مقایسه ی فعالیت سیستم های مغزی رفتاری وابستگان به مت آمفتامین با افراد بهنجار؛ بر اساس نظریه ی تجدیدنظرشده ی حساسیت به تقویت

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

10.22038/jfmh.2013.763

چکیده

مقدمه: هدف مطالعه‌ی حاضر، مقایسه‌ی سه سیستم تجدیدنظرشده (فعال‌ساز رفتاری، بازداری رفتاری و جنگ/گریز/انجماد) نظریه‌ی حساسیت به تقویت در بیماران وابسته به مت‌آمفتامین با افراد بهنجار بود.
روش‌کار: این پژوهش علی‌مقایسه‌ای در شش ماه اول سال 1390 انجام شد. جامعه‌ی مورد مطالعه، مردان وابسته به مت‌آمفتامین فاقد اختلال سایکوتیک همراه و یا اختلالات بارز محور دو شهر مشهد بودند. از این بین، تعداد 25 نفر به روش نمونه‌گیری در دسترس انتخاب شدند.
هم‌چنین 25 نفر از بستگان نزدیک گروه وابسته به مت‌آمفتامین که به لحاظ متغیرهای سن، جنسیت و تحصیلات با آن‌ها همتا شده بودند به عنوان گروه بهنجار شرکت کردند. نمونه‌ها با استفاده از مصاحبه‌ی بالینی ساختاریافته‌ی راهنمای تشخیصی و آماری اختلالات روانی،
پرسش‌نامه‌ی اطلاعات جمعیت‌شناختی و پرسش‌نامه‌ی 5 عاملی جکسون ارزیابی گردیدند. داده‌ها با آزمون‌های کولموگروف-اسمیرنوف، مجذور خی و تی مستقل تحلیل شدند.
یافته‌ها: گروه وابسته به مت‌آمفتامین نسبت به گروه بهنجار از حساسیت بیشتری در سیستم‌های تجدیدنظرشده‌ی فعال‌سازی رفتار، بازداری رفتار، جنگ و انجماد برخوردار بودند (05/0>P) اما در سیستم تجدیدنظرشده‌ی گریز، تفاوت معناداری بین دو گروه دیده نشد (05/0<P).
نتیجه‌گیری: الگوی شخصیتی بیماران وابسته به مت‌آمفتامین با افراد بهنجار متفاوت
می‌باشد. این افراد از یک سو به دلیل حساسیت بالای سیستم بازداری رفتار و از سوی دیگر به دلیل حساسیت بالای سیستم فعال‌ساز رفتاری، در شرایطی با احتمال تنبیه از قبیل مقایسه شدن در موقعیت‌های اجتماعی و هم‌چنین گرایش به تقویت و پاداش از حساسیت بالایی برخوردارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


1. Karila L, Weinstein A, Aubin H-J, Benyamina A, Reynaud M, Batki SL. Pharmacological approaches to methamphetamine dependence: A focused review. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2009; 69(6): 578-92.

2. EMCDDA: European Monitoring Center for Drugs and Drug Abuse. Annual report 2008: The state of the drug problem in Europe. [Cited 2009 November]. Available from: URL; http://www.emcdda.europa.eu

 3. Barr A, Panenka W, McEwan W, Thornton A, Lang D, Honer W, Lecomte T. The need for speed: an update on methamphetamine addiction. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2006; 31: 301-13.

4. Sadock BJ, Sadock VA. Kaplan and Sadock's pocket handbook of clinical psychiatry. 4th ed. Arjmand M. (translator). Tehran: Arjmand; 2005: 132-7. (Persian)

5. Graham RB. Physiological psychology. Saremi A, Rajaie A. (translator). Mashhad: Beh-Nashr; 1990: 553-6. (Persian)

6. Chang L, Cloak C, Patterson K, Grob C, Miller EN, Ernst T. Enlarged striatum in abstinent methamphetamine abusers: A possible compensatory response. Biol Psychiatry 2005; 57: 967-74.

