Inattentional Blindness: What else are we missing?

Well, hello and good morning, afternoon, and evening readers. I truly hope you’re swimming in the pleasantries of life rather than keeping your head above water in the unpleasant swamp. HOPE = Hold On Pain Ends. And there’s generally a learning or personal growth that comes after the storm of every painful experience, even if it’s simply greater empathy and compassion for others.

Today’s the day to learn or remember the fallacies of the human mind. I am not as smart as I look, haha. Have you heard of heuristics before? In cognitive psychology, a heuristic is a mental “shortcut” that allows people to solve problems and make judgments quickly and efficiently. They can be very helpful in many situations, but they can also lead to cognitive biases, errors in thinking, and even perhaps without the mental shortcut, our thinking is often filled to the brim with cognitive distortions, assumptions and fallacies (faults). Awareness raising is probably the first step to identify our own cognitive traps and also identify them in others. Cognitive errors are natural – we all have them. Below are some cognitive distortions/errors to be aware of when we reflect on our interactions with people, during personal reflection, and when making meaningful decisions or judgements.

• ALL-OR-NOTHING THINKING (aka. POLARISED THINKING, SPLITTING, and BLACK-AND-WHITE THINKING: is extreme thinking i.e., the error in a person’s thinking to bring together the dichotomy of both positive and negative qualities of the self and others into a cohesive, realistic whole. It is a common defense mechanism. Before you think “I must have really shitty thinking because I do this ALL the time”, give yourself a break. If you’re thinking in black and white, you probably internalised this from social media, television and movies, your family of origin and the broader society. Be mindful of using extreme, dichotomist terms, such as “failure”, “success”, “best”, “worst”, “freezing”, “boiling”, “everything”, and “nothing”. If you think “I’m a terrible person”, that is bullshit and inaccurate. You may have behaved terribly for a period of time towards yourself, to someone else, or towards some “thing”, but we cannot discount all the NON-terrible qualities about you. We must THINK in DIALECTICS i.e., the ability to view issues from multiple perspectives with reason and wisdom or in other words being able to have two contradictory viewpoints, where a greater truth emerges from their interplay. The truth is, if you think you’re a terrible person, there’s also virtuous person in there too.

• OVERGENERALISTION: The words “always”, “every” and “never” come into play here, and you have an unshakable “rule” or “conviction” about yourself, something, or someone, based on one or two incidences. Overgeneralising is “a cognitive distortion in which an individual views a single event as an invariable RULE, so that, for example, failure at accomplishing one task will predict an endless pattern of defeat in all tasks.” Coming into the present moment and being specific can be helpful if you are someone who overgeneralises. You may also want to ask yourself if what your saying is the really the truth. Is it really accurate or correct. There’s an assumption that because something has happened once or a few times that it’s like going to happen every time. Remember, the words “always”, “every”, and “never” frequently appear in this cognitive “trap”. I encourage you to look at the big picture and ask yourself if what you’re saying or thinking is accurate. Overgeneralisations tend to be vague and board statements e.g., “I always get every red light”. Perhaps this is part of our evolutionary negativity bias. We tend to notice the so-called “bad” and overlook the so-called “good”. If you find yourself using overgeneralisations that suggest a future prediction (e.g., “I’ll never get a partner) … use some humour – you may have big balls but neither one of them are crystal – VEEP. If there is some truth to unusually frequent and specific situations that are making your life unpleasant, validate them, talk to someone, and brainstorm some solutions. We humans have plenty of blind spots that others can see sometimes.

• MENTAL FILTER: is considered to be the opposite to OVERGENERALISATION the mental filter takes one small event and focuses on it exclusively, filtering out anything else that’s relevant. Filtering out the positive and focusing on the negative can have a detrimental impact on your mental well-being. Filtering out the so-called “negative” can also make one a bit hubris (excessive pride or self-confidence), arrogant, vain and conceited – and then you’re just a stone’s throw away from narcissism.

• PERSONALISATION AND BLAME: Personalization and blame is a cognitive distortion whereby you entirely blame yourself, or someone else, for a situation that in reality involved many factors that were out of your control. I think this is a symptom of our wounded ego, or simply just the ego. As human’s we are egocentric, like children, and we often think that circumstances in our environment are solely because of our influence. For example, your friend isn’t behaving like they usually do, so it must be because you have done something.

