: compulsive drug use • definition • drug addiction • reductionism • theory

Journal of Psychopharmacology, Vol. 12, No. 1, 3-7 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/026988119801200101


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J PsychopharmacolHome page
P. Haddad and I. Anderson
Antidepressants aren't addictive: clinicians have depended on them for years
J Psychopharmacol, May 1, 1999; 13(3): 291 - 292.
[PDF]


Home page
J PsychopharmacolHome page
P. Haddad
Do antidepressants have any potential to cause addiction?
J Psychopharmacol, May 1, 1999; 13(3): 300 - 307.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Advertisement