The Relationship of Self-Regulation among substance dependents and non-dependents Individuals

List of Content

• Title page
• Declaration
• Certificate
• Dedication
• Acknowledgement
• List of Contents
• List of Tables
• List of Appendices
• Abstract
• Chapter I
• Introduction
• 1.1 Summary
• Chapter II
• Literature  Review
• 2.1Summary
• 2.2 Rational of the study
• 2.3 Hypothesis
• Chapter III
  
• Method
• 3.1 Research Design
• 3.2 Sampling Strategy
• 3.3 Sample
• 3.4 Conceptual definition
• 3.5 Operational Definition
• 3.5.1 Inclusion criteria
• 3.5.2 Exclusion criteria
• 3.6 Measures
• 3.7 Demographic variable questionnaire
• 3.8 Procedure
• 3.9 Ethical consideration
• Chapter IV
  
• Results
• Chapter V
• Discussions
• 5.1 Implication
• 5.2 Limitation
• 5.3 Suggestions
• References

 

List of Tables

Table 3.1	Descriptives of Sample Characteristics (N=60)	14
Table 4.1	Independent Sample t-test	17
Table 4.2	Descriptive Statistics of Self Regulation	18

 

List of Appendices

Appendix A                Consent Foam

Appendix B                Demographic Form

Appendix C                Permission letter from Institute

Appendix D                Permission letter from Hospital

Appendix C                Questionnaire (Self Regulation Questionnaire)

 

Abstract

The current study aims to investigate the relationship of self-regulation among substance dependents and non-dependents individuals using the self-regulation questionnaire (SRQ) ;( Brown, Miller&Lawendowski) would be included. Inclusionary criteria would be individuals more than 15 years of age, 30 substance using individual from addiction rehab unit of Punjab Institute of Mental Health (PIMH) Lahore and 30 of non dependents individual from different colleges. Self-regulation questionnaire would be used. Descriptive analysis, correlation analysis for association among substance dependent and non-dependent and regression analysis would be use. Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 17(SPSS) would be used for all the analysis. Result will be discussed in the light of previous literature.

Chapter I

Introduction

The current study aims to compare the self-regulation among substance dependent and non-dependents individuals. Self-regulation is the capability to develop, implement, are flexibly maintain plan behavior in order to achieve ones goals. There is a developed model of self-regulation to study the addictive behavior and general principles of behavioral self control.

Crockett, Moilanen, Raffaeli and Randall (2006) self-regulate theorists presented self-regulation as a unitary, dimensional construct. Wills, Dishion, (2004), Walker, Mendoza, Ainette, (2006);  Windle and Cleary, (1988) made distinction between good self-regulation and poor self-regulation. Wills and his colleagues viewed good self-regulation refers to planning, dependability and focused attention having a future orientation , self monitoring, delay of gratification, and to illustrate its increased focus as a topic of study. Moilanen(2007) studied 382  Institutes related  to self-regulation between 2000 and 2006, compare to 282 during the period between 1990 and 1999,also viewed poor self-regulation refers to a tendency towards impulsiveness, distractibility, having a present orientation, avoidant/withdrawn coping, irritability/anger proneness, and an inability to delay gratification.

People trend to have variety of substance in the hope of reducing physical pain allalerting the state of consciousness for the centuries. Almost all around the world, people use one or more substance that affects the nervous system, relieving physical and mental anguish or producing euphoria.

There are two categories by pathological use of substance: substance abuse and substance dependents. Substance dependence refers to as addiction, characterized by DSM-IV-TR as the presence of many problems related to taking the substance. (DSM-IV) substance dependence is defined as according to the as diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. When and individual is in use of alcohol or other drugs despite problems related to use of the substance, may be diagnosed substance dependence. Compulsive and repetitive use may result in tolerance to the effect of the drugs and withdrawal symptoms when use is reduced or stopped. Substance dependents can be diagnosed with physiological dependence, evidence of tolerance of withdrawal, or without physiological dependence.

In 2001 the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Pain Society, and the American Society of Addiction medicine jointly issued’’ Definitions related to the use of Opioids for the treatment of pain’’, which defined the following terms.

Addiction is a primary chronic, neurobiological disease; with genetic, psychosocial and environmental factors influencing development and manifestation. It is characterized by behaviors that include one or more of the following; impaired control over drug use, compulsive use, continued use despite harm and craving.

Physical dependence is a state of being that is manifested by a drug class specific withdrawal syndrome that can be produced by abrupt cessation, rapid dose reduction, decreasing blood level of the drug, and/or administration of an antagonist.