Again, personalisation is an egocentric error in cognition. “Of course it has to do with me”, we think. It makes sense that we personalise things. We are the star of our own show, our own narrative. If you personalise something, it means we’ve directly influenced it – we are the primary cause. This may elicit internal pain, shame or guilt, so what’s the pay-off? Personalisation is a cognitive error that offers us the illusion of control e.g., “If we caused it then we will learn how to not cause it again, and maybe even undo what we have caused”. If you think about it, personalising something is something children do. Remember, there are infinite variables in any situation to take full credit of the outcome. That being said, it is responsible and mature to reflect objectively on the influence of our behaviour and what we can learn about our shortcomings.

Blame deserves it’s own blog post but in short, it can be defined as a defence mechanism to protect the self from feeling some unwanted emotion or thinking something unacceptable in relation to the “self”. Blaming provides a way of devaluing others, an the pay-off or reinforcement the blamer receives is a sense of superiority. It protects our ego from feeling responsible for something, and protects us from feeling guilt or shame. Perfectionists are very good at blaming others, and themselves. Even if you genuinely think faulting someone or something is valid, remember that no one is perfect. Recognise that you are human and others are fallible humans. As they say in recovery, “there is a bit of bad in the best of us and a bit of good in the worst of us“. We may have internalised from society and culture that we couldn’t make mistakes (because we receive “punishment” for making mistakes) but we must move beyond that now. As adults, we need to get real. Validate your experience because it may be very disappointing when we don’t meet others or our own expectations. We must nurture and care for the wounded child. Lets attend and befriend to our shortcomings and accept we are not superhuman. Learn to expect you will make mistakes. Failure is kind of an illusion, isn’t it? Or maybe a social construct? “Failure” is really learning – replace ‘failure’ with the word ‘feedback’. Would a cat or dog blame them self for a “mistake”? In the minds of animals, there’s no such concept as failure or a mistake.

Here’s a link to website “simplypsychology” that discusses a theory called Attribution Theory, an idea about how people explain the causes of behaviour and events: Attribution Theory – Situational vs Dispositional | Simply Psychology

Retrieved from Issue 346 of Institute Inbrief 20/01/2021

Paranoia: Definition and levels

When a person believes that others are “out to get them”, trying to stalk or harm them, or paying excessive attention to them for no reason, they may be experiencing paranoia. Occurring in many mental health conditions, paranoia is most often present in psychotic disorders. It involves intense anxious or fearful feelings and thoughts, most often related to persecution, threat, or conspiracy (Mental Health America, n.d.). It can be a symptom of illnesses such as schizophrenia, brief psychosis, paranoid personality, psychotic depression, mania with psychotic features, delusional disorders, or substance abuse (chronic or momentary) (Barron, 2016).

Mental health experts have identified three levels of paranoia:

1. Paranoid personality disorder (PPD): Characterised by odd or eccentric ways of thinking, PPD involves an unrelenting mistrust and suspicion of others when there is no reason to be suspicious. It is one of the personality disorders in the DSM-5’s Cluster A, along with schizoid and schizotypal personality disorders. Thought to be the mildest form of paranoia, a person with PPD may still be able to function in relationships, employment, and social activities. The onset is typically in early adulthood and is more common in men than in women.
    
2. Delusional (paranoid) disorder: Found in the DSM-5 chapter, “Schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders”, this is a condition in which an individual holds one major false belief or delusion; it will often be an implausible but not bizarre delusion. A delusional disorder typically occurs without any other signs of mental illness. So a person might think that others are talking behind their back if they have a persecutory delusion, or believe that they need immediate medical attention for a (non-existent) medical problem if they have a somatic delusion. This condition is slightly more common in women than men.
    
3. Schizophrenia with bizarre delusions: People with this condition do not function well in society and need consistent treatment (Sunrise House, 2018; WebMD, 2018).This is the most severe form of paranoia, involving bizarre delusions without basis, such as that aliens are trying to abduct them, or that an unseen enemy is removing their internal organs and replacing them with others’ organs.

This article is about Levels (1) and (2), the paranoid personality disorder (PPD) and delusional disorder, which you may encounter more commonly, either in your client or the client’s partner.

Identifying paranoia

We have several options for finding out what characteristics should be called “paranoid”: we can assess how we experience the person — how we describe them and what they evoke in us — and/or we can run with DSM-5 descriptions, which outline the clinical symptoms we can observe specifically with the paranoid personality disorder and delusional disorder. Let’s do both.

