Health Psychology Revision


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Health Psychology Revision

  1. 1. Unit 3Health Psychology
  2. 2. Definitions• Health psychology considers the reasons for behaviour that is detrimental to health, such as substance misuse. The emphasis then is on how to promote healthy living. – Understanding what causes good and bad health, using psychology to promote good health – For example, it looks at biological causes of subjstance abuse and how drug treatments might work – Understand health from a cognitive, social and biological perspective – The study of how our mental and physical health can be assessed
  3. 3. Key Terms– Synapse– Substance misuse– Tolerance– Physical dependence– Psychological dependence– withdrawal
  4. 4. Methodology• LAB STUDIES USING ANIMALS• Animal laboratory experiments can be used to show a cause and effect relationship between the drug administered and the behaviour resulting/eq;• • Mice can be used to comparatively study the effects of drugs on the brain or vital organs as they can be sacrificed to examine physiological damage• Monkeys, for example, can be studied to investigate the reinforcing effects of a drug on behaviour to understand what schedule of reinforcement or type of drug causes addictive behaviour/eq;• • Meisch (2001) used monkeys research to show that they would be more likely to drink a drug solution than water, demonstrating its reinforcing effects• Animals can be used to test substitute biological drugs/replacement drugs for addicts• The findings of animal research are used to judge possible influences on human behaviour or physiology• Rat Park was developed to understand whether drugs are bioloigically addictive or reinforced behaviour/eq;
  5. 5. Methodology• Evaluating use of animal research – practical issues (nb you don’t need to know all of these, just pick 2-3 that you could expand on, and use examples from animal studies to demonstrate the point) – Animals are more practical to use than humans as their behaviour can be monitored closely in confined situations over long periods of time – Relatively cheap and can be used in large numbers/relatively small and easy to handle/easier to house and cage – Animal research as a whole is expensive as it involves specialist equipment/facilities – In drug trials animals are cheaper/more cost effective in terms of fee/cost and amount of drug – than humans – The knowledge gained from animal research can benefit humans, making it important in improving the quality of human life – Human behaviour is very different from animal behaviour, so the results of such study may not be generalisable to humans – The nervous system (neural transmission) is the same in animals as it is in humans, so the results of drug research on neural transmission should be generalisable to humans – Animals breed quickly, so the heritability of conditions caused by durg use can be studied conveniently
  6. 6. Methodology• Evaluating ethics of animals research to study drugs• Animal research is subject to strict regulation that can be costly to set up as special housing, equipment and a licence is required• Guidelines are enforced with animal research such as housing, number, endangered species, painful procedures• Animals can suffer during experimentation which may be seen as morally objectionable/pro-species argument• Animals respond differently from humans to drugs, so suffering may be more extreme. Aw• Animals can be used where suffering may be unacceptable to inflict upon humans• The least number of animals should be used in animal research to minimise suffering to the least amount of animals• If procedures cause pain to the animal an anaesthetic can be used to alleviate the pain• The benefits of the research should outweigh the costs to the animals involved• During drug experimentation animals may suffer pain and discomfort (basic mark)
  7. 7. Methodology• Human Research method 1 – Interviews• Can be used to generate quantitative and qualitative information about the effects of drug use and effectiveness of prevention/rehabilitation programmes• Interviews can gather essential information about the individuals experience of drug use, social conditions and rehab/relapse conditions• Qualitative information can be gathered about the experiences of drug use/lifestyle• Quantitative information can be gathered about amount of substance abuse, age of commencement etc• Blattler et al (2002) used interviews to find out amount of drug taken and other patterns, looking at heroin and cocaine use/eq;• Structured and unstructured interviews + open/closed ended questions + face to face between researcher and interviewee/eq;
  8. 8. Methodology• Human research 1 evaluation• Strengths• Can provide qualitative data about feelings – Human participants can provide qualitative data that cannot be measured in animal studies in the same way/eq; – Such as how drugs make the person feel/subjective experiences/eq;• Long terms effects can be studied – Longitudinal research can be conducted into the long term effects of drug use or rehabilitation/eq; so that more robust conclusion can be drawn over time/eq;• Can generalise to humans, unlike animal studies – In depth research into factors associated with drug use can be investigated so that vulnerability can be predicted in humans/eq; – Human studies do not have generalisability issues associated with animal research - animals may not respond in the same way to drugs/eq; – animals may not respond in the same way to drugs because of cognitive/physiological/behavioural differences between us/eq; – They test drugs on humans that other humans will use so the findings will show exactly what effects the drugs will have on humans because we share the same central nervous system• Validity – Human research conducted in real life is more valid than artificial situations used to study animals – Which means findings can be applied to real life siutations such as to help drug users
