medigraphic.com

2018, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Elec Psic Izt 2018; 21 (1)

The process opponent theory as a model to explain the addictions

Vargas RJC, Jiménez RD

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 222-236
PDF size: 974.90 Kb.


ABSTRACT

One of the most known models that pretend to explain a part of the functioning of the addictions was made by Shepard Siegel (2005), in this model he proposed, with many experiments realized in animal models, a possible explanation of the maintenance of the addictive substance consumption behavior. Using a Classic Conditioning paradigm based on the Opponent Process Theory by Solomon and Corbit (1978), Siegel proved the functioning of the drug´s effects Tolerance, the Abstinence Syndrome symptoms and a possible explanation of the overdose death. This article describes the model made by Solomon and Corbit, the experiments realized by Siegel that brings empirical support to his postulate. The actual psychological treatments for addictions, with medical and pharmacological treatment have been demonstrated empirically favorable results. The use of behavioral techniques, with the objective of the extinction of the association between the environmental cues and the organism´s opponent answer to the drug´s effect, could be alternative techniques for the addictions and the prevention to relapse consumption.


REFERENCES

  1. American Psychiatric Association. (2014). Trastornos relacionados con sustancias y trastornos adictivos. En: Manual diagnóstico y estadístico de los trastornos mentales (5ta. Ed.) (pp. 481-591). México: Editorial Médica Panamericana.

  2. Berns, P. V. y Bell, L. M. (1979). Tonic immobility in chicks during presentations and withdrawals of an imprinting stimulus. Animal Learning y Behavior, 7 (3), 383-386. Recuperado de http://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03209689

  3. Bowlby, J. (1952). Maternal care and mental health. Geneva: World Health Organization. Recuperado de http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/40724/1/WHO_MONO_2_(part1).pdf

  4. Camí, J., Mcgeary, J., y Swift, R. M. (2005). Drogadicción. Revista de Toxicomanías, 42, 3-14. Recuperado de http://www.catbarcelona. com/uploads/rets/RET42_1.pdf

  5. Childs, E. y De Wit, H. (2016). Alcohol-induced place conditioning in moderate social drinkers. Addiction, 111 (12), 2157-2165. doi: 10.1111/add.13540

  6. Church, R. M., LoLordo, V., Overmier, J. B., Solomon, R. L., y Turner, L. H. (1966). Cardiac responses to shock in curarized dogs: Effects of shock intensity and duration, warning signal, and prior experience with shock. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 62, 1-7. Recuperado de http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/5968272/Cardiac_respon ses_to_shock_in_curarized_dogs:_effects_of_shock_intensity_and_duratio n_warning_signal_and_prior_experience_with_shock_

  7. Crowell, C. R., Hinson, R. E., y Siegel, S. (1981). The role of conditional drug responses in tolerance to the hypothermic effects of etanol. Psychopharmacology, 73, 51-54. Recuperado de http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00431101

  8. Gantiva, C., Delgado, R., y Romo-González, T. (2015). Emotional reactions to alcohol-related words: Differences between low- and high-risk drinkers. Addictive Behaviors, 50, 60-63. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2015.06.004

  9. Instituto Nacional de Psiquiatría Ramón de la Fuente Muñiz. (2012a). Encuesta Nacional de Adicciones 2011: Reporte de drogas. México: INPRFM. Recuperado de http://www.conadic.salud.gob.mx/pdfs/ENA_2011_DROGAS_ILICITAS_.pdf

  10. Instituto Nacional de Psiquiatría Ramón de la Fuente Muñiz. (2012b). Encuesta nacional de adicciones 2011: Reporte de alcohol. México: Secretaría de Salud. Recuperado de http://www.conadic.salud.gob.mx/pdfs/ENA_2011_ALCOHOL.pdf

  11. Katcher, A. H., Solomon, R. L., Turner, L. H., LoLordo, V., Overmier, J. B., y Rescorla, R. A. (1969). Heart rate and blood pressure responses to signaled and unsignaled shocks: Effects of cardiac sympathectomy. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 68 (2), 163-174. Recuperado de http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1969-12358-001

  12. Koob, G. F. y Le Moal, M. (2008). Neurobiological mechanisms for opponent motivational processes in addiction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 363, 3113-3123. doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0094

  13. Leménager, T., Hill, H., Reinhard, I., Hoffmann, S., Zimmermann, U. S., Hermann, D., Smolka, M. N., Kiefer, F., Vollstädt-Klein, S., Heinz, A., y Mann, K. (2014). Association between alcohol-cue modulated startle reactions and drinking behavior in alcohol dependent patients – results of the PREDICT study. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 94, 263-271. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.09.009

  14. Martínez, J. F., Martín, A., Valero, M., y Salguero, M. (2002). Síndrome de Abstinencia. Málaga: Hospital Regional Carlos Haya, Servicio de Cuidados Críticos y Urgencias Médicas. Recuperado de http://www.medynet.com/usuarios/jraguilar/Manual%20de%20urgencias%2 0y%20Emergencias/mono.pdf

  15. Mayo, L. M. y De Wit, H. (2016). Acquisition of conditioned responses to a novel alcohol-paired cue in social drinkers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 77 (2), 317-326. Recuperado de: http://www.jsad.com/doi/10.15288/jsad.2016.77.317

  16. Organización Mundial de la Salud. (1993). Trastornos mentales debidos al consumo de sustancias psicotropas. En Clasificación Internacional de las Enfermedades (CIE-10) Trastornos mentales y del comportamiento: Criterios diagnósticos de investigación (10a Ed.) (pp. 71-89). Madrid: Editorial Meditor.

  17. Siegel, S. (1975). Evidence from rats that morphine tolerance is a learned response. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 89 (5), 498-506. Recuperado de http://www08.homepage.villanova.edu/michael.brown/Psych%208175/Siege l1975.pdf

  18. Siegel, S. (2005). Drug tolerance, drug addiction, and drug anticipation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14 (6), 296-300. doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00384.x

  19. Siegel, S., Hinson, R. E., Krank, M. D., y McCully, J. (1982). Heroin “overdose” death: Contribution of drug-associated enviromental cues. Science, 216 (23), 436-437. Recuperado de http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/mxh/C83CLI/Siegal%20et%20 al%20(1983).pdf

  20. Solomon, R. L. y Corbit, J. D. (1978). An opponent-process theory of motivation. The American Economic Review, 68 (6), 12-24. Recuperado de http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.590.1802yrep=rep 1ytype=pdf

  21. Solomon, R. L. (1980). The opponent-process theory of aquired motivation: the costs of pleasure and the benefits of pain. American Psychologist, 35 (8), 691-712. Recuperado de https://www.researchgate.net/publication/15781664_The_opponentprocess_ theory_of_acquired_motivation_The_costs_of_pleasure_and_the_ benefits_of_pain

  22. Star, M. D. (1978). An opponent-process theory of motivation VI: Time and intensity variables in the development of separation-induced distress calling in ducklings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 4 (4) 338-355. Recuperado de http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xan/4/4/338/

  23. Vila, J., Ruiz, R. I., Trejo, F., y Miranda, F. (2013). Participación de factores de condicionamiento Pavloviano en el desarrollo de la tolerancia a los efectos cardiovasculares producidos por la nicotina del tabaco. Revista de Psicología, 22 (1), 13-21. doi: 10.5354/0719-0581.2013.27715




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com