The Paradox of Addiction Neuroscience

Leveraging neuroscience education to address stigma related to opioid use disorder in the community: a pilot study

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths are a public health crisis. One contributing factor is stigma towards people who use opioids. We developed and conducted a public-facing, half-day educational event designed to challenge misperceptions about OUD from a contemporary neuroscience perspective. Participants engaged with three different resources on the neurobiology of addiction, and, at the end of the event, they rated its effectiveness. We also collected and compared pre- and post-event composite OUD stigma scales. Participants rated our approach and the overall event as highly effective. Additionally, OUD stigma scores were lower immediately following the event, and this decrease was primarily driven by decreased internalized stigma. Here, we demonstrate an effective proof-of-concept that an accessible, public-facing, neuroscience education event may reduce OUD stigma in the community.

O-Know Opioid Knowledge Test: Development and Psychometric Testing in a Community Setting

Given the various sources and consequences of opioid use disorder (OUD) stigma, the mechanisms by which stigma occurs becomes more important. Educational deficits regarding OUD as a disease and treatment influence OUD stigma. The purpose of the study was to develop, pilot test and psychometrically evaluate the Opioid-Knowledge (O-Know) test in a community setting. A social media strategy was used to recruit 294 participants, in 2019, from a midwestern region experiencing an HIV epidemic, stemming from opioid and injection drug use. The Factor analysis used a tetrachoric correlation matrix, with principal axis factor extraction and Promax rotation. Horn's parallel analysis supported the factorial validity of a two-factor model representing OUD as a Disease (Cronbach's alpha = .57) and OUD Treatment and Recovery (Cronbach's alpha = .62). The reliability estimates were deemed adequate given the intended group-level uses for the instrument. Convergent construct validity was partially supported via the OUD Treatment and Recovery factor's negative correlation with personal opioid stigmatization (B = -.29, p =.001). OUD research must produce measures that convert observations to empirical generalizations. The psychometric analysis of the O-Know scale demonstrated progress in reducing measurement error to facilitate that conversion.

Leveraging neuroscience education to address stigma related to opioid use disorder (OUD) in the community: A pilot study

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and overdose deaths are a public health crisis. One contributing factor is stigma towards people who use opioids. We developed and conducted a public-facing, half-day educational event designed to challenge misperceptions about OUD from a contemporary neuroscience perspective. Participants engaged with three different resources on the neurobiology of addiction; at the end of the event, they rated its effectiveness. We also collected and compared pre- and post-event composite OUD stigma scales. Participants rated our approach and the overall event as highly effective. Additionally, OUD stigma scores were lower immediately following the event, and this decrease was primarily driven by decreased internalized stigma. Here, we demonstrate an effective proof-of-concept that an accessible, public-facing, neuroscience education event may reduce OUD stigma in the community.

(Mis)understanding alcohol use disorder: Making the case for a public health first approach

'Alcohol use disorder' (AUD) is used by several contemporary conceptualizations to identify, treat and prevent problems associated with alcohol use. Such conceptualizations encompass diagnostic classifications and broader frameworks for policy and practice. However, current AUD concepts are subject to multiple tensions and limitations in capturing and responding to the complex and heterogeneous nature of alcohol problems. Further, public understandings of alcohol problems are heavily divergent from professional AUD concepts and remain embedded within an 'alcoholism' master narrative in which disease model stereotypes come with multiple costs for prevention and 'recovery'. The persistence of a problematic 'alcoholism' paradigm reflects the coalescing of multiple forces including the cognitive appeal of reductionism, motives to stigmatize and 'other', and an over-emphasis on AUD as an individually located biomedical problem. Public misperceptions of AUD as a matter of the individual, the individual's essence, and misconceived notions of responsibility and control have been bolstered by industry interests and the ascension of neuroscience and genetics, in turn diverting attention from the importance of the environmental and commercial determinants of health and the effectiveness of under-utilized public health policies. We call for multiple stakeholders to support efforts to prioritize a public health first approach to advancing AUD research, policy and treatment in order to make significant advances in AUD prevention and treatment. We offer several recommendations to assist in shifting public understanding and scientific limitations in AUD concepts and responses.

Gaming disorder and stigma-related judgements of gaming individuals: An online randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The inclusion of gaming disorder (GD) in the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11) has generated scholarly debate, including claims about its potential stigmatizing effects on the wider gaming population. The present study aimed to estimate the effect of addiction-based and non-addiction-based conceptualizations of problem gaming on stigma of gamers.

DESIGN

This preregistered experiment involved a 2 (health information: addiction-related or non-addiction-related) × 3 (vignette: problem, regular or casual gamer) randomized, between-subjects design.