Descriptions of the paranoid person

Joe Navarro, who has written extensively about mental disorders, asked those who had either lived with or been victimised by paranoid personality types to describe this personality type from their experiences. Here is the list of some of their words:

“Angry, anxious, apprehensive, combative, complainer, contrarian, critical, delusional, demanding, difficult, distrustful, disturbed, eccentric, fanatic, fearful, fixated, fussy, guarded, hard-headed, inhospitable, intense, irrational, know-it-all, menacing, mentally rigid, moralistic, obsessed, odd, offensive, opinionated, sensitive, peculiar, pedantic, quarrelsome, questioning, rigid, scary, strict, stubborn, suspicious, tense, threatening, tightly-wound, touchy, unforgiving, unhappy, vindictive, wary, watchful, withdrawn” (Navarro, 2016).

What they evoke in us:

Experiencing a relationship with someone described by such intense words as those above cannot fail to bring forth a reaction in us. Laurel Nowak (2018) outlines the common feelings evoked by paranoid individuals in those with whom they are in relationship. She talks about: “feeling weighed down, negative, stressed, isolated from the people and activities you used to enjoy, and like you’re walking on eggshells”. Some have noted that it can feel to the other person like they are not being seen — ever — for who they truly are. The exaggerated negative spin on events or in response to statements occurs in the context of relating which lacks tenderness, humour, or comfort (Navarro, 2016). While these authors are describing feelings evoked in intimate relationships with paranoid individuals, they could have been talking about how therapists feel when faced with a client with this condition. Dealing with such a person eats away at the most robust sense of happiness and self-esteem. Here are the DSM-5 symptoms.

Paranoid Personality Disorder: DSM-5 symptoms description

According to the DSM-5, there are two primary diagnostic criteria for Paranoid Personality Disorder, of which Criterion A has seven sub-features. Four of these must be present to warrant a diagnosis of PPD:

Criterion A is: Global mistrust and suspicion of others’ motives which commences in adulthood. The seven sub-features of Criterion A are:

1. Belief others are using, lying to, or harming them, without apparent evidence thereof
2. Doubts about the loyalty and trustworthiness of friends and associates
3. Inability to confide in others due to the belief that their confidence will be betrayed
4. Interpretation of ambiguous or benign remarks as hurtful or threatening
5. Holding grudges (being unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights)
6. In the absence of objective evidence, belief that their reputation or character are being assailed by others; retaliation in some manner
7. Being jealous and suspicious without cause that intimate partners are being unfaithful.

Criterion B is that the above symptoms will not be during a psychotic episode in schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or depressive disorder with psychotic features (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

Delusional Disorder: DSM-5 definition and types

According to the DSM-5, this condition is characterised by at least one month of delusions but no other psychotic symptoms. Delusions are false beliefs based on incorrect inference about external reality that persist despite the evidence to the contrary; these beliefs are not ordinarily accepted by other members of the person’s culture or subculture. In delusional disorder (a moderate level of paranoia), a person experiences non-schizophrenic (i.e., not bizarre) delusions, such as that they are that they are being spied on. Because only thoughts are affected, a person with a delusional disorder can act normal and function in everyday life, although they may display paranoia or other symptoms related to their delusion. The five types of delusions people with this disorder have are:

1. Erotomanic, where there is a belief that a person with higher social or financial standing (such as the president or a movie star) is in love with them; it can lead to stalking and obsession.
    
2. Grandiose, involving the false belief that the person has a special power or ability not shared by anyone else (such as that they are extremely lucky and will always win at the casino).
    
3. Jealous: a mistaken belief that a current or former loved one is unfaithful or even harmful. Paranoia about the loved one’s words or actions can be a symptom of these delusions.
    
4. Persecutory, in which the common sense of the paranoia is that someone is out to get the individual, because the person believes they are being threatened, mistreated, or that they will be harmed in the future.
    
5. Somatic: a delusion in which the individual believes that they have an illness, disability or physical defect (Sunrise House, 2018; Mental Health America, n.d.; Bourgeois, 2017).

