Chapter 2

Concept of Personality, Emotional Intelligence and Addiction: Theoretical Underpinnings

2.1] Introduction

The current chapter will explain the concept and various dimensions of the Personality,

Emotional Intelligence and Addiction. This will also explain the various definitions of

Personality, Emotional Intelligence and Addiction. Theoretical perspective for above mentioned

three concepts will be given in brief. This chapter is structured with the view that it will shape

the understanding of above three mentioned concepts in the context of current study. Remaining

of the chapter is organized in the below mentioned format. Section two will detail the concepts

of personality and its theoretical perspectives. Section three will present definition and concepts

of addiction and its theoretical approach available in literature. Section four has discussed the

concept and definition of emotional intelligence. It also detailed various theoretical perspective

of emotional intelligence available in the literature.

2.2] Personality

2.2.1] Concept and Definition of Personality

There are many possible ways of defining and interpreting “personality”, dependent on which

method is used. Personality is stable and continuing organization of a person's temperament,

nature, character, eccentric, intellectual feelings and physical presence which govern the

individual’s personality. Character denotes his or hersteady and continuing system of cognitive

behaviour; Temperament and nature denotes his or hersteady and continuing system of affective

behaviour; Intellectual feelings denotes his or her steady and continuing system of cognitive

behaviour; Physical presence denotes his or hersteady and continuing system of physical

configuration and neuro-endocrine endowment (Eysenck, 1953).

Within psychology two classic definitions are often used. Personality is anactiveorganization of

psychophysical arrangements, inside person, that produce the person’s characteristic designs of

thoughts,nature, behaviour and feelings (Allport, 1961). Internal factors . . . create one person’s

behavior constantfor various timeframe, which can be different from the other person’s

behaviour that they will follow in comparable situations (Child, 1968).

Both these definitions emphasize that personality is an internal process that guides behaviour.

Gordon Allport (1961) makes the point that personality is psychophysical, which means both

physical and psychological. Recent research has shown that biological and genetic phenomena

do have an impact on personality. Child (1968) makes the point that personality is stable – or at

least relatively stable. We do not change dramatically from week to week, we can predict how

our friends will behave, and we expect them to behave in a recognizably similar way from one

day to the next. Child (1968) includes consistency (within an individual) and difference (between

individuals) in his definition, and Allport (1961) refers to characteristic patterns of behaviour

within an individual. These are also important considerations. Personality makes our thoughts,

actions and feelings consistent, and it is also makes us different from one another.

2.2.2] Theoretical Perspective

2.2.2.i] The Psychoanalytic Perspective

Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) had begun to write about psychoanalysis by the early years of the

twentieth century, which he described as a theory of the personality, a technique of examination

of unconscious process, and a technique of treatment. Ithighlights the effect of the unconscious,

the significance of sexual and forceful instincts, and earlier childhood experience. He said mind

is similarto an iceberg and have limited conscious alertness (Hewstone et. al. 2005; Boeree,

1997; Freud 1913; Freud, 1930 & Thornton, 2005).

Freud developed a number of hypothetical models to show how the mind (or what he called the

psyche) works:

• A topographic model of the psyche – or how the mind is organized;

• A structural model of the psyche – or how personality works;

• A psychogenetic model of development – or how personality develops.

Topographic model of the psyche

Hesuggested that psychological powersfunctionon three levels of awareness:

Conscious level: The opinions, feelings, thoughts and vibrations that one is cognizant of at the

present moment.

Preconscious level: It consist information which he or she is not presently aware.However, they

can simplygo in conscious mind.

Unconscious level: It consists of the opinions, feelings, thoughts and vibrations, drives wishes

etc. which one is not aware. Butit affects our conscious level of movement. An unconscious

thing normally seeks to push through in a disguised manner to the conscious level. This can be in

a slanted manner and or it may become a figurative form. To explain the three levels of

awareness, explanation of imaginings& free association were followed.

Structural model of the psyche

Freud developed a structural model of personality involving what he called the ID, the EGO and

the SUPEREGO. Hethought that personality developsgiven conflict between his or herforceful,

dominant& pleasure pursuing biological instincts and the adopted social manacles against them.

It arises in the process of our commitment and efforts to resolve any struggles or conflict.

ID: The unconscious, illogicalside of personality. It is the embryonicsideresistant to morality and

needs of the outside world. It follows pleasure principle. It seeks instantrelief and satisfaction.

EGO: Involved the mechanisms and working of the actual world. It alwaysworks on the reality

principle. It is the conscious and logical side of personality and controlsfeelings, thinking and

behaviors. And it also makes people to learn how to balance needs of outside world andneeds of

the people.

SUPER EGO: The insidedemonstration of parental &collective values. It is the voice of

conscience whichinduces the ego to deliberate not only the actual but also the ultimate and ideal.

It judges his or her behaviors whether wrong, bad good or right. Failing up to ethicalprinciples

brings the guilt, shame, anxiety and inferiority in him or her (Hewstone et. al. 2005; Boeree,

1997; Freud 1913; Freud, 1930 & Thornton, 2005).

The above three concept can be better elaborated with an example on child. An infant is only

worried with his satisfaction i.e. to have milk etc. when extreme hungry. So, he has only an ID.

His every desiremust be immediately satisfiedwithout considering its availability, adequacy or

possibility. When child grows old and start making compromises is indicationsof thelearned

EGO. When child also learns to monitorand obey the guidelines, rules, discipline, principles or

duties given by parents or anybody else. This is known as SUPER EGO.

Defense Mechanisms

When we deal with real world and see if everything is not possible and if such situations are

intimidating for our EGO, we usemultiple strategies/mechanisms to safeguard our EGO. The

EGO performsproblematictasks of facilitating between the instinctive demands of ID and

ethicalsetting of SUPER EGO. EGOalways tries to find a solutionto the problem and if a genuine

solution is unlikely then it gets intoaltering thoughts, feelings or perception of actual

circumstances through someprocedureswhich is called defense mechanisms. This is also called

Adjustment Mechanisms. Several defense mechanisms are described below.