SETTING

An international sample of participants was recruited via Prolific in June and July 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were eligible (n = 1228) if they were aged 35 to 50 years, played video games for no more than 6 hours per week and did not endorse DSM-5 or ICD-11 criteria for GD.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Participants were provided with an explanation of problem gaming as related to either an addictive disorder (i.e. 'addiction' explanation) or personal choice and lifestyle factors (i.e. 'non-addiction' explanation).

MEASUREMENTS

The Attribution Questionnaire (AQ) and Universal Stigma Scale (USS) assessed stigma toward each gamer vignette. Vignettes described a problem gamer (with features of GD); a regular gamer (frequent gaming; some life interference); and a casual gamer (infrequent gaming; no life interference).

FINDINGS

Problem gamer vignettes (mean [M] = 113.3; 95% CI = 111.5-115.4) received higher AQ stigma ratings than regular (M = 94.0; 95% CI = 91.9-95.9) and casual gamers (M = 80.1; 95% CI = 78.2-82.1). Although significant, the effect of health information type on AQ stigma ratings was negligible (addiction group [M = 97.6; 95% CI = 95.9-99.1], non-addiction group [M = 94.1; 95% CI = 92.6-95.8]). However, the addiction information group scored lower on USS blame and responsibility than the non-addiction information group with at least a small effect (99.1% confidence).

CONCLUSIONS

Framing of problem gaming as an addictive disorder or non-addictive activity appears to have a negligible effect on stigma of different gamers among middle-age adults with minimal gaming experience. The concept of 'gaming addiction' seems unlikely to be an important influence on public stigma of gaming.

Should we promote alcohol problems as a continuum? Implications for policy and practice

The highly heterogeneous nature of alcohol use and problems has presented significant challenges to those attempting to understand, treat or prevent what is commonly termed alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, any attempts to capture this complex phenomenon, including the various current criterion of AUD, come with a number of limitations. One particular limitation has been how alcohol problems are represented or understood in ways which do not capture the broad spectrum of alcohol use and harms and the many potential routes to prevention, treatment, and recovery. One possible response to this has been proposed as more explicitly framing or conceptualizing a continuum model of alcohol use and harms. In this commentary, we attempt to identify the key implications of a continuum model for policy and practice, examining the historical and current context of alcohol problem classifications and models. We argue a continuum model of alcohol use and problems holds a number of advantages for advancing public health goals, but also some potential limitations, both of which require further examination.

The "alcoholic other": Harmful drinkers resist problem recognition to manage identity threat

OBJECTIVE

Harmful drinkers represent an important Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) group in public health terms, accounting for significant health and social costs. However, harmful drinkers are characterized by low problem recognition; they tend to construct their drinking identity as positive and problem-free, actively setting themselves apart from the stigmatised 'alcoholic other'. As such, harmful drinkers rarely engage in treatment and represent an important opportunity for lower threshold interventions and self-change. The present study sought to explore AUD problem framing and stigma effects on problem recognition.

METHODS

Harmful drinkers without perceived addiction experience recruited online (n = 244, 54% male, 46% female, 96% British) were randomised to one of six conditions comprising beliefs about alcohol problems (control, continuum, binary disease model) and stigma (stigma, non-stigma), and completed measures relating to problem recognition.

RESULTS

As predicted, results found that harmful drinkers exposed to binary disease model beliefs and stigmatising language had significantly lower problem recognition than those in other conditions. However, no support was found for the prediction that continuum beliefs would be associated with higher problem recognition. Results suggest that the interaction of binary disease model beliefs and stigma prompted alcoholic label avoidance.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that problem framing has important consequences for harmful drinkers. Implications for behaviour change amongst harmful drinkers through mechanisms of problem framing and identity are discussed.

Commentary: Addiction, Stigma, and Neurodiversity

The addictions are subject to a great deal of stigma, the constituents of which include negative attributions such as being immoral, weak-willed, or sick. Negative outcomes include exclusion from positive life opportunities. In this commentary, I briefly discuss the definition of stigma, descriptors of addiction-related stigma, and negative consequences. Solutions to reduce addiction-related stigma are mentioned including providing greater interpersonal exposure to persons recovering from addiction, corrective information education, altering the language used to describe and classify persons who have suffered from addiction, and possibly viewing addiction vulnerability as an example of neurodiversity, as opposed to a character flaw or a disease. Suggestions for future research on reducing addiction-related stigma are suggested.

Determinism and Destigmatization: Mitigating Blame for Addiction

The brain disease model of addiction is widely endorsed by agencies concerned with treating behavioral disorders and combatting the stigma often associated with addiction. However, both its accuracy and its effectiveness in reducing stigma have been challenged. A proposed alternative, the “choice” model, recognizes the residual rational behavior control capacities of addicted individuals and their ability to make choices, some of which may cause harm. Since harmful choices are ordinarily perceived as blameworthy, the choice model may inadvertently help justify stigma. This paper seeks to fully naturalize the choice model by highlighting the determinants of voluntary action and thus increase its potential for destigmatizing addiction. In light of a deterministic understanding of behavior, it is unreasonable to suppose that addicted individuals could have made different choices in becoming addicted and in subsequent situations. To the extent that stigma is motivated by the supposition that addicted individuals could have chosen otherwise in actual situations, a deterministic understanding of addictive behavior promises to mitigate blame and stigma.