  9. 9. Weaknesses of surveys Ps• Ps may not tell the truth about their drug use so distort the results, this is because drug taking is a sensitive topic so Ps may cover up or exaggerate the extent of their drug misuse• Ps may give socially desirable answers and say what they believe they should say which would affect the validity of the findings as all responses will be skewed to social norms values• Closed questions may not offer the opportunity to give the detailed response or actual response the P would want to give• Open questions are open to interpretation by the researchers – such subjectivity will elad to bias and could affect the validity of the research
  10. 10. Methodology• Human research 2nd method – Questionnaires• Blattler et al used questionnaires to assess the effectiveness of prescription heroin• Questionnaires can be used to gather a lot of information about the prevalence, experiences and causes of drug use• Questionnaires can gather qualitative and quantitative information based on type of question asked (closed or open)• Ennett et al used questionnaires to gather information about smoking and peer group influence directly from the source by asking/self report method
  11. 11. Methodology• Using humans as participants – method 2 (alternative) – PET SCANS• PET scans can be used on human participants to understand the effects of drug use on the brain structure and functioning• Blood flow to a particular area of the brain can be detected/imaged to show the active parts of the brain during/following drug use• Scott (2004) found that smokers brains were less active in memory, emotion and pleasure regions after smoking cigarettes
  12. 12. Methodology – evaluate one study using humans as participants• Blatter et al (2002• Cross checking using biological and self report measures of drug use to ensure the findings were valid• They followed up reasons for drop out from the programme to ensure that the findings were not biased by the remaining participants• The study was ethically correct and authorised by an ethics committee for offering of drugs• A full right to withdraw was offered and often taken up• As participants maintained their normal routines the findings of the study in terms of its effect on social behaviour should have good ecological validity• The study could be criticised for having a cohort effect, the findings could be due to conditions of the cohort and time• The sample size of drug users was high offering generalisable findings in the drug user population in Switzerland• Urine tests were used and cross checked against drug use claims
  13. 13. Methodology• Why use humans not animals?• Animals are behaviourally/genetically/physiologically different to humans so findings may not be generalisable• Drugs affect the brain and as humans have a more complex nervous system/cognitive abilities comparisons are harder to make• Qualitative information can be gathered from human Ps which is much more difficult to gather from animals• Humans have subjective experiences especially when high that can be studied that animals cannot report• Animals may react differently to some drugs compared to humans. The effect of the drugs are different because of the differences in the nervous systems of humans and animals so the findings may not apply
  14. 14. Explanations of Substance Misuse Biological – description. Neurotransmitters (biochemical)• Drug misuse can be explained by significant change to the neurotransmitter action in the brain• Stimulants or depressants alter the balance of neurotransmitters and affect mood and behaviour• Natural production of neurotransmitters need to be substituted with drugs to function normally• Drug taking results in physiological dependency which results in the need to take the drug to feel normal• Drugs can be taken to prevent unpleasant withdrawal effects such as sickness• Using more of the drug may be needed because the body becomes tolerant to lower doses• Drugs are taken to produce pleasant effects due to the chemical action in the brain
  15. 15. Biological explanation - evaluation• The biological approach ignores the role of nurture in that addiction can be explained by social learning, reinforcement or peer pressure• Neurological activity in the brain of addicts have been shown to be different to be different to non-addicts, supporting a biological basis for addiction• Animal studies have shown biochemical changes in the brain due to drug misuse, supporting the biochemical theory• Withdrawal symptoms due to the biochemical crash support this explanation• Many people try and infrequently use drugs such as alcohol, and don’t become addicted, suggesting individual differences rather than a completely biological explanation• There are cultural and subcultural differences that cannot be explained by a biological approach• The learning explanation of addiction is closely related as it builds up on the need for pleasure, avoidance of withdrawal effects and reinforcement
  16. 16. Learning explanation of substance misuse - description• SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY• An individual may observe a drug user and model their behaviour/eq;• A role model who takes drugs can encourage drug misuse if they have statusand power is looked up to or respected Eg friend, family member, mediamodel, someone they admire or relate to, making modelling more likely• Drug use can be glamorised and rewarded which can be a form of vicariousreinforcement for an observer which means the model is seen to be enjoyingthemselves for example.• The observer may identify with the drug user and wish to adopt the samedrug taking values and beliefs as a role model/eq• Receive direct positive reinforcement from the drug itself or gain approval from friends as a reward• Retain/encode the memory of models taking drugs and copy/imitate
  17. 17. Learning explanation of substance misuse - evaluation• Vast amount of experimental evidence for the general role observational learning so we can be fairly sure that a similar process can explain drug taking (eg Bandura 1961)• Sher found that smoking tended to run in families as a consequence of imitation• However Drug misuse tends to run in families and this could be due to genetic factors rather than social learning• Culturally, different drugs are used/misused in different cultures, supporting social learning theory as an explanation of drug taking• studies that demonstrate the reliability of SLT support this explanation of drug misuse through modelling (Bandura 1961)/eq;• SLT provides an alternative explanation for the fact that addictions tend to run in families.• SLT does not SLT does not explain drug use in the absence of observing a role model• It is difficult to evidence SLT in this area as there are many other factors involved in addiction, and it is difficult to isolate SLT as one explanation due to other influences on behaviour eg peer pressure to take drugs to look cool• SLT explains why people first take the drug which the biological approach fails to explain
  18. 18. Comparison of 2 explanations• Closely linked as the biological explanation builds on the need for pleasure, avoidance of withdrawal effects, and reinforcement• The learning explanation is the nurture side whereas the biological explanation is the nature side of the debate• The biological approach explains physiological dependency whilst the learning approach explains psychological dependency.• The learning approach can explain the cultural differences in types of drug taken – due to reinforcement, which the biological explanation does not address
  19. 19. How Drugs Work• Heroin – mode of action, effects, tolerance. Dependency, withdrawal• Mode of action: – Increases the level of dopamine in the brain – Acts upon the opioid receptor sites – Trigger release of neurotransmitter at receptor sites – Mimics endorphins to stimulate dopamine reward system/eq; – Morphine produced by taking heroin is a depressant and painkiller/eq; – GABA activity is inhibited• Withdrawal – Symptoms begin within 12 hours following last fix of heroin and involve agitation/restless (or any other symptom) – The severity of withdrawal is dependent upon the level of addiction – Hot and cold flushes and restlessness – Skin crawl and often sleeps a lot – Cramps and vomiting, diarrhoea, sweating, twitching and shaking, depression, sensitivity in groin area, ‘itchy blood’ frustration, confusion. – Psychological response – feel they can’t cope without heroin, cannot function without the drug.
  20. 20. How Drugs Work• 1 other drug – mode of action, effects, dependency, tolerance, withdr awal• Alcohol – mode of action – Acts upon GABA system – Increased GABA suppresses inhibitory behaviour – Affects ANS by suppressing sympathetic division – Results in slow reaction time
  21. 21. Treating Addiction – biological method• Biological substitute programmes, such as methadone for heroin addiction can reduce craving and prevent heroin having its typical euphoric effect• Methadone is a synthetic opiate used to replace heroin• It works to block the effects of heroin at the synapse and reduce the withdrawal symptoms for 24 hours• Methadone reduces heroin cravings• If taken with heroin the heroin will not produce its euphoric effects• Blood test are done regularly to test for illegal drug use for the programme to be effective• Drug replacement for class A drugs also serve to reduce drug related behaviours and disease (crime, prostitution, HIV)• The effects of methadone last a day (24 hours) for a daily dose is taken, usually under supervision, and is systematically lowered to wean off• When trusted the drug can be taken away from the pharmacy