1. Denial

2. Displacement

3. Projection

4. Rationalization

5. Reaction formation

6. Regression

7. Repression

8. Sublimation

Psychogenetic model of development

Freud proposed that child growth and expansioncontinues through a series of stages related to

physical development, and that adult personality is influenced by how crises are resolved at each

stage. Freud concluded that personality growthhappens through a series of psycho-sexual steps.

Each stage is named after an erogenous zone, or area of the body that can experience pleasure

from the environment. Excessive gratification or frustration at any one stage can result in the

fixation of libido and subsequent disruption to normal personality development. These stages

(steps) are given below:

1. Oral (0-18 months)

2. Anal (18-36 months)

3. Phallic (4 to 6 years)

4. Latency (7 to 11 years)

5. Genital (From the beginning of puberty)

Freud’s ideas were controversial and the neo-Freudians divergedon various fronts. His ideas

were revised by other psychologists. The psychoanalysts like Horney Karen,Adler Alfred and

Jung Carlproposed different theories, where they differed with him (Freud) that personality is

completelyshaped during initial5 years. They were also in opinion that Freud did not highlightthe

society and cultural forces (Hewstone et. al. 2005; Boeree, 1997; Freud 1913; Freud, 1930 &

Thornton, 2005).

Carl Jung (1875–1961) was one of the first prominent analysts to break away from Sigmund

Freud. Carl saw humans as being directed as much by purpose and ambitions as by aggression

and sex. To distinguish his approach from classic psychoanalysis, Jung named it analytical

psychology (1951). The mainhypothesis of this theory was that personality contains challenging

forces and organizes within the individual which should be stable. He emphasized conflicts

between opposing forces within the individual, rather than between the individual and the needs

of society (Bair, 2003; Boeree, 2006; Jung, 1971; Jung, 1989).

Karen Horney’s (1885–1952) theory alsodiverged from Freudian principles, wherein

hehighlightedsignificance of social relationships as far as personality development is concerned.

Elementaryworryis the feeling of a child being lonely& helpless in a possiblyaggressive

world(Hewstone et al., 2005; Boeree,2006;Horney, 1950; Horney, 1945; Horney, 1937 &

Horney, 1942).

Alfred Adler believed that determined for precision, inferiority complex, order of birth, and

sibling competitionformsthe personality. Alfred Adlersaid that the main human cause is that of

determined for dominance. It arises from inferiority complexwhich may befelt during the

childhood. This is the phase where child is stranded and depends on others for assistance,

guidance and support (Hoffman& Edward, 1994;Hewstone et. al. 2005; Boeree, 2006; Adler,

1964; Adler, 1979; Oberst& Stewart, 2003; Phyllis Bottome, 1939)

2.2.2.ii] The Trait Perspective

Traits are typical behaviours and conscious intentions. They characterize a comparatively stable

and continuingtendency to behave in a given method. It isoften used in unfolding people. Trait

theories of personality identify, describe and measure individual differences. Sheldon (1954), for

example, categorized people according to three body types and related these physical differences

to differences in personality. Endomorphic body types are plump and round with a tendency to

be relaxed and outgoing. Mesomorphic physiques are strong and muscular, and usually energetic

and assertive in personality. Ectomorphic body types are tall and thin and tend to have a fearful

and restrained personality.

Gordon Allport (1897–1967) made the first comprehensive attempt to develop aoutline to define

personality using traits. Allport & Odbert (1936) had taken Webster’s (1925) New Dictionary to

identify terms that describe personality. Gordon Allport thought that main traits make up the

mostappearances of personalities.

Allport &Odbert (1936) in their study hypothesized that (which has become known as the

Lexical Hypothesis): “Individual differences are most striking&publiclypertinent in his or her

lives. And it will finally become programmed into their language. If this difference is more

important, then it is more likely to become articulated as a single word”.Allport & Odbert (1936)

initiated tofind personality traits by occupying two comprehensivedictionaries of the English,

and extractedeighteen thousands personality-describing words. They also extracted four thousand

five hundred personality-describing adjectives.

This work was developed further by Cattell Raymondused factor analysis to determine the

structure of personality. In personality theory, factor analysis can be used to identify which sets

of variables most simply and accurately reflect the structure and arrangement of human

personality. Cattell depends on 3 sources data collected from: (1) his or her life record (2)

objective test and (3) self-ratings. Hefoundsignificant personality factors both across individual

and within the individuals (Hewstone et al., 2005; Boeree, 2006).

Like Allport, Cattell believed that a useful source of information about the existence of

personality traits could be found in language, the importance of a trait being reflected in how

many words describe it. Cattell called this the lexical criterion of importance. Building on

Allport’s work, Cattell (1943) collated a set of 4500 trait names from various sources and then

removed obvious synonyms and metaphorical terms, until he reduced these to 171 key trait

names. Cattell collected ratings of these words and factor-analysed the ratings. Cattell (1947)

developed a model of personality describing 16 trait dimensions. Later he developed

questionnaire to measure these traits (Cattell, Eber & Tastuoka, 1977) called the Sixteen

Personality Factors Questionnaire (16PF). Below are the 16 trait dimensions.Reserved

(Outgoing), Relaxed (Tense), Sober (Happy-go-lucky), Expedient (Conscientious), Humble

(Assertive), Trusting (Suspicious), Undisciplined (Controlled), Less intelligent (More

intelligent), Tough-minded (Tender-minded), Placid (Apprehensive), Stable/ ego strength(

Emotionality/neuroticism), Shy (Venturesome), Conservative (Experimenting), Group-

dependent (Self-sufficient), Forthright (Shrewd), Practical (Imaginative).

Cattell’s investigations yielded three types of data, which he categorized as follows:

L-data – life record data, in which personality assessment occurs through interpretation of actual

records of behavior throughout a person’s lifetime (e.g. report cards, ratings by friends and

military conduct reports);

Q-data – data obtained by questionnaires (e.g. asking people to rate themselves on different

characteristics); and

T-data – or objective psychometric test data (e.g. the thematic apperception test).