Tolerance in the body’s physical adaptation to drug; greater amounts of the drug are required overtime to achieve the initial effect as the body “gets used to’’ and adopts to the intake.

Pseudo addiction is a term that has been used to describe patient behavior that may occur when patient is under treated. Patients with un-relive pain may become focused on obtaining medication, May “clock watch and may otherwise seem in inappropriately“drug seeking”. Even such behaviors as illicit drug use and deception can occur in the patients efforts to obtain relief. Pseudo addiction can be distinct from true addiction in that the behaviors resolve when pain is affectively treated.

By Neels Begerot , addiction is an emotional fixation(sentiment) acquired through learning, which intermittently are continually expresses itself in purposeful , stereo type behavior with the character and the force of natural drive, aiming at a specific pleasure are the evidence of a specific discomfort. Addiction may fault the self-regulation because of deficit of receiving relevant information, evaluating the information and comparing it to norns, triggering change, searching for options, formulating a plan, implementing the plan, assessing the plans effectiveness(Brown, 1998)(Miller & Brown, 1991).

1.1 Summary

Self-regulation is ability to self control in developing implementing and maintaining. Drug addiction are substance dependency, dependents may fault self-regulation. It may make unable to receive information, to evaluate the information, to compare with norms, to trigger change, to search for new option, to formulate new plan, to implement new plan and  to assess the plans effectiveness.

In self-regulation is a model formulated by Frederick Kanfer (Kanfer, 1970a, 1970b), and viewed by Miller & Brown (Brown, 1998). (Miller & Brown 1991) for the study of addictive behavior.

Chapter II

Literature Review

Brown, Baumann, Smith and Eheridge. (1997) studied 300 college students investigate self-regulation ability by use of self-regulation questionnaire (Kanfer .1970a, 1970b) and formulated 7 steps model of self-regulation (Miller & Brown,1991). The lower SRQ scores were associated with binge drinking, more alcohol related consequences, and more frequent marijuana use.

Crockett, Melanin, Rafaelaand Randall, (2006) took self-regulation as a unitary ; whereas Wills, Windle and Cleary, (1998) studied the distinction between good self-regulation and poor self-regulation in related concerns but in separated constructs.

In accordance of advanced view by Wills and his colleagues, good self-regulation to planning, dependability, focused attention having a futuristic orientation, self monitoring, delayed of gratification. Moilanen (2007) studied 382 national institute of NIH grants related to self-regulation between 2000 and 2006, compare to 282 during the period between 1990 and 1999.

Minuchin (1974), Haley (1986)studied such a perspective by posting how specific types of family level, dyadic and triadic interaction in a family.

Rafaelli, Crockett and Shen, (2005); Wills and his colleagues, the developmental theorist studied the imagines of self-regulation throughout child hood. Whereas Raikes, Robinson, Bradley, Raikes and Ayoub, (2007) have patched adolescent self-regulation to childhood temperament. Although Wills and Byrnes (2001), conceptualized “self-regulation decision making” as a skill that develops by adolescence. Raffaeli, Crockett and Shen (2005), studied that self-regulation, as they measured it, remain stable between middle childhood and early adolescence. Although, Vermeiren, De Clippele, Schwab-Stone, Ruchkin,and Deboute, (2002) linked lower level of self-regulations to lower IQ and to delinquency in adolescence. By the study findings, the self-regulation exists in fixed quantities do not necessary vary from situation to situation, and developed over longer time frame.

Wills et all, (1999) studied the behavior in a situation context still assume an overall general skill level, and rely on trait terms, impatience and dependability to characterize self-regulation.(Moilanene 2007) to context into account by including a distinction between the ability to self regulate in the short term vs. the long term, making plans to meet goal.

Wills, Walker, Mendoza , Ainette (2006);  Windle and Cleary (1998)studied the sample of middle of high school students and related the level of substance use by behavior and emotional self-regulation. In another study Wills, Sandy, Yaeger, Cleary andShinar (2001) found that self-regulation in contacts of positive and negative self regulatory coping strategies related inversely and positively , respectively in both initial level of substance use.  In sample of 1668 participant assessed at age 12.5 years and two yearly follow-ups.

Walker, Ainette, Mills and Mendoza (2007) studied that self reported good self-regulation partially mediated the link between religiosity including non religious spirituality and decreased substance use in a survey of 7^th grade students.

Wills, DuHamel and Vaccaro(1995) studied the indirect effects of temperament characteristics on substance use through self control and other factors related to motivation in the 7^th grade students.