Scepticism and hope in a complex predicament: People with addictions deliberate about neuroscience

BACKGROUND

According to the 'brain disease model of addiction', addiction is a chronic condition the symptoms of which reflect persistent changes in neural functioning produced by long-term drug use. Scholars have argued both for and against the validity and usefulness of this way of conceptualising addiction, which has been variously described as emancipatory and detrimental to addicted persons. In this paper we explore how people with addictions make sense of the brain disease concept and the extent to which they find it useful.

METHODS

We conducted 44 semi-structured interviews with persons in treatment for drug and alcohol addiction recruited through a variety of channels. Transcripts were analysed by combining a health identity approach with thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We describe participants' understandings of how they became addicted and what role, if any, neurobiological conceptions play in their explanations. Our findings highlight the hopeful and sceptical viewpoints of addicted individuals on the value of addiction neuroscience ideas and neurotechnologies.

CONCLUSIONS

These viewpoints shed some light on the diverse and divergent ways that people with addictions make sense of neurobiological ideas and technologies. It also describes when, and how, neurobiological explanations and the 'brain disease' model can be helpful to addicted persons. Some of the limitations of the brain disease model become apparent in the complex ways in which neurobiological explanations and labels are incorporated into lay understandings. In order to be more useful to addicted persons, neurobiological explanations should be provided as part of a more complex explanation of addiction and the brain than the BDMA offers, and should not be given a 'disease' label.

Addiction in the Making

This review traces the literatures in cultural anthropology and neighboring disciplines that are focused on addiction as an object of knowledge and intervention, and as grounds for self-identification, sociality, and action. Highlighting the production of disease categories, the staging of therapeutic interventions, and the ongoing work of governance, this work examines addiction as a key site for the analysis of contemporary life. It likewise showcases a general movement toward accounts of addiction that foreground complexity, contingency, and multiplicity.

Lessons in Biopolitics and Agency: Agamben on Addiction

The concepts of 'biopolitics' and 'naked life' have become increasingly relevant in the debate on substance dependency due to the growing prominence of neuroscience in defining the nature of addiction and its threat to agency. However, these concepts are not necessarily well understood, and therefore may lead to oversight rather than insight. In this article we review the literature on Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, whose founding works on both concepts shed a different light on addiction. We argue that the current debate is missing a key insight from Agamben's work: the idea of agency past the subject, of agency past identity. We will illustrate how this can be an important form of agency against the stigmatization of users, making use of empirical data from our ongoing work on addiction and agency.

The 'side effects' of medicalization: a meta-analytic review of how biogenetic explanations affect stigma

Reducing stigma is crucial for facilitating recovery from psychological problems. Viewing these problems biomedically may reduce the tendency to blame affected persons, but critics have cautioned that it could also increase other facets of stigma. We report on the first meta-analytic review of the effects of biogenetic explanations on stigma. A comprehensive search yielded 28 eligible experimental studies. Four separate meta-analyses (Ns=1207-3469) assessed the effects of biogenetic explanations on blame, perceived dangerousness, social distance, and prognostic pessimism. We found that biogenetic explanations reduce blame (Hedges g=-0.324) but induce pessimism (Hedges g=0.263). We also found that biogenetic explanations increase endorsement of the stereotype that people with psychological problems are dangerous (Hedges g=0.198), although this result could reflect publication bias. Finally, we found that biogenetic explanations do not typically affect social distance. Promoting biogenetic explanations to alleviate blame may induce pessimism and set the stage for self-fulfilling prophecies that could hamper recovery from psychological problems.

How has neuroscience affected lay understandings of personhood? A review of the evidence

The prominence of neuroscience in the public sphere has escalated in recent years, provoking questions about how the public engages with neuroscientific ideas. Commentaries on neuroscience's role in society often present it as having revolutionary implications, fundamentally overturning established beliefs about personhood. The purpose of this article is to collate and review the extant empirical evidence on the influence of neuroscience on commonsense understandings of personhood. The article evaluates the scope of neuroscience's presence in public consciousness and examines the empirical evidence for three frequently encountered claims about neuroscience's societal influence: that neuroscience fosters a conception of the self that is based in biology, that neuroscience promotes conceptions of individual fate as predetermined, and that neuroscience attenuates the stigma attached to particular social categories. It concludes that many neuroscientific ideas have assimilated in ways that perpetuate rather than challenge existing modes of understanding self, others and society.