Treating and coping with paranoia

For the therapist

First, we must note the common advice: a person suffering from either PPD or a delusional disorder needs to seek professional help, although most such individuals do not believe that they are paranoid; rather, they think they are perceptive, noticing things that no one else sees. In this sense, it can be difficult to get such a person to therapy, as the condition tends to be ego syntonic. If such an individual turns up in your therapy rooms, however, note that a referral to a medical doctor is in order to determine if medication is needed.

Medication generally is not a major focus of treatment for PPD; therapy is. However, medications, such as anti-anxiety, antidepressant, or anti-psychotic drugs, might be prescribed if the person’s symptoms are extreme, or if he or she also suffers from an associated psychological problem, such as anxiety or depression (WebMD, 2018).

With delusional disorders, the diagnosed individual begins a combination of medication and psychotherapy. The anti-psychotic medication helps the individual improve enough to be able to understand reality and the need for therapeutic help. In milder cases, the individual may receive anti-anxiety medications or anti-depressants, which allows them to undergo therapy, where they learn coping skills, how to recognise delusions as false, and how to manage stress or difficult feelings. Hospitalisation may sometimes be indicated to stop the person from harming themselves or others during violent delusions (Sunrise House, 2018).

As the condition affects the client’s thought patterns and beliefs, it can be worked with effectively using cognitive behavioural therapy, which transforms the unrealistic, maladaptive thoughts by replacing them with more helpful, realistic adaptive thoughts. In addition, some therapists have observed that psychodynamic work, such as object relations, can help paranoid clients look into reasons for becoming mistrustful and suspicious which arise from early childhood relationships (Everyday Health, n.d.).

You might be asking, “Wait a minute; chief symptoms are a tendency to be suspicious and an inability to trust. How, then, can a therapist make any reasonable headway with such a client, given that trust is the basis for any solid therapeutic alliance?” If you twigged to this issue, congratulations; you have nailed the problem: how to keep the paranoid client in therapy long enough for enough trust to be built so that real progress can be made. Building trust is where the challenge is, no matter what modality is being used with the client.

To help a client in relationship with a person living with paranoia

You are likely to see the partner of a person acting paranoid. Once it is established that some form of paranoia is indeed the diagnosis, some clear guidelines exist for helping the partner. Some of the following tips also hold true for therapists working with this client population.

Setting boundaries. The paranoid person needs compassion and understanding, true, but that does not equate to acceptance of poor treatment on the grounds that the person has a disorder and is frustrated. Clear lines of what is acceptable and what is not must be drawn; those expectations for decent treatment must be communicated clearly, including around the issue of refusing to collude with delusional thinking (compromising one’s own needs) because of the person’s paranoia or fear.

Practicing self-care. For therapists and partners alike, this one is paramount! Dealing with this disorder is exhausting and sometimes heart-breaking. Those in close relationships (whether intimate or therapeutic) with paranoid individuals must have regular, solid habits of self-care. All the usual practices go into this category: relaxation/meditation, exercise, decent diet, support systems activated, and perhaps journalling or creative work to vent frustrations. Particularly for partners of those with PPD or a delusional disorder, maintaining a healthy social life — not allowing oneself to become isolated — is important.

Don’t abandon own stance, but empathise with their fear. If either the partner of the paranoid person or you, as therapist, hear an accusation that seems really “off” — totally unfounded — you can employ the tactic of empathising with the feeling, but not necessarily agreeing with the facts (though outright disagreeing doesn’t work, either). Carrie Baron, M.D., and Director of the Resilience Program at Dell Medical School in Texas, explains that consoling the person and refuting what they have said will not likely alter any paranoid convictions or delusions. What works better is “observation, reflection, curiosity and openness without judgment”, which lead to better understanding (Barron, 2016). Thus, the partner could say to the paranoid person, “I can imagine you’re worried if you think that the inheritance you counted on for your retirement might be taken away through your dad marrying. Have you observed any behaviour that made you question her motives?” (curiosity). However they do it, partners of people with any form of paranoia must look beneath the surface before getting swept up in the partner’s claims (Barron, 2016).

Recognise that the paranoid person can still contribute to life. Because of the fact that mild or moderate forms of paranoia are circumscribed, showing up only in particular thoughts and delusions, only those involved or accused may be aware of the psychopathology of the condition. The person can thus contribute to family life, work, and aspects of social life in positive ways, which you as therapist can help highlight for the partner.

Having either a client or a client’s partner who is paranoid is not easy, but the worst heartbreak and chaos can be avoided if the person can engage treatment, including medication when necessary.

References:

1. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.(5th Edition). Washington, DC.: APA.
2. Barron, C. (2016). 7 Tips for coping with a paranoid partner. Psychology Today. Retrieved on 4 December, 2018, from: Website.
3. Bourgeois, J. (2017). Delusional disorder. Medscape. Retrieved on 9 December, 2018, from: Website.
4. Everyday Health. (n.d.) Coping with paranoia in a loved one. Everyday Health. Retrieved on 4 December, 2018, from: Website.
5. Mental Health America. (n.d.). Paranoia and delusional disorders. Mental Health America. Retrieved on 6 December, 2018, from: Website.
6. Navarrro, J. (2016). The paranoid partner: Identifying the paranoid personality in relationships. Psychology Today. Retrieved on 4 December, 2018, from: Website.
7. Nowak, L. (2018). Paranoid personality disorder and relationships: Moving past fear, together. Bridges to Recovery. Retrieved on 4 December, 2018, from: Website.
8. Sunrise House. (2018). Is there a difference between paranoia and delusional disorders? American Addiction Centers. Retrieved on 9 December, 2018, from: Website.
9. WebMD. (2018). Paranoid personality disorder. WebMD LLC. Retrieved on 9 December, 2018, from: Website.

Abstract

Addiction is a complex, multifaceted phenomenon that has been described variously as a disease, disorder, syndrome, obsessive-compulsive behaviour, learned behaviour, or spiritual malady. Modern scientific understanding emphasises addiction as a chronic brain disorder shaped by neurobiological changes, learning, and social context. This article examines each conceptualisation and presents an integrated definition that aligns with current neuroscience, psychological, and public health evidence.

Conceptualising Addiction: Labels and Their Accuracy

No single label fully captures addiction’s complexity; each highlights certain truths while overlooking others.

Disease

From a medical perspective, disease is the closest match. Addiction involves persistent neurobiological changes in reward, stress, and self-control circuits, increases relapse risk over years, and shows substantial genetic vulnerability (~50–60%) (NIDA, 2018; Heilig et al., 2021). Treatments improve outcomes but rarely “cure” the condition. This framing is used by the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM), NIDA, WHO ICD-11, and DSM-5-TR (as “Substance Use Disorder”) (NIDA, 2018).

Disorder

Disorder is also scientifically accurate and slightly less medicalised. DSM-5’s “Substance Use Disorder” captures behavioural, psychological, and biological criteria and recognises functioning and harm rather than framing addiction strictly as a lifelong disease (Heather, n.d.; Heilig et al., 2021).

Syndrome

Addiction may be described as a syndrome because it is a cluster of symptoms with behavioural and physiological manifestations, without a single causative factor. However, the term is too generic for practical use outside clinical texts (Blithikioti et al., 2025).

Obsessive and Compulsive Learned Behaviour

Addiction involves learning, habit formation, and compulsion through reinforcement of rewarding behaviours (Hyman, 2005; Hausotter, 2013). Yet describing it solely as learned behaviour ignores genetic predisposition, neuroadaptation, withdrawal, and social factors.

Spiritual Malady

Some mutual-aid traditions characterise addiction as a spiritual malady. While this may be meaningful for individuals, it is not scientifically explanatory: addiction can be adequately explained via biological, psychological, and social mechanisms (Lewis, 2017).

Modern Integrative Definition

The most accurate contemporary description of addiction is:
“A chronic, relapsing disorder of brain circuits involved in reward, stress, and self-control, shaped by learning, environment, and social context”.

This definition encompasses:

• Disease/disorder: medical accuracy
• Learned behaviour and compulsion: neuroscience and behavioural accuracy
• Social determinants: public health relevance
• Flexibility for personal or spiritual interpretations

In short, addiction is best understood as a bio-psycho-social condition that is treatable and sometimes reversible, rather than a deterministic, lifelong curse.

Neurobiology: Why Addiction Is Considered a Brain Disorder

Repeated substance use alters structural and functional brain circuits involved in reward, stress, motivation, memory, and self-control (Nwonu et al., 2022; NIDA, 2018). These changes can persist long after use stops, explaining why addiction is more than a matter of “bad habits” or weak will (NIDA, 2025).