Other researchers Wills, Ainette, Stoolmiller, Gibbons and Shinar (2008) studied that self-regulation mitigated the impact of negative family and adolescent life events and peer substance use with adolescent substance over a four year period between 6^th and 9^th grade. Wills, Resco Ainette andMendoza (2004) studied that both good self-regulation and poor self-regulation mediated the association of parental and peer support with adolescent substance use(mean age 12.3 years).

Wills, Sandy and Shinar (1999) studied the adolescence self-regulation demonstrated association with problems arising from substance use. Interpersonal, institutional, excessive use and control problems in a cross sectional study. In another study Wills,Sandy and Yaeger (2002) using self report,studiedself-regulation moderated the relation of substance use level to concurrent control and especially conduct problems, such that self-regulation had a protective effect and poor self-regulation had a risk enhancing effect.

Buckner, Mezzajcappaand Beadsllee (2009) studied a sample of very low income youth ages 8 to 18, interviewer related self-regulation was negatively related to child and mother report of behavior problems in the home and in the community, as well as to children’s sels reports of depression and anxiety.

Brody and Ge (2001) studied the teacher reported self- regulation was associated with the latent psychological functioning variable derived from self report measures of depression hostility, and self esteem over a two year period.

In another longitudinal study, Kimand Brody (2005)studied the teacher reported adolescent self-regulation(goal setting, planning, appreciation of consequence) mediated the association between mother reported parental support involvement and conflict and teacher reported  internalizing and externalizing levels.

Crockett, Moilanen, Raffaelli and Randall (2006) in another study found  that adolescents with parent reported psychological profiles indicating good self-regulation of affect, attention and behavior at ages 12 and 13 were doing better academically then their less regulated peers four years later.

Developmental psychopathology research has examined typical development of self-regulatory abilities in order to understand their aberrations, and has examined its potential role as a risk or protective factor in the development of childhood disorders. Published studies have tended to focus more on the dispositional stability believed to be inherent to problematic youth behavior, rather than on contributing situational factors, and, when it comes to adolescent self- regulation, more on etiology or emergence than on maintenance.

. A contextual perspective of adolescent self-regulation would view self- regulation as a transaction between an individual and his or her environment. Under this view, regulation of attention, behavior, cognitions, and emotions occurs jointly between the adolescent and the current social context.

The Structural family systems theory explained a perspective of specific types of family-level, dyadic, and triadic interaction in a family might relate to what might otherwise be conceptualized as individual adolescent self-regulation ( Minuchin, 1974; Haley, 1986).

The structural family systems theory (SFST), followed by a description of a proposed SFST perspective on adolescent “self” regulation. (Minuchin, 1974; Haley, 1986).

The dispositional Adolescent Self-Regulation focused on the development of self-regulation throughout infancy, childhood, and early adolescence.  In early infancy, self-regulation occurred as a function of the interaction between a baby and his or her caretaker, but that beyond a certain age, when the child learns to undertake emotional, behavioral, and cognitive tasks of increasing difficulty, self-regulation resides wholly within the individual. Developmental theorists (Rafaelli, Crockett, and Shen, 2005; Wills and his colleagues) often study the emergence of self-regulation throughout childhood (., Raikes, Robinson, Bradley, Raikes, and Ayoub, 2007) and have tied adolescent self-regulation to childhood temperament (e.g., Wills &Dishion, 2004), which inherently also has a dispositional focus. Researchers studying self-regulation in children and adolescents often refer to “levels” of self-regulation which can be measured at discrete time points (e.g., Miller & Byrnes, 2001, conceptualized “self-regulated decision making” as a skill that develops by adolescence ;( Raffaeli, Crockett, &Shen, 2005,)

Dispositional adolescent self-regulation, measured in various ways ( by self-, parent-, or teacher-report, or by direct observation), has been associated with various commonly studied adolescent problems. (Wills, Walker, Mendoza, Ainette, 2006; Wills, Windle, & Cleary, 1998).

Adolescent self-regulation has also demonstrated associations with problems arising from substance use, including interpersonal, institutional, excessive use, and control problems, in a cross-sectional study (Wills, Sandy, & Shinar, 1999).

Psychodynamic and social learning theories, to be crucial to adolescent development. , Walls’s transactional model of self-regulation development posits that child temperament (early appearing, stable characteristics reflecting physical activity level, task orientation, and negative or positive emotionality) interacts with parenting variables to influence early parent-child relationships, and subsequently, the development of self-regulation (Wills &Dishion, 2004).