Cattell had identified the 16 Personality Factors (16 PF).

Eysenck (1967) began with a theory of personality which he based on two super-traits:

extraversion–introversion and neuroticism– stability. Psychoticism was found to be additional

measurement of personality (Eysenck, 1982). Eysenck viewed the super-traits of extraversion

and neuroticism as independent, and believed that different personalities arise from differing

combinations of the two super-traits.

Below figure (figure2.1) shows the traits associated with Eysenck’s two major personality

dimensions. According to him, people who are high in both neuroticism and extraversion tend to

exhibit quite different traits than someone who is low in both, or a combination of low and high.

If person is high on extraversion and neuroticism,then he or her normally tends to be touchy and

aggressive. If personis high on extraversion and low on neuroticism, then he or her tend to be

carefree and sociable.

Figure 2.1: Personality Types

Source: Adapted from Eysenck (Hewstone et al., 2005)

In his work in 1982 on psychoticism, people scoring high on psychoticism are described as:

‘detached, selfish, dominating, cold, lacking in compassion, lacking in apprehension for others,

thoughtless, and not worried abouthuman rights and well-being of others. Like Cattell, Eysenck

developed a questionnaire designed to measure his supertraits – the Eysenck Personality

Questionnaire, or EPQ (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975).

Touchy Restless Aggressive Excitable Chargeable Impulsive Optimistic Active

Passive Careful Thoughtful Peaceful Controlled Reliable Even-tempered Calm

Moody Anxious Rigid Sober Pessimistic Reserved Unsociable Quite

Sociable Outgoing Talkative Responsive Easygoing Lively Carefree Leaderlike

Neuroticism

Extraversion

Emotional Stability

Introversion Choleric

Sanguine Phlegmatic

Melancholic

In the literature, multiplepeople found Cattell's theory complex & Eysenck's theory very limited

in coverage.Latter on the5-factor theory was developedand it becamebasic structure of

personality. Multiple researchers like Fiske (1949), McCrae & Costa (1987), Smith (1967),

Norman (1963, 1967), Goldberg (1981) described only five core traits for personality. Literature

on this theory has been growing over the past 50 years, beginning with the research of and later

expanded by other researchers including). These five categories are usually described as follows:

(1) Extraversion (2) Conscientiousness (3) Openness (4) Neuroticism (5) Agreeableness.

Imagination and insight, broad range of interests, prefers variety, and independent most of the

early work on the Big Five model was conducted in North America using the English language.

A recent review of studies involving European languages (De Raad et. al., 1998) found general

support for the Big Five. Evidence from studies conducted in non-Western cultures is less widely

available, but does show some support for a five factor structure (Church et al., 1997).

2.2.2.iii] The Social-Cognitive Perspective

This theory tries to concentrate on the part of memory and thinking in the personality. In order to

determining behaviours, skills &expectations learned by him or her are very important.

Mischel (1973) helped to answer the questions like how do cognitive and social processes affect

behavior and how do different processing strategies result in differing personalities? He proposed

a set of psychological person variables for analysing individual differences in cognitive terms.

These variables are assumed to interact with each other as we interpret the social world and act

on it. Later, Mischel & Shoda (1995) renamed the variables as cognitive–affective, integrating

constructs from research in cognition and social learning. This model provides a classification

system of broad cognitive categories, which describe interacting processes that may lead to

personality differences. Below are the forms of cognitive–affective parts in the system of

personality as given in Mischel & Shoda (1995)

1. Encodings

Units or constructs for categorizing events, people and the self

2. Expectancies and beliefs

Relating to the societal world and about consequences for behaviour; self-value

3. Affects

Approaches, emotions, feelings and affective reactions to stimuli

4. Goals and values

Required and aversive disturbing states and consequences, life objectives, values

5. Competencies and self- regulatory plans

Behaviours and approaches for forming actions and influencing consequences, one’s own

behaviour and reactions

Theorists like Argyle & Little(1972) and Peterson, Seligman & Vaillant(1988) talked about

various processes such as selective attention, interpretation and categorization and how that

causes to perceive the same events and behaviours in different ways throughout our life.

Lazarus (1966, 1990) investigated people’s reactions to stressful situations and concluded that

how we view or appraise stress, cognitively, is more important than the actual amount of stress

we are experiencing. Much of Lazarus’s research has involved the identification and evaluation

of coping strategies (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).

Expectancies are the possible outcomes that we expect or anticipate in a given situation, and will

determine which behaviour is selected by them from a potentially large number of possibilities.

Mischel (1973, 1990) defined three types of expectancy: Firstly, behaviour–outcome relations

are the relationship between possible behaviour and expected outcomes in any situation.

Secondly, stimulus–outcome relations – we learn that certain cues or stimuli are likely to lead to

certain events, and we learn to react accordingly. And thirdly, Self-value is a person’s belief that

they can achieve certain behaviour. People differ in how effective they expect themselves to be

in a situation, and these expectations seem to affect their actual performance (Bandura, 1978).

2.2.2.iv]The Humanistic Perspective

In the literature, within thisperspective, researcher suggested that within everyperson is a

dynamicimaginative force exists which is called “self”. Humanistic theories of personality

present a positive and optimistic view of human behaviour. Humanistic theories have formed the

basis of many therapeutic procedures on which modern counselling techniques are based.

Maslow Abraham &Rogers Carl opposed this perspective.

Carl Rogers (1902–87) saw humans as intrinsically good and as having an innate desire for self-

improvement. He believed that self-concept is critical to our experience of the world, and that

this develops from the child’s perceptions of his parents’ approval.

According to Rogers Carl the human motivation is objectifying tendency and the innate drive to

sustain and improvehis or her organism. Hesaw that individuals are inspired to act in agreement

with his or her self-concept and normally reject theexperiences which are against their self-

concept. The perfect condition for growth is categorical positive respect. According to him, a

person is fully operativepersonif his or her self-concept is evolving and flexible (Hewstone et al.,

2005; Boeree, 2006).

Maslow Abraham suggested the idea of self actualization and that peoplespurposes are based on

itshierarchical needs. According to him, self actualized individual, are extemporaneous and

creative,have genuine perception, generally enjoy..

McLeod S (2007)work on Carl Rogers explains more about him. According to him,he was a

psychologist (humanisticpsychologist)and thought that every individual can achieve their desires,

wishes and goals in life.

Myers (1998) in his book wrote: Experiencing unconditional positive regard – love and affection

– enables us to grow and to satisfy our core tendency, which is to fulfil our potential by

developing our capacities and talents to the full. This is called self-actualization. Activities that

are self-actualizing are perceived as satisfying, says Rogers, whereas activities that are

incompatible with self-actualization are frustrating. From a scientific perspective, the tendency to

self-actualize is vague and untestable. While, we may all have the same capacity to self-

actualize, the form that actualization takes will be unique to each individual making it impossible

to establish objective criteria for measurement.

Rogers differentiated5features of the complete operative person (McLeod, 2007):

A. Open to experience: both positive and negative emotions accepted. Negative feelings are not

denied, but worked through (rather than resort to ego defense mechanisms).

B. Existential living: in touch with different experiences as they occur in life, avoiding

prejudging and preconceptions. Being able to live and fully appreciate the present, not

always looking back to the past or forward to the future (i.e. living for the moment).

C. Trust feelings: feeling, instincts and gut-reactions are paid attention to and trusted.

D. Creativity: creative thinking and risk taking are features of a person’s life. Person does not

play safe all the time. This involves the ability to adjust and change and seek new

experiences.

E. Fulfilled life: person is happy and satisfied with life, and always looking for new challenges

and experiences.

Rogers developed a therapeutic approach known as client-centered therapy, which gives a central

role to the therapist’s categoricaloptimisticrespect for the client. The psychotherapist has to be

trusting, accepting and empathic. Rogers argued that this helps the individual in therapy to

recognize and untangle her feelings and return to an actualizing state Myers (1998). Rogers &

Dymond (1954) set out to examine changes in the discrepancy between present self-concept and

the ideal self (the person the client would like to be). This was done using a Q-sort technique

(devised by Stephenson, 1953), whereby the client is given a range of cards on which there is a

descriptive statement, such as: ‘I don’t trust my own emotions’ and ‘I have a warm emotional

relationship with others.’

2.3] Addiction

2.3.1] Concept and Definition of Addiction

The word "addiction" has too many meaningsand isthe subject of considerable debate (Foddy &

Savulescu, 2010 & Shaffer, 1997) because of itsessentialvagueness. At its beginning, it

isnormallyconsideredas “giving over” or also can be termed as “highly devoted” to a individual

or movement (Alexander& Schweighofer,1988), or appealing in a behavior consistently(Levine,

1978) that can results in negative or positive concerns.

For previous four hundred years, it was framed as overpowering urges and involving strong. And

during previoustwo hundred years, addiction was considered disease-like in implication (Orford,

2001).

Addiction can bedisastrous or enviable. It can also be somewhere between both of them. In the

nineteenth century, new meanings appeared. The new meaning is more obstructive than the

historicalone in 3 ways; it clubs addiction to injuriousparticipations with drugs which produce

withdrawal sign (Alexander& Schweighofer, 1988).

Because “addiction” is commonly used in such a vague way, there have been many attempts to

define it more clearly. Addiction is a main, prolonged, neurobiological disease, with hereditary,

psychosocial, and ecological factors. Addiction is categorized by behaviors which include any or

more ofthe following: cravings, compulsive use, compromised control over drug use andconstant

use despite harm (Savage et. al., 2002).

The 1933 Oxford Dictionary (English)also defined addiction: a official giving over (Murray,

Bradley, Cragie& Onions, 1933). Before 19thcentury, the addiction was very hardly linked with

drugs but opium had been connected to addiction or any substituteof addiction (Parssinen &

Kerner, 1980).

The usage of addiction, in fact the restrictive use of addiction, was developedin the 19thcentury

(Berridge& Edwards, 1981; Levine, 1978, 1984; Sonnedecker, 1963). It wasobserved as a

medical or scientific success. But it was not scientific rather it was medical

incidentally(Alexander, 1987).

The restrictive concept of addiction prospered but the historical concept was extremely rooted

and never completely displaced. The both definition started confusing to people and researcher,

therefore, authorities urged abandoning both (Zinberg & Robertson, 1972; American Psychiatric

Association, 1980; LeDain, 1973; Edwards, Arif, & Hodgson, 1982; Paton, 1969;Vaillant, 1983).

Sussman & Sussman (2011) didorganized literature review on the definition of addiction.

Addiction washypothesized as being consists of multiple essentials(Larkin&Griffiths, 1998;

Griffiths& Larkin, 2004). They suggested5 elements which can be considered as elements of

addiction. These elements are given below.

Feeling different

Multiple addicts reported to feel “different” as compared to others.This means they feel

comparatively uncomfortable, isolated, fidgety, or partial (Jacobs, 1986).

Obsession with the behavior

It considers too much of thoughts to perform a behavior. Too much time spent toinvolve in the

behavior. Too little time spent on other actions(Campbell, 2003, Robinson, & Berridge, 2001;

Robinson, & Berridge, 2008).

Temporarysatiation

This is stage of temporary shutting down of cravings or temporarily urges are not operative and

can return soon (Foddy, &Savulescu, 2010; Orford, 2001;Marks, 1990).

Loss of control

This is stage of loss of control over addiction. Peoples are facing problem in abstainingfrom

addiction in spite of attempting to withdraw (Heather, 1998). Many peopleseven disregard

theelementary self-care and loose simple will(Nordenfelt, 2010).

Negative consequences

This is all about the negative results of addiction. Negative consequences generally start after the

extreme level engagement in addictive behavior which is basicallybodily pain,uneasiness,

societaldispleasure, fallen self-esteem etc.(Marlatt, 1985, Goodman, 1990; Campbell, 2003).

Stopping this gets very difficult and the individual also fear for day-to-day apparent stress

(Hatterer, 1982; Schneider& Irons, 2001; Sussman, Lisha, &Griffiths, 2010).

An operational form of the broad definition of addiction can be derived from distinctions laid out

by Jaffe in 1980and defined as: "a behavioral pattern of drug use characterized by overwhelming

involvement with the use of a drug (compulsive use), the securing of its supply, and a high

tendency to relapse after withdrawal" (Jaffe, 1980). Jaffe explicitly excludes tolerance and

withdrawal symptoms from this concept. He adds: "Addiction is thus viewed as an extreme on a

continuum of involvement with drug use and refers in a quantitative rather than a qualitative

sense to the degree to which drug use prevades the total life activity of the user and to the range

of circumstances in which drug use controls his behavior." The quantitative dimension alluded to

is not quantity of drug use, but of involvement with the drug.

Jaffe also distinguishes "addiction" from "dependence," describing "dependence" as an inflexible

involvement that may be harmful, but is not overwhelming, as addiction is. Similar distinctions

between more and less severe forms of compulsive drug use have been made by Kaplan &

Wieder (1974);Gerard, Lee,Chein, & Rosenfeld (1964); and Wurmser (1978).

For several years, Alexander & Schweighofer (1988) hasquestioned students. It was centered on

drug-use types &categories explainedby Jaffe.

Table 2.1: Involvement Definition

Adopted from Alexander BK & Schweighofer ARF (1988) and Jaffe (1980)

2.3.2] Theoretical Perspective

Multiple theories have been suggested in the literature to describe addiction. In the current

context, four major approaches (theories) have been discussed in brief. The first concentrates on

the neurobiological effects of drugs. The second theory is psychological. It concentrated on

behavioural models and individual differences. The third approach is socio-cultural. It

concentrated on the cultural and environmental factors that make drug dependence more likely.

The final approach is Bio-psychosocial Theory, whereindrugs misuse is consequences ofintricate

interaction between societal, biological, spiritual and psychologicalfactors (BCMCF, 1996).

2.3.2.i] Neuro-Scientific Approach

According to Koob & LeMoal, (1997) & Nutt(1997), various drugs clearly have multiple

primary activities on the brain.But theendogenous opioid system and dopamine system have

been involved as normal to most drugs. Under these theories, various drugs have been explained.

Alcohol, nicotine, Cannabis, Opiates, Cocaine, Amphetamine and Benzodiazepines are used to

as drugs.

Research in past has concentrated on exploring biological characteristics that underlie drug

dependence which can be grouped into two kinds of explanations. Firstly, examines individual

differences in liability to drug dependence because of genetic characteristics, and secondly

accounts for drug dependence in terms of changes that occur in the brain due to chronic drug

administration.

Family studies of alcohol use disorders suggest that such disorders do cluster in families

(Kendler, Davis& Kessler, 1997; Merikangas, 1990; Merikangas et. al., 1998). Many studies

suggest that substance use disorders cluster within families that may occur simply because the

siblings share the same environment rather than any underlying genetic cause.

Adoption studies examine rates of disorder among adoptees, given their biological and adoptive

parents’ disorder status. This allows evaluation of the effects of genetic (biological parents’

status) and environmental (adoptive parents’ status) effects on vulnerability to substance use

disorders. Research suggests that there is a significant genetic factor that influences adoptees’

vulnerability to alcohol use disorders (Sigvardsson, Cloninger&Bohman, 1981; Goodwin,

Schulsinger, Hermansen, Guze& Winokur, 1973; Heath, 1995).

One theory of drug dependence is based on the concept of neuro-adaptation (Koob & LeMoal,

1997). Neuro-adaptation refers to changes in the brain that occur to oppose a drug’s acute actions

after repeated drug administration. It is of two types, within system adaptations and between-

system adaptations. When drugs are repeatedly administered, changes occur in the chemistry of

the brain to oppose the drug’s effects. When this drug use is discontinued, the adaptations are no

longer opposed; the brain’s homeostasis is disrupted (Koob & LeMoal, 1997). Essentially, this

hypothesis argues that acceptance to the impact of a substance withdrawal and substances when

substances are stoppedare the result of neuro-adaptation (Koob, Caine, Parsons, Markou&

Weiss, 1997).

2.3.2.ii]Psychological Approach

Psychological approaches to the explanation of drug dependence have often been based on

concepts that are common to those of other syndromes of behaviour involving compulsive or

impulsive behaviours, such as obsessive-compulsive disorder or gambling (Miller, 1980). There

are various psychological approaches to explain drug dependence which includes emphasis on

learning and conditioning (behavioural models), cognitive theories, pre-existing behavioural

tendencies (personality theories), and models of rational choice.

One group concentrates on the fact that behaviour is maintained (or made more likely) by the

consequences (reinforcers) of such behaviour (West, 1989). Drugs might be reinforcing in two

general ways: through the direct effects of drugs on some sort of reinforcement system in the

brain; or through its effects on other reinforcers (such as social or sexual reinforcers) or

behavioural effects (such as increased attention) (Altman et al., 1996). It has been shown that

two factors (history of use (learning) and current environmental conditions of use (cues)) are

important in the development of persistent use or abuse of drugs (Barrett &Witkin, 1986).

These findings point to another group of behaviourist theories, which focus on classical

conditioning Greeley & Westbrook(1991); Heather &Greeley (1990) focused on classical

conditioning which has been found to play a significantrole in the growth&preservation of

addictive behaviours.

Cue exposure theory argues that cues are important in the development and maintenance of

addictive behaviour (Drummond, Tiffany, Glautier& Remington, 1995; Heather & Greeley,

1990). A cue that has previously been present when drugs were administered will be more likely

to elicit a conditioned response (cue reactivity). This is thought to underlie craving, and may

explain why someone who was dependent on a substance but has been abstinent for some time

experiences strong cravings (Heather &Greeley, 1990).

Various theories in literature are presents which explain drug dependence in terms of cognitive

constructs and importance of self-regulation in the growth of drug use issues. According to

Miller & Brown, (1991, self-regulation can change the development and progression of one’s

behavior (Diaz & Fruhauf, 1991).

Many theorists argue that some people are more prone to addiction through a so-called

“addictive personality”. Hans Eysenck has discussed this in terms of a psychological resource

model, whereby the habit of drug-taking is developed because the drug used fulfils a certain

purpose that is related to the individual’s personality profile (Eysenck, 1997). According to

Eysenck, there are three major and independent personality dimensions: P (psychoticism), N

(neuroticism), and E (extraversion) (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985). Research examining the link

between E and drug dependence has revealed inconsistent findings; in a review of research on

this topic, 10 studies found a negative relationship, 2 found a positive correlation, and 12 found

no significant relationship (Francis, 1996). In contrast, there has been considerable research

suggesting that persons with dependence on a range of substances - alcohol, heroin,

benzodiazepines, nicotine - have higher than normal N and P scores (Francis, 1996). This

research suggests that persons who are more moody, irritable, and anxious (high N scores), and

those who are more impulsive and aggressive (high P scores), are also more likely to have

substance use problems.

Elster & Skog (1999) examined the problem of why people voluntarily engage in self-destructive

behaviour. It couldbe anything from continued use in spite of urge to stop or use excessively

(Pears, 1984, Davidson, 1985; APA, 1994).

2.3.2.iii]Socio-Cultural Approach

A number of social and environmental factors have been studied in literature that has strong

relation to drug & substance use and drug & substance use disorders. There have been many

personal elements that contribute towards use or abuse. However, the occurrence of drug abuse is

contingent broadly upon the situations,trends and ethics of society at that time.

While there is a strong genetic component to vulnerability to drug dependence, there is also a

substantial environmental component (Kendler & Gardner, 1998; Kendler, Karkowski &

Prescott, 1999; Kendler & Prescott, 1998).

Historical evidences propose that individual with antisocial behaviour are expected to have or

develop substance use problems. Adolescents with conduct disorders are significantly more

prone to develop drug use ailments than those without such conduct problems (Cicchetti &

Rogosch, 1999; Gittelman, Mannuzza, Shenker& Bonagura, 1985). Children or young people

with anxiety or depressive symptoms are more likely to begin substance use at an earlier age, and

to develop substance use problems (Henry et al., 1993; Cicchetti & Rogosch, 1999; Costello et

al., 1999; Loeber, Southamer-Lober& White, 1999).

The socio-cultural background of a person will also affect the likelihood that he or she will

develop substance use problems; for example, people who come from lower socioeconomic

backgrounds are more likely to have problematic use of a range of drugs (Anthony, Warner&

Kessler, 1994; Hall, Johnston& Donnelly, 1999).

In the words of manynoticeable ethnographers: "Drinking problems are virtually unknown in

most of the world's cultures" (Heath, 1982), and "solitary, addictive, drinking behavior does not

occur to any significant extent in small-scale, traditional, preindustrial societies" (Marshall,

1979). Finally "beverage alcohol usually is not a problem in a society unless . . . it is defined as

such" (Marshall, 1979).

Families also have a strong effect on the likelihood that people will develop substance use

problems (Hawkins, Catalano &Miller, 1992; Lynskey & Hall, 1998). Multiple researches have

found significant relationship between substance use by family members with the chances of the

substance use behaviour of adolescents. Parents’ drug use has been associated with the initiation

and incidence of cannabis &alcohol use (Hawkins et al., 1992), while older brothers’ drug use

and attitudes towards drug use have been associated with younger brothers’ drug use (Brook,

Whiteman, Gordon&Brook, 1988). If parents hold permissive attitudes towards the use of drugs

by their children, their children will be more likely to use drugs (Hawkins et al., 1992). The risk

of substance misuse is higher if there is family discord, poor or inconsistent behavioural

management techniques by parents, or low levels of bonding within the family (Hawkins et al.,

1992).

The peer environment also has a large influence on the drugtaking behaviour of individuals.

Drug use usually begins with peers, and peer attitudes to substance use have been shown to be

highly predictive of adolescent substance use (Fergusson & Horwood, 1997; Newcomb,

Maddahian &Bentler, 1986)

2.3.2.iv]Bio-Psychosocial Perspective

In contrast to the traditional theories, a model called the Bio-psychosocial (BPS) model

wasinitiated to present the composite interaction and collaboration between psychological,

biological and societalfactor of addiction (Crowe, 1994). Currently, according to Marlatt &

Vanden (1997), the basis of multiple treatments to addictions is derived from this model.

The Bio-psychosocial model was originally designed by George Engel (1977) as an alternative

to the prevailing biomedical model, which tends to reduce illness to a single source, then treat

the illness with little regard for other contributing factors such as a patient’s psychological

experiences or social behaviors.

A decade later, Donovan (1988) and Wallace (1990) articulated a BPS model for addictive

behaviors in recognition that drinking behavior and alcohol problems are multidimensional.

Donovan recommended comprehensive assessment that could capture the

psychological,biological and societalfactor of the individual’s life that is affected by drinking.

This information, Donovan hypothesized, would improve diagnosis and treatment.

2.3.3] DSM-IV Criteria

2.3.3.i) Drug Abuse

A form of substance and drug use leading to clinically damage or distress, as displayed by either

one or more:

A. Recurrent substance use which causes failure to accomplish commitments at home, work or

school.

B. Recurrent substance use when it is physically dangerous.

C. Recurrent substance - linked legal issues.

D. Sustainedsubstance use inspite of interpersonal and social problems.

2.3.3.ii) Substance Dependence

A form of substance and drug use leading to clinically damage or distress, as displayed by either

threeor more

A. Tolerance

B. Withdrawal

C. The drugs is normally taken in maximum amounts or for longer period

D. Continuous wish or ineffectivedeterminations to bring down drug use

E. Significant time spent to get the substance

F. Social, recreational activities are reduced or eliminated due to substance use

G. Continued use in spite of knowledge of its causes and consequences.

2.3.4] Addiction Cycle, Stages, Relapseand Recovery

Gorski& Miller (1986) described addiction cycle in six steps i.e.

1. Short-term (Temporary) gratification

2. Long-term pain and Dysfunction

3. Addictive rational (thinking)

4. Increased acceptance (tolerance)

5. Control loss (losing control)

6. Bio-psycho-social damage

1. Short-Term Gratification : First there is short-term gratification. You feel good now.

2. Long-term Pain and Dysfunction: The short-term gratification is eventually followed by

long-term pain. This pain, part of which is from physical withdrawal, and part of which is

from the inability to cope psycho-socially without drugs/alcohol, is the direct consequence of

using the addictive chemical/s.

3. Addictive Thinking : The long-term pain and dysfunction trigger addictive thinking.

Addictive thinking starts with compulsion and obsession.

4. Increased Tolerance: Without your being aware that it is happening, more and more of the

drug is required to produce the same effect.

5. Loss of Control: The obsession and compulsion become so strong that you cannot think

about anything else. Your feelings and emotions become distorted by the compulsion. You

become stressed and uncomfortable until finally the urge to use is so strong that you cannot

resist it. Once you use the addictive chemicals or the addictive behaviors again, the cycle

starts all over.

6. Bio-Psycho-Social Damage: Eventually there is damage to the health of your body (physical

health), mind (psychological health), and relationships with other people (social health). As

pain and stress get worse, the compulsion to use the addictive drugs or behaviors to get relief

from the pain increases. A deadly trap develops. You need addictive use in order to feel

good. When you use addictively you damage yourself physically, psychologically, and

socially. This damage increases your pain which increases your need for addictive use.

Nay (1997) described the stages of addiction. He described the basic stages of addiction in three

stages. (1) Thought process changes (2) Dealing withlife'svarious changes and relations with

others. (3) Bodily and mental welfarewear awaybeyond no control. This can results in suicide.

Relapse

Relapse is a process in which recovering addict, after his treatment goes back to addictive pattern

of behavior and habbits. It does not happen in day or two. There are gradual significant changes

in attitude e.g. social withdrawal, defensiveness, anxious, mood swings, anger tantrums, lying,

disturbed sleep and eating habbits. Individual starts thinking about the substance, old

companions and relapse. Once individual starts thinking about relapse it will not take very long

to get the substance and start consuming it.

Recovery

Addiction is treatable disease, it can be treated with the help of rehabilitation, medication,

counseling-psychotherapy, family intervention and support groups.

2.4] Emotional Intelligence

2.4.1] Concept and Definition of Emotional Intelligence

In broad terms, researchers have different view point for Emotional Intelligence (EI).

Researchers have been studying emotional intelligence for more than 100 years. In literature,

various definition of emotional intelligence is available. Dr. J Mayer's talked about EI as

intellectual intersection of the thoughts and emotions. The more formal definition was given by

Mayer, Salovey & Caruso (2004); Mayer & Salovey(1997) and Salovey & Mayer (1990). The

concept of EI has engenderedmany interest both in the amateur& scientific fields.

Mayer & Mitchell (1998) and Mayer, Salovey& Caruso (2004) viewed EI as a member practical,

societal and personal intelligences.It was called hot intelligence because these operate on hot

perceptions.

According to Mayer & Salovey (1993)EI as one of the type of social intelligence. Itcontainsthe

capability to seehis or her or others emotions and can differentiateamongst them. Emotional

intelligence is now considered by many as being essential for successful living (Goleman, 1995).

EIdenotes to the ability for distinguishinghis or her feelings with those of others. EI also denotes

encouraginghimself or herself, and for handling emotions well in himself or herself (Goleman,

1998).Reuven Bar-Onis the prominent researchers of the EI and presented the concept of

emotion quotient.

Definition of Emotions

An emotion is a complex, multi-component episode that creates a readiness to act. There are six

components of emotions: cognitive appraisals, the subjective experiences of emotion, thought-

action tendencies, internal bodily changes, facial expression,and responses to the emotion.

Emotions are distinct from moods in several ways. For instance, emotions have clear causes, are

particularly brief, and implicate multiple components (Smith et. al., 2003). Nelson (2007) in his

book “The Emotion Code” presented the emotions.

2.4.2] Theoretical Perspective

A survey of literature on the models of Emotional Intelligence explains different classifications

of the construct.

First approaches followed Goleman’s book (1995) (Fernández-Berrocal & Extremera, 2006).

Second approaches characterized asa scientific models. These models followed literature, done

controlled empirical papers, and utilized measurement scales developed for this purpose (Mayer

& Salovey, 1997;Goleman, Boyatzis, & Rhee, 2000 and Bar-On, 1997).

One line of research was established in 1990 by Salovey and Mayer, another by Goleman in

1995, and yet another by Bar-On in 1997. The model by Salovey and Mayer observesEI is a

cognitive capability. A model by Bar-On observes EI as a mixed intelligence. This contains

personality aspects &cognitive (capability) ability. The model by Golemanalso observes EI as a

mixed intelligence like Bar-On

2.4.2.i] The Ability-Based Model (Mayer & Salovey):

This model has produced the maximum number of researches which are published in various

journals. In literature, there are multiple approaches but this is the most acceptable approach.

Because, it considers EI as a mental capability (ability). EI involves the aptitude to recognize

accurately, express emotion and evaluate. According to Mayer & Salovey, (1997) EI is the

ability to engender feelings, to comprehendemotional knowledge, to monitor emotions and to

promote intellectual and emotional growth

Salovey &Mayer’sbeginningof EIfound that EI is consists of two areas. First is experiential and

second is strategic. The experimental is the ability to observe, reply, and influence and

manipulate emotional evidencewith no necessary understanding. Whereas, strategic is ability to

comprehend and accomplish emotions with no perceived feelings.