Chronicity and Relapse

Addiction is often chronic and relapsing. Even after long periods of abstinence, cues and stressors can trigger relapse (Meurk et al., 2014; SAMHSA, 2023). Key regions implicated include the basal ganglia (habit formation), extended amygdala (stress), and prefrontal cortex (decision-making) (Kirby et al., 2024). Nevertheless, many individuals achieve stable remission, highlighting heterogeneity in clinical outcomes (Heilig et al., 2021).

Learning, Memory, and Habit Formation

Addiction exploits neural mechanisms of learning and memory: rewarding behaviours are repeated and consolidated into habits, with cues triggering compulsive responses even when the substance’s reward diminishes (Hausotter, 2013; Lewis, 2017). This intertwines biological disorder and learned behaviour.

Critiques and Limitations

Some scientists caution that framing addiction strictly as a brain disease is simplistic:

• Brain changes may resemble those from other motivated behaviours (Lewis, 2017).
• Many recover without formal treatment (Heilig et al., 2021).
• Social, environmental, and psychological factors are crucial to understanding addiction (Blithikioti et al., 2025).

Thus, while the disease model is powerful, it does not fully represent addiction’s heterogeneity or socio-psychological dimensions.

Implications for Treatment

Addiction is treatable, not simply curable. Interventions combining pharmacological and behavioural approaches, alongside social support, can foster long-term recovery (Liu & Li, 2018; Heilig et al., 2021). Like other chronic conditions, management — rather than elimination — is often the realistic goal (NIDA, 2018). Neural circuits can gradually readjust, particularly when environmental and personal factors support recovery.

Conclusion

Addiction is a learned, compulsive brain disorder with chronic potential, shaped by neurobiological, psychological, social, and environmental factors. Recognising addiction as both a disorder and a behavioural learning condition avoids extremes: it is neither an unchangeable fate nor merely a moral failing. This integrated perspective supports nuanced understanding, compassionate care, and effective treatment strategies.

References

Blithikioti, C., Fried, E. I., Albanese, E., Field, M., & Cristea, I. A. (2025). Reevaluating the brain disease model of addiction. The Lancet Psychiatry, 12(6), 469–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(25)00060-4

Hausotter, W. (2013). Neuroscience and understanding addiction. Addiction Technology Transfer Center (ATTC) Network. https://attcnetwork.org/neuroscience-and-understanding-addiction

Heather, N. (n.d.). What’s wrong with the brain disease model of addiction (BDMA)? Addiction Theory Network. https://addictiontheorynetwork.org/brain-disease-model-of-addiction

Heilig, M., MacKillop, J., Martinez, D., Rehm, J., Leggio, L., & Vanderschuren, L. J. M. J. (2021). Addiction as a brain disease revised: Why it still matters, and the need for consilience. Neuropsychopharmacology, 46(10), 1715–1723. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-020-00950-y

Hyman, S. E. (2005). Addiction: A disease of learning and memory. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 162(8), 1414–1422. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.162.8.1414

Kirby, E. D., Glenn, M. J., Sandstrom, N. J., & Williams, C. L. (2024). Neurobiology of addiction (Section 14.5). In Introduction to Behavioral Neuroscience. OpenStax. https://socialsci.libretexts.org/…/14.05:_Neurobiology_of_Addiction

Leshner, A. I. (1997). Addiction is a brain disease, and it matters. Science, 278(5335), 45–47. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.278.5335.45

Lewis, M. (2017). Addiction and the brain: Development, not disease. Neuroethics, 10(1), 7–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-016-9293-4

Liu, J. F., & Li, J. X. (2018). Drug addiction: A curable mental disorder? Acta Pharmacologica Sinica, 39(12), 1823–1829. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41401-018-0180-x

Meurk, C., Carter, A., Partridge, B., Lucke, J., & Hall, W. (2014). How is acceptance of the brain disease model of addiction related to Australians’ attitudes towards addicted individuals and treatments for addiction? BMC Psychiatry, 14, 373. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-014-0373-x

National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2018). Drugs, brains, and behavior: The science of addiction (Rev. ed.). https://irp.nida.nih.gov/…/NIDA_DrugsBrainsAddiction

Nwonu, C. N. S., Nwonu, P. C., & Ude, R. A. (2022). Neurobiological underpinnings in drug addiction. West African Journal of Medicine, 39(6), 874–884. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36063103

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2023). What is substance use disorder? U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.samhsa.gov/substance-use/what-is-sud