According to this theory, children with better intentional orientation and more positive emotionality are likely to have better relationships with their parents and subsequently to develop better self- regulation. Children with more difficult temperaments are likely to have more conflicted relationships with parents, and to develop poorer self-regulation (Wills &Dishion, 2004).

Achenbach, Krukowski, Dumenchi & lvanova (2005)., McConaughyandHowell (1987) found an average inter-informant correlation of .28 and adults .44 for externalizing and .43 for internalizing problems

In a recent paper Kandall and Drrabick (2010) argued for the use of information from multiple reporters, including direct observation with a professional integrating the information to arrive a comprehensive perspective.

2.1 Summary

In conclusion different perspective self-regulation theorist Crockett, Moilenen, Raffaali and Randed (2006), studied self-regulation as a unitary construction. Wills, Dshion (2004), Walker, Mendoza , Ainette (2006) Wills , Windle and Cleary (1998) studied the distinction between good self-regulation and poor self-regulation. Vermiren, De Clippele, Schwab-Stone, Ruchkin and Deboute (2002) Connected lower levels of self-regulation to lower IQ and to delinquency in adolescence. . Wills, Walker, Mendoza , Ainette (2006);  Windle and Cleary (1998) studied the behavioral and emotional self-regulation in relation of level of substance usage.

Overall, research on self-regulation among substance dependent and non dependent individual is scarce especially in Pakistan. The current study aims to investigate the self-regulation in substance dependent and non-dependent individuals. The above literature review highlights the role of self-regulation of substance dependent and non dependent individuals. It is important to understand the true notion and nature of self-regulation in addictive behavior.

Present research will be in addition in the current knowledge of self-regulation, self-regulatory processes in addictive behavior and non-addictive behavior. Findings would further the helpful to design interventions that aim to reduce the measures that cause to damage the self-regulatory processes as well. The nature of self-regulation perspectives and its expression is also different in different culture. So it is necessary to conduct such a research that will investigate self-regulation in addictive and non addictive behavior and this study will also provide help in designing intervention plan which would be more in indigenous and fulfill the local needs.

The study of self-regulation capability in context of additive perspectives, substance dependent and non-dependent concern would provide the ability to investigate the self-regulation model imperatives in the contact of the addictive behaviors and open the door of resolving criteria.

2.2 Rational of the study

Self-regulation determines the individual ability to control and maintain one’s own inner cognitive. Emotional and behavioral mechanisms. Theses mechanisms may be related to individual’s ability to be or not to be dependent on some drugs. If research shows any relationship between self-regulation and dependency, measures can be taken to enhance self-regulatory mechanisms in patients to reduce their drug dependency.

2.3 Hypothesis

There is a relationship between self-regulation among substance dependent and non-dependent individual.

Chapter III

Method

3.1 Research Design

The research design of the present research was cross sectional design.

3.2 Sampling Strategy

No probability purposive sampling would be used for data collection.

3.3 Sample

The total number of sample was 60, divided into two groups; 30 of substance dependent and 30 of non-dependent individual.

3.4 Conceptual definition

When an individual persists in use of alcohol and other drugs despite problems related to use of the substance, substance dependence may be diagnosed. Compulsive and repetitive use may result in tolerance to the effect of the drug and withdrawal symptoms when use is reduced or stopped. This, along with substance abuse is considered substance use disorder.

3.5 Operational Definition

People have various substances in the hope of reducing physical pain or altering states of consciousness for centuries. Around the world, almost all people using one or more substance that affects the nervous system, relieving physical and mental anguish or producing euphoria.

3.5.1 Inclusion criteria

Individual more than 18 years of age would be included.

3.5.2 Exclusion criteria

Individual less than 18 year of age would not be included as a focus of this research is substance dependent Punjab Institute of Mental Health (PIMH), and non dependents individuals from different colleges and institutes. Individual having with any other psychological and physical disorder would not be included.

Table 3.1

Descriptives of Sample Characteristics (N=60)

Variable	f (%)	M(S.D)
Age	22.58	4.315
Gender	1.00	000
Education	1.85	1.022
No. of siblings	4.80	2.192
Birth order	3.23	1.779
Marital status	1.28	.458

Standard deviation= SD     Mean=M      f%=frequency percentage

The demographic characteristics comprises of participants related with variables age, gender, number of siblings, birth order ,education ,family system and socioeconomic status.

3.6 Measures

Questionnaire:

Self-regulation questionnaire SRQ

Self-regulation Questionnaire SRQ;(Brown, Miller & Lawendowski,1999) is a tool to study addictive behavior. It has 63 items to check the ability of self control.Reliability of the SRQ appears to be excellent. Test-retest reliability for the total SRQ  score was high (r = .94,p <.0001). Internal consistency of the scale was also quite high (α= .91), consistent with the idea that its items contain much redundancy .The SRQ also has shown strong convergent validity with concomitant measures. SRQ score was significantly inversely correlated  with volume of alcohol consumption per occasion(r = -.23,p = .04) and with negative consequences of drinking (r =-.46.p< .0001).

3.7 Demographic variable questionnaire

The questionnaire will include information regarding; Bio data, marital status number of children, duration of illness and monthly income.

3.8 Procedure

A pilot study would be carried out on 60 individuals including 30 substances dependent and 30 non dependent in order to get time estimation required for administering all questionnaires, or any fatigue or comprehension issues. A self report feedback Questionnaire would be helpful for the purpose. Permission for using the tool of data collection would be taken from the related authors. Permission for data collection will be taken from the Executive Director of Punjab Institute of Mental Health (PIMH) and consultant Psychiatrist of the respective units of PIMH. Then data collection would be initiated. Written informed consent would be taken from the individuals. The individuals would be provided with brief description of natures and purpose of the present study and they would also be informed that the collected information would remain confidential and would be used only for academic and research purposes. All measures would be administered individually to each individual.

3.9 Ethical consideration

Permission for using the tool of data collection would be taken from the related authors. Permission for data collection will be taken from the Executive Director of Punjab Institute of Mental Health (PIMH) and consultant Psychiatrist of the respective units of PIMH. Then data collection would be initiated. Written informed consent would be taken from the individuals. The individuals would be provided with brief description of natures and purpose of the present study and they would also be informed that the collected information would remain confidential and would be used only for academic and research purposes.

Chapter IV

Results

This research aimed at exploring relationships between self regulation in substance dependent and non-dependent individuals. t test was used to examine the self regulation in substance dependent and non-dependent. Means and standard deviation of depression and aggression are presented in Table 4.1

Table 4.1

Independent Sample t-test

Variance								95% CI
	f	Std	t	df	Siq(2 tailed)	Mean difference	Std error difference	Lower	Upper
Total SRQ
equal  variance assumed	.110	.741	1.252	5.8	.215	3.200	2.555	-1.915	8.315
equal  variance not assumed			1.252	56.700	.216	3.200	2.555	-1.917	8.315

Note. M=Mean, S.D=Standard Deviation, p>.001

Table 4.2

Descriptive Statistics of Self Regulation

	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std deviation
Substance dependent Nondependent Valid N	30 30 60	16 16	32 32	176.93 173.73	10.619 9.116

 

Results shows that there is no difference between normal individuals and addicts in self-regulation.

Chapter V

Discussions

The Purpose of the present study was to investigate the relationship of  Self-Regulation among substance dependent and non -dependent individual. For this purpose sample of 60 individuals  (30 substance dependent and 30 non -dependent ) were selected. Self -Regulation questionnaire was use to measure the Self-Regulation  capability in substance dependent and non- dependent individual

After collection of data t-test was used the result has no significant difference

5.1 Implication

Self-regulation determines the individual ability to control and maintain one’s own inner cognitive. Emotional and behavioral mechanisms. Theses mechanisms may be related to individual’s ability to be or not to be dependent on some drugs. If research shows any relationship between self-regulation and dependency, measures can be taken to enhance self-regulatory mechanisms in patients to reduce their drug dependency.

5.2 Limitation

• The sample was small in size. The large sample size would be more convenient.
• Data was collecting by using non probability sampling.
• There was lake of awareness and cooperation to give the true information.
• There was difficult to understand the questionnaire. The briefing was to be given them.
• The data was collected only one addicted center.

5.3 Suggestions

• The large sample should be used to draw the more accurate and authentic results.
• They should be collected from more than one centre.
• The questionnaire should be in easier to understand.

References

• Abramson, L,Y. Metalsky,G.I,&Karim,L(1989).Hopelessness-depression:  A Theory-based subtype of depression. Psychology Review,96-235.
• Akert, R. M., Aronson, E., & Wilson, T. D. (2010). Social Psychology (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Asberg, M., Schalling, D., Traskman-Bendz, et al., (1986). Psychology of Suicide, impulsivity and related phenomena. In H. Y. Meltