Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sulkunen, P. (2015). The images theory of addiction. The International Journal Of Alcohol And Drug Research, 4(1), 5-11. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.7895/ijadr.v4i1.191In everyday language, addiction usually refers to a strong desire that drives people to continue habitual behaviour despite acknowledged harm and their own will to quit. Many theorists and practitioners have long rejected the concept because of its tendency to individualize problem behavior, to focus on treatment rather than prevention, and to limit harmful consequences unduly to a selected group of users. There is no commonly accepted etiology of, or evidence-based treatment for, the condition, and diagnostic definitions are based on syndromes only. This article argues that the objections are not valid if we understand addiction as a generic concept, defined in terms of characteristics shared by several specific types, of which some are called prototypes. Addictions involve neurological adaptations but are not caused by them. They always emerge from culturally regulated behaviours, they are processes rather than on-off conditions, and involve types and pathways that depend on the social conditions in which they evolve. Addicted and normal uses are closely related and governed by images that define the functions, norms, meanings and use-values of the behavior. These will be transformed as addictions develop. The Images Theory of Addiction opens the way to understanding cultural variations in the addictive process, as well as to identify particularly risky images of potentially addictive behaviors. The theory is illustrated with examples from recent comparative studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".