Matching, behavioral economics, and teleological behaviorism: Final cause analysis of substance use and health behavior

Heterogeneity in choice models of addiction: the role of context

RATIONALE

Theories of addiction guide scientific progress, funding priorities, and policy development and ultimately shape how people experiencing or recovering from addiction are perceived and treated. Choice theories of addiction are heterogenous, and different models have divergent implications. This breeds confusion among laypeople, scientists, practitioners, and policymakers and reduces the utility of robust findings that have the potential to reduce the global burden of addiction-associated harms.

OBJECTIVE

Here we differentiate classes of choice models and articulate a novel framing for a class of addiction models, called contextual models, which share as a first principle the influence of the environment and other contextual factors on behavior within discrete choice contexts.

RESULTS

These models do not assume that all choice behaviors are voluntary, but instead that both proximal and distal characteristics of the choice environment-and particularly the benefits and costs of both drug use and non-drug alternatives-can influence behavior in ways that are outside of the awareness of the individual. From this perspective, addiction is neither the individual's moral failing nor an internal uncontrollable urge but rather is the result of environmental contingencies that reinforce the behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

Contextual models have implications for guiding research, practice, and policy, including identification of novel target mechanisms while also improving existing interventions.

Contextual and psychosocial factors influencing drug reward in humans: The importance of non-drug reinforcement

The reinforcing efficacy, or behavior-strengthening effect, of a substance is a critical determinant of substance use typically quantified by measuring behavioral allocation to the substance under schedules of reinforcement with escalating response requirements. Although responses on these tasks are often used to indicate stable reinforcing effects or trait-level abuse potential for an individual, task designs often demonstrate within-person variability across varying degrees of a constraint within experimental procedures. As a result, quantifying behavioral allocation is an effective approach for measuring the impact of contextual and psychosocial factors on substance reward. We review studies using laboratory self-administration, behavioral economic purchase tasks, and ambulatory assessments to quantify the impact of various contextual and psychosocial factors on behavioral allocation toward consumption of a substance. We selected these assessment approaches because they cover the translational spectrum from experimental control to ecological relevance, with consistent support across these approaches representing greater confidence in the effect. Conceptually, we organized factors that influence substance value into two broad categories: factors that influence the cost/benefit ratio of the substance (social context, stress and affect, cue exposure), and factors that influence the cost/benefit ratio of an alternative (alternative non-drug reinforcers, alternative drug reinforcers, and opportunity costs). We conclude with an overview of future research directions and considerations for clinical application.

A brief measure of non-drug reinforcement: Association with treatment outcomes during initial substance use recovery

BACKGROUND

Translational research demonstrates that drug use is inversely associated with availability and engagement with meaningful non-drug reinforcers. Evaluation of non-drug reinforcement in treatment-receiving clinical populations is limited, likely owing to the time intensive nature of existing measures. This study explores the association of non-drug reinforcers with treatment outcomes using a novel, brief measure of past month non-drug reinforcement quantifying three elements: relative frequency, access, and enjoyability.

METHODS

Respondents enrolled in substance use treatment (residential, intensive outpatient, and medically managed withdrawal) in clinics across the United States (N = 5481) completed standardized assessments of non-drug reinforcement and treatment outcomes (i.e., return to use and life satisfaction) one-month after treatment discharge. Non-drug reinforcement measures (availability, engagement, enjoyability) were used as predictors of return to use and life satisfaction using generalized linear models.

RESULTS

Non-drug reinforcement indices were associated with return to use and life satisfaction in unadjusted models (e.g., 12.4 % versus 58.3 % return to use for those with the highest and lowest availability, respectively). Consistent results were observed in models adjusted for sociodemographic variables and risk factors (i.e., sleep disturbance, anhedonia, stress). Comparisons by drug class generally showed lower non-drug reinforcement among patients reporting heroin or methamphetamine as their primary drug.

CONCLUSIONS

Results highlight the importance of non-drug reinforcement during the first month following treatment. Rapid measurement of non-drug reinforcement in stepped care settings may illuminate critical deficits in early stages of behavior change, identify those at greatest risk for return to use, and provide targets for treatment to improve recovery trajectories.