12 August 2020
In the preceding blog, Why did I use? II, the fourth, of seven categories of use, was examined and discussed (genetic predisposition, low entry cost, cultural, incremental, personality, loneliness & self-medication). This week, personality, as a causal factor, is examined.
Readers may recall that last week’s post, on incremental use, when analyzed, was also related to personality. In reviewing the predominant trait theory, the Big 5, combinations of traits were shown to leave some personalities more vulnerable to addictive behaviours than others.
In the original article, cited for this series of blogs (Hashmet, 2017), that author used impulsivity as an example of a personality trait whose variance predicts addiction. Citing MacKillop (2016), Hashmet wrote that, “Addicted individuals assign lower values to delayed rewards than to immediate ones. The excessive preference for immediate rewards despite longer-term consequences leads to problems with addiction.” There is an experiment, well known in psychology, that tested the self-discipline required to gain later rewards at the cost of delayed gratification, an important concept for recovery.
That experiment was conducted by Mischel (1960) and consisted of putting a marshmallow in front of individual children and leaving them with that marshmallow for 20 minutes. Their instructions were that if they resisted eating the single treat, they would be rewarded with two marshmallows after 20 minutes. With follow-up, it was found that the children who were able to delay gratification had higher measures of success in later life. What either the press or Mischel didn’t make clear at the time, was that some of the children, able to delay gratification, were given strategies to help them resist eating that marshmallow (Carli, 2018).
This is good news for the addictive community as it bolsters the role of agency (freely chosen actions) in recovery. The premise is simple. If children, given strategies, overcame their desires for immediate gratification of the reward circuit, so can people with addictive behaviors. Thereby, they can become strong enough to stay sober and enter recovery.
One of the tools often discussed in SMART meetings is “playing it forward.” This entails reviewing regrettable outcomes of the last few times you used your drug of choice while in recovery. Those regrettable outcomes are usually strong enough to distance a sober person from re-lapsing. All of which means that…as wellness returns to a clean personality, healthy, reward-delaying behaviours can be learned, used, and habitualized.
Dan Chalykoff facilitates two weekly voluntary group meetings, as well as private appointments, for SMART-based counselling services at danchalykoff@hotmail.com
What about someone that sees the using as a challenge to overcome ? That is how I viewed using my last lapse.
I put a bench in front of my TV so watch was uncomfortable. Where does that fall in the spectrum?
Thanks for the questions, Allan. I don’t think you’re alone in seeing self-destructive drug use as a challenge to be overcome. If you are phrasing that challenge as a positive i.e., growth-inducing challenge, then, no, that’s not an unhealthy perspective to take. I’m uncertain which spectrum you’re referring to in your final point. If stopping TV use is a goal, there are more effective ways. Putting the bench in front of the TV is akin to mild torture. You’re exposing yourself to the stimulus but precluding full enjoyment. A better plan might be, per the earlier (5 May) blog “Scheduling as Survival,” make a list of healthy and interesting things to do: reading that stretches your perspective, walking in new places, learning a musical instrument, cleaning a small space, looking at art…and schedule those around defined periods of TV watching. Take the good that TV offers but discipline your use to one hour at a time (or whatever you feel is healthy) breaking up TV with some of the suggestions above. Thanks for reading and responding to the blog.
I absolutely agree with playing the tape forward but for me also having a visual, a handwritten list of all the negatives as well I.e. how I physically feel afterwards, the impact on my family, the hours I lost, the money spent etc. The combination, for me, emphasizes the negative ramifications far out way the temporary immediate gratification.
Thanks Dan for these great blog!
Thanks for the comment, Sue. That’s a powerful list of reasons not to indulge addictive behaviours. Thanks for sharing it.