  22. 22. Biological treatment of addiction - evaluation• Blattler et al found that those give prescribed methadone reduced their general use of cocaine and showed behavioural changes associated with abstinence• Methadone is a synthetic opiate that can produce physical dependency• Drug replacement therapies often have withdrawal and dependency issues themselves• Drug replacement therapy can help take the addict away from the drug context that may reinforce an addicts lifestyle• Less glamour when taken orally so removes association between shooting up and high (which is a good thing)• Reduces the risk of other infections associated with needle sharing/taken orally• Ball and Ross (1991) found methadone effective in reducing illicit opiate use• Biological drug replacement therapy can be costly to the health service although this may not be as high as the cost to the individual and family if it remains untreated• Drug replacement can involve a dangerous cocktail that is harmful in itself• Drug replacement therapies often have withdrawal and dependency issues themselves.• Non-compliance can result in abuse of the methadone programme and may sell the drugs on the black market• It does not treat the cause of the addiction, but simply replace an illegal drug with a legal one• Need motivation to give up drugs otherwise the treatment won’t be successful• YOU DON’T HAVE TO WRITE ABOUT ALL THESE STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES, PICK A COUPLE OF EACH AND ELABORATE AND EXPLAIN WHAT THEY MEAN
  23. 23. Treating Addiction – Aversion therapy• Aversion therapy can be used so that drug use is associated with an unpleasant consequence• Emetics can be given with a drug to force a negative consequence• Drugs will be avoided to prevent to conditioned effect
  24. 24. Treating addiction – aversion therapy evaluation• Aversion therapy is considered unethical as it forces adverse reaction• Participants must be fully informed of the process before undertaking treatment• Abstinence is usually short term as conditioning can be reversed easily• Behavioural therapies do not successfully treat the causes of the addiction but help to break a habitual behaviour
  25. 25. Anti Drug Campaigns• Eg Talk to Frank• Uses openness as a strategy for children and parents to seek advice• Parents are encouraged to look for signs of drug use• Younger people are exposed to drug user images that are negative• Shows peer group pressure and how this can influence drug use• Uses both sides of the argument to encourage choice and consideration
  26. 26. Health Campaign - techniques• Scare tactics – frighten people into not using drugs• Role models – use a key figure that people will identify with to show dangers of drugs• Statistics – provide information about death/illness rates of drug misuse as fear factor• Openness; use as a strategy for parents and children to seek advice• Two-sides – present both sides of argument to encourage choice and consideration• Mediums – use various ways of delivering the message eg TV, adverts, radio, internet, twitter etc• Support – ensure suport is available like helplines, counselling• Signs – encourage parents/guardians to look for signs of drug use
  27. 27. Anti Drug Campaign Evaluation• You can either evaluate drug campaigns in general, or apply the different approaches to explain the psychological theory behind the campaign.• Difficult to measure effectiveness as many factors may cause increase in health• Quantitative measures of health related behaviour (death rate, consumption, helpline activity) can be statistically verified• Health programmes often go hand in hand with a change in public opinion, which may account for reduction in unhealthiness rather than programme itself• Mechanic et al (2005) claimed that smoking fell by half due to anti-smoking campaigns• Hafsted (2009) found that those who responded emotionally to anti-smoking campaigns were more likely to quit, so emotionally provoking campaigns seem to work• Health campaigns only work if people do not have barriers to health related behaviour and can access help• They are preventative rather than curative so stops issues before they cause health/lifestyle/family issues• Can be costly but cheap in comparison to curative strategies• Talk to Frank is based on the Yale Model of Persuasion which has experimental support for the effectiveness of presenting both sides of the argument
  28. 28. Key Study: Blattler et al Swiss Heroin programme• Description• Aimed to see if prescribed heroin could reduce the use of cocaine• To investigate the variables affecting cocaine misuse• To see if a drug maintenance programme was successful on poly-drug users• Ps were followed up after 18 months in the programme to see if there was a reduction in illegal drug use• The Ps were selected from an existing treatment programme and had been addicted for over 2 years• Ps were interviewed every 6 months to measure their illegal substance use• Urine tests were us – All gave informed consent – Counselling made compulsory for all patients – Standardised questionnaire – same questions – Independent interviewers to prevent researcher bias – Urine samples – Approved by an ethical committee – Results: the treatment resulted in more than half reducing their cocaine use• Urine analysis confirmed the huge reduction in regular cocaine use of Ps on the programme• Conclusion: There was a reduction in drug related behaviour and offences as a result of the programme.•
  29. 29. Key Study: Blattler et al Swiss Heroin programme• Evaluation points •• The study omitted data from participants excluded for dealing or dropped out of the programme, so the results are limited to the most dedicated patients/eq; •• Participants of the study were fully informed about the nature and extent of the research, so it was ethical in that sense/eq;• Ps gave full consent to take part as they were part of the rehab programme• There was a right to withdraw from the programme• Approved by ethics committee• A few did withdraw so right to withdraw was enforced• The applications of this study are far reaching in terms of economic and individual cost of drug use/eq;• The validity of the findings are established through triangulation of biological and self report measures/eq; •• The participants were naturally undertaking the clinical trials, so participants were not carefully selected or matched to a control group/eq;• As participants were followed up over 18 months the long term effects of the programme could be established/eq; •• Independent researchers conducted the interviews and analysed the findings to ensure there was no researcher bias/eq; •• The findings were compared to baseline measures to ensure a reliable change in drug usage was established/eq; •• Ecological validity as they were drug users on a drug programme/eq; •• High population validity as they were extreme drug users/polydrug users and findings were related to them/eq;• Low population validity if generalised to the wider population (e.g. mild drug users)/eq;• • Cause and effect is hard to show as there are many other factors to take into account/eq;• • Participants may have taken part in the programme with the intention of getting free heroin not to give up their drug habit/eq;large sample of 266 Ps is a sample from which generalisations can be made to the target population for specific drug users
  30. 30. Key Study: Ennet al al. Peer groups and smoking• Description• Aim: To investigate adolescent smoking and the relationship between them and their peers and friends• Procedure:• 1092 9th grade students (aged 14-15) from 5 schools in the US were questioned between August and December 1980• Mothers educational background was determined as well as a range of other possible mitigating variables• Ennett et al (1994) used questionnaires to gather information about smoking and peer group influence directly from the source by asking/self report method• Network analyses was used to determine friendship cliques within the school they attended• Friendship reciprocation was weighted more greatly than non-reciprocated friendships• Results• Just under ½ the Ps were regarded as cliques, the remainder were clique liaisons or isolated individuals• 89.9% of clique members were non smokers• 2% of cliques were entirely smokers• 68% of cliques were entirely non smokers• Cliques that were similar (race/sex/mother’s educational background) were either all smokers or non- smokers, and the dissimilar cliques included both smokers and non-smokers• Conclusions:• Peer groups tend to discourage smoking, and only similar smoking groups encouraged it• Girls are more likely to be in smoking cliques than boys• The mothers educational level affected adolescent smoking
  31. 31. Key Study: Ennett al al • Evaluation (including comparison with Blattler)• The sample of adolescents surveyed from the 5 schools was inclusive and large, so the results should be generalisable to this culture• The survey gathered in depth information about friendship cliques using a variety of methods to ensure validity before examining smoking behaviour• It is supposed to measure the influence of friendship groups on smoking, but the findings were restricted to three best friends – we are influenced by more than our closest friends• Connectedness and reciprocal friendship may have been mis-measured as one persons view of friendship may not be reciprocated by the other person• The self report data may have been affected by the lack of social desirability with regards to smoking• The study is different to Blattler who actually administered replacement drug – this study just used self reports• Blattlers study did not investigate the role of friendship groups in the formation of a drug habit• Both Ennett and Blattler took self reports from participants• Both Ennett and Blattler cross checked self reports with tests (urine and carbon monoxide) to check for reliability of answers
  32. 32. Evidence in Practice Content Analysis• Give aims of your content analysis (treat it like an observation)• How you sourced the material, planned and carried it out, themes and categories, coding decisions, bias, procedure, sampling, apparatus, controls, how you might have got round bias in the source (editing)• Give a range of procedural issues – eg sampling, how data was summarised into categories• Analysing your data – Analysing data, qualitative and quantitative, refers to how data was scored, tallied, totalled, themes analysed, conclusions drawn from the summaries (can include theory as relevant). – Results • Accurate and detailed links made between the findings and two or more concepts, theories and/or research drawn from health psychology. • Detailed explanation of findings with accurate and detailed links made between the findings and at least two concepts drawn from health psychology – Conclusions • In depth description of conclusions drawn from practical and/or showing some supporting ideas, evidence, concepts and/or justification.
  33. 33. If asked to design a study using humans eg asking about legal highs:• Questionnaire/interview/surveyDesign a questionnaire designed to administer tousers and non-users of the drugAsk users of the drug to report psychological andphysical effectsUse open ended questions to gather qualitativedata on how the P feels when taking the drugUse closed ended questions to gather quantitativeinfo on how many times the P uses the drug etc.
  35. 35. Key Issue• Application of theory and research