 7. Thompson PM, Hayashi KM, Simon SL, Geaga JA, Hong MS, Sui Y, et al. Structural abnormalities in the brains of human subjects who use methamphetamine. J Neurosci 2004; 24: 6028-36.

 8. Baicy K, London ED. Corticolimbic dysregulation and chronic methamphetamine abuse. Addiction 2007; 102 (Suppl 1): 5-15.

 9. Aron JL, Paulus MP. Location, location: using functional magnetic resonance imaging to pinpoint brain differences relevant to stimulant use. Addiction 2007; 102 (Suppl 1): 33-43.

 10. Volkow ND, Li TK. Drug addiction: The neurobiology of behavior gone awry. Nat Rev Neurosci 2004; 5: 963-70.

 11. Goldstein RZ, Volkow ND. Drug addiction and its underlying neurobiological basis: neuroimaging evidence for the involvement of the frontal cortex. Am J Psychiatry 2002; 159: 1642-52.

12. National Institute on Drug Abuse. NIDA research report: Methamphetamine abuse and addiction. 2006 September. (NIH Publication No. 06-4210). Available from: URL; http://www.drugabuse.gov/sites/default/files/rrmetham.pdf

13. Gray JA, McNaughton N. The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septohippocampal system. New York: Oxford University; 2000: 335-42.

14. Gray JA. The neuropsychology of anxiety: An inquiry into the functions of the septal-hippocampal system. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. Oxford: Oxford University; 1982: 469-534.

15. Gray JA. Framework for taxonomy of psychiatric disorders. In: Goozen SHMV, Poll NEV, Sergeant J. (editors). Emotions: Essays on emotion theory. New Jersey: Erlbaum; 1994: 29-59.

16. Dawe S, Loxton NJ. The role of impulsivity in the development of substance use and eating disorders. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2004; 28(3): 343-51.

17. Corr PJ. Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST): Introduction. In: Corr PJ. (editor). Reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality. UK: Cambridge University; 2008: 349-59.

18. Corr PJ. Gray's reinforcement sensitivity theory: Tests of the joint subsystems hypothesis of anxiety and impulsivity. Pers Individ Dif 2002; 33: 511-32.

19. Le Bon O, Basiaux P, Streel E, Tecco  J, Hanak C, Hansenne M, et al.  Personality profile and drug of choice: A multivariate analysis using Cloninger’s TCI on heroin addicts, alcoholics, and a random population group. Drug Alcohol Depend 2004; 73(2): 175-82.

20. Pomerleau CS, Pomerleau OF , Flessland KA,  Basson SM. Relationship of tridimensional personality questionnaire scores and smoking variables in female and male smokers. J Subst Abuse 1992; 4(2): 143-54.

21. Vukov M, Baba-Milkic N, Lecic D, Mijalkovic S, Marinkovic J. Personality dimensions of opiate addicts. Acta Psychiatrica 1995; 91(2): 103-7.

22. Franken IH, Muris P. BIS/BAS personality characteristics and college students’ substance use. Pers Individ Dif 2006; 40(7): 1497-503.

23. Johnson SL, Turner RJ, Iwata N. BIS/BAS Levels and psychiatric disorder: An epidemiological study. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 2003; 25: 25-36.

24. Fowles DC. Biological variables in psychopathology: A psychobiological perspective. In: Sutker PB, Adams HE (editors). Comprehensive handbook of psychopathology. 2nd ed. New York: Plenum; 1993: 57-82.

25. Genovese JEC, Wallace D. Reward sensitivity and substance abuse in middle school and high school students. J Genet Psychol 2007; 168: 465-9.

26. Hundt NE, Kimbrel, NA, Mitchell JT, Nelson-Gray RO. High BAS, but not low BIS, predicts externalizing symptoms in adults. Pers Individ Dif 2008; 44: 563-73.

