scholarly journals Resurgence and repeated within‐session progressive‐interval thinning of alternative reinforcement

Author(s):  
Anthony N. Nist ◽  
Timothy A. Shahan

Author(s):  
Markus Heilig ◽  
James MacKillop ◽  
Diana Martinez ◽  
Jürgen Rehm ◽  
Lorenzo Leggio ◽  
...  

AbstractThe view that substance addiction is a brain disease, although widely accepted in the neuroscience community, has become subject to acerbic criticism in recent years. These criticisms state that the brain disease view is deterministic, fails to account for heterogeneity in remission and recovery, places too much emphasis on a compulsive dimension of addiction, and that a specific neural signature of addiction has not been identified. We acknowledge that some of these criticisms have merit, but assert that the foundational premise that addiction has a neurobiological basis is fundamentally sound. We also emphasize that denying that addiction is a brain disease is a harmful standpoint since it contributes to reducing access to healthcare and treatment, the consequences of which are catastrophic. Here, we therefore address these criticisms, and in doing so provide a contemporary update of the brain disease view of addiction. We provide arguments to support this view, discuss why apparently spontaneous remission does not negate it, and how seemingly compulsive behaviors can co-exist with the sensitivity to alternative reinforcement in addiction. Most importantly, we argue that the brain is the biological substrate from which both addiction and the capacity for behavior change arise, arguing for an intensified neuroscientific study of recovery. More broadly, we propose that these disagreements reveal the need for multidisciplinary research that integrates neuroscientific, behavioral, clinical, and sociocultural perspectives.



2014 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 252-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary M. Sweeney ◽  
Keira Moore ◽  
Timothy A. Shahan ◽  
William H. Ahearn ◽  
William V. Dube ◽  
...  


Author(s):  
Yathushan K ◽  
Kishok S ◽  
Bryan E. Thevarajah ◽  
Nithurshan M




2016 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucie M. Romano ◽  
Claire C. St. Peter


Addiction ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 113 (6) ◽  
pp. 1139-1148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rubin Khoddam ◽  
Junhan Cho ◽  
Nicholas J. Jackson ◽  
Adam M. Leventhal


1990 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 359-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
John A. Nevin ◽  
Mary E. Tota ◽  
Richard D. Torquato ◽  
Richard L. Shull


2011 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 516-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.A. Leão ◽  
E.M.F. Aquino ◽  
S.R.L. Tinô ◽  
R.S. Fontes


Author(s):  
Sanjay Choudhry ◽  
Bhawana Pandey

Bio fibres have recently become eye-catching to researchers, engineers and scientist as an alternative reinforcement for FRP (fibre reinforced polymer) composite. Due to their low cost, fairly good mechanical properties, high aspect strength .Three to four ton of human hair fibre wasted in India annually .These fibre pose an environmental challenge In order to find commercial application the wasted human hair fibre mixed with polypropylene. Polypropylene based composite are prepared using hair fibre obtained from human hair. Human hair fibres are mixed into polypropylene (PP) at 3,5,10 and 15 % by wt. using two roll mills. The composite are compression moulded at specific time and temperature. Polypropylene and hair fibre polymer reinforced composite have better flexural and impact strength than PP (Polypropylene) and lower the tensile strength of polypropylene and hair fibre polymer reinforced composite than (PP) polypropylene.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document