The ability based model consists of 4 abilities. First, emotional assimilation, second, emotional

perception, third, the management of emotions and the fourth is emotional understanding.

This model does the estimatefor internal organization of the emotional intelligence. It

alsoaboutthe implications for individual life. It forecasts that EI will meet 3 empirical criteria. (1)

The mental issues have wrong or right answers (2) the estimated skills are correlated with other

measures of ability and self-reported understanding. (3) The complete ability rises with age.

2.4.2.ii] The Mixed Model (Bar-On)

Bar-On Reuven had initiated “Emotion Quotient” as the 1stmeasures of EI. His approach is

broader, comprehensive and more inclusive than ability model developed by Mayer & Salovey.

This modeltalks about the potential for success and performance, instead of success and

performance itself. It measured process-oriented instead of outcome-oriented.

It emphases on an arrangement of social and emotional capabilities and abilities which includes

following and are related to bodily health.The ability to

1. Aware of his or herself

2. Accomplish emotions and handgrip stress

3. Solve personal and interpersonal problems and issues

4. Continuepositivetemperament

He presented thatsocial-emotionalintelligence is a multiple combinations of social and emotional

skills and competencies which impact

(1) Individuals ability to distinguish,

(2) Understanding and management of emotions,

(3) How he or she can relate with others,

(4) How he or she can adjust to change and able to solve personal and interpersonal nature

problems

(5) And can effectivelyhandle with daily challenges, demandsand pressures.

He focused on maindeterminants&constituents of emotional &social functioning which direct the

individual to a better emotionaland psychological wellbeing.According to him EI& cognitive

(intellectual) intelligence (II or CI) contribute equally to anindividual’s general intelligence. For

individual’s potential to succeed in future and his or her life, this can work as an indicator.

He outlines 5 main emotional intelligence components: i.e. general mood,stress management,

interpersonal, intrapersonal and adaptability. The detail of the components and sub-components

is given in table 2.2. Further, table 2.3 has given brief comparison of all three models.

Table 2.2: TheEQ-i Scales

Sources: Adopted from Bar-On, R. (2006).

Table 2.3: Three Models on “Emotional Intelligence”

Sources: Adopted from Mayer, Salovey & Caruso (2000)

2.4.2.iii] The Mixed Model (Goleman)

The concept of EI in fact was originated from the book by GolemanDaniel written on

“Emotional Intelligence” and also from hisreports regarding the effect of these capabilitieson

individual’s lives. Goleman’s model was also mixed model like Bar-On, wherein hecategorized

by 5comprehensive areas i.e.

i. Knowing individual’s emotions

ii. Distinguishing emotions in others

iii. Management of relationships

iv. Management of emotions

v. Inspiring oneself

His model utilized several core competencies which are considered as representatives of the

successful and brilliant individual (Goleman, 2001). His model elaborates 4crucial dimensions

and that can be further divided in to twenty competencies.These are

(1) Self-Awareness

(2) Self-Management

(3) Social Awareness

(4) Relationship Management

According to Goleman (1998), Self-awareness normally readsand understands individual’s

emotions. It also identifiesits impact to guide decision by using gut feelings. Social awareness is

aboutunderstand, wisdom, sense and respond to other's emotions when understanding social

networks. Self-management tries to controlindividual’s emotions and desires and familiarizing to

fluctuatingconditions or circumstances. Relationship management is about to motivate, develop,

inspire, encourage and influenceothers while handling conflict.

At work, Emotional Intelligence will assist people “in teamwork”, in cooperation, in helping

learn together how to work more effectively (Goleman, 1995; 1998a, b). Below table explains

Goleman's model onEI.

Table 2.4: Goleman's (2001) EI Competencies

2.4.2.iv] Emotional Intelligence Measures

There are myriad of tests available to measure Emotional Intelligence (EI). Several researchers

have developed emotional intelligence including those developed by Lane, Quinlan, Schwartz,

Walker& Zeitlin (1990);Goleman, Boyatzis& Rhee (2000);Bar-On (1997); Mayer, Salovey&

Caruso (2002); Jordan, Ashkanasy, Hartel & Hooper (2002); Dulewicz & Higgs (1999) and

Wong & Law (2002). Multiple measures of EInormally used for companies, industrial,

institutional and organizational settings are not related to the traditional theories of EI. These are

scientific scales and do not have any relation to traditional theories. Some of these measures are

the Self-Report EI Test (SREIT) and Levels of Emotional Awareness (EA) Scale (LEAS).

In this section, we will be discussing 3prominent measures developed by above authors are

discussed. The first measure was developed by Mayer & Salovey. They tested the validity of 4

branch model of EI with the Multi-branch EI Scale (MEIS). It containstwelve sub-scale measures

of EI.The evaluations with the Multi-branch EI Scale specifyEI as distinct intelligence (DI). This

DI has three separate sub factors.

(1) Emotional Understanding

(2) Emotional Perception and

(3) Emotional Management.

The second measure was developed by Reuven Bar-On. He developed “Emotion Quotient

Inventory” (EQ-i) – Bar On. EQ-i is a self-report measure of EIfor the people for 16 years or

more.

This measure estimates the social and EI and also socially and emotionally competent behavior.

It does not measure the traits for personality and also does not measure any cognitive capacity. It

is best to measure individual’s ability and capability to be positivetowards environmental

pressures &demands. Total EQ is consists of 5 scales that coincides with five Bar-On’s

components

1) Intrapersonal

2) Adaptability

3) Interpersonal

4) General Mood and

5) Stress Management

Table 2.5: Measures of Emotional Intelligence: Commonly Used

Source: adopted from Stys & Brown (2004)

The third measure was developed by GolemanDaniel. He developed and initiated the Emotional

Competency Inventory (ECI). Like other, this measure is based on EI competencies to measures

the competencies of employees i.e. executives, managers, and leaders. This measure consists of

twenty competencies. Goleman organized it into 4 components.

(1) Self Awareness

(2) Self Management

(3) Social Awareness

(4) Social Skills

Others commonly used measures of emotional intelligence are presented in table 2.5.