27. Simons JS, Dvorak RD, Batien BD. Methamphetamine use in a rural college population: Associations with marijuana use, sensitivity to punishment, and sensitivity to reward. Psychol Addict Behav 2008; 22: 444-9.

28. Loxton NJ, Dawe S. Reward and punishment sensitivity in dysfunctional eating and hazardous drinking women: Associations with family risk. Appetite 2006; 47(3): 361-71.

29. Loxton NJ, Dawe S. How do dysfunctional eating and hazardous drinking women perform on behavioural measures of reward and punishment sensitivity. Pers Individ Dif 2007; 42(6): 1163-72.

30. Loxton NJ, Nguyen D, Casey L, Dawe S. Reward drive, rash impulsivity and punishment sensitivity in problem gamblers. Pers Individ Dif 2008; 45: 167-73.

31. O'Connor RM, Stewart SH, Watt MC. Distinguishing BAS risk for university students' drinking, smoking, and gambling behaviors. Personality and Individual Differences 2009; 46: 514-9.

32. Taylor J, Reeves M, James L, Bobadilla L. Disinhibitory trait profile and its relation to cluster B personality disorder features and substance use problems. Eur J Pers 2006; 20: 271-84.

33. Bijttebier P, Beck I, Claes L, Vandereycken W. Gray's Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory as a framework for research on Personality–psychopathology associations. Clin Psychol Rev 2009; 29: 421-30.

34. Hassani J, Bigdel I, Ghoshchian S. The activity of brain/behavioral systems in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder in comparison with normal individuals. Cognitive sciences 2008; 9(4): 16-25. (Persian)

35. Jackson CJ. Jackson-5 scales of revised reinforcement sensitivity theory (r-RST) and their application to dysfunctional real world outcomes. J Res Pers 2009; 43: 556-69.

36. Cleveland HH, Harris KS. The role of coping in moderating within-day associations between negative triggers and substance use cravings: a daily diary investigation. Addict Behav 2010; 35(1): 60-3.

37. Blum K, Braverman ER, Holder JM, Lubar JF, Monastra VJ, Miller D, et al. Reward deficiency syndrome: A biogenetic model for the diagnosis and treatment of impulsive, addictive, and compulsive behaviors. J Psychoactive Drugs 2000; 32: 1-68.

38. Loxton NJ, Dawe S. Alcohol abuse and dysfunctional eating in adolescent girls: The influence of individual differences in sensitivity to reward and punishment. Int J Eat Disord 2001; 29: 455-62.

39. Moradi AA. Brain, behavior, and metal health in substance dependent individuals in comparison to healthy controls. Journal of fundamentals of mental health 2012; 13(4): 304-13. (Persian)

40. Abdi R, Roudsari AB, Aliloo MM. The sensitivity level of behavioral approach and inhibition systems in substance abusers, smokers and normal subjects. Iranian journal of psychiatry and clinical psychology 2011; 17(3): 241-7. (Persian)

41. Kambouropoulos N, Staiger PK. Reactivity to alcohol-related cues: Relationship among cue type, motivational processes, and personality. Psychol Addict Behav 2004; 18: 275-83.

42. Staiger PK, Kambouropoulos N, Dawe S. Should personality traits be considered when refining substance misuse treatment programs? Drug Alcohol Rev 2007; 26: 17-23.

43. Genovese JEC, Wallace D. Reward sensitivity and substance abuse in middle school and high school students. J Genet Psychol 2007; 168: 465-9.

44. Smillie LD, Pickering AD, Jackson CJ. The new reinforcement sensitivity theory: Implications for personality measurement. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2006; 10: 320-35.

45. Perkins AM, Kemp SE, Corr PJ. Fear and anxiety as separable emotions: An investigation of the revised reinforcement sensitivity theory and personality. Emotion 2007; 7: 252-61.

46. Abdalehzade-Jeddi AMA, Hashemi-Nosratabad T, Moradi AR. The Role of brain behavioral systems in predicting of drug abuse. Journal of clinical psychology 2010; 2: 6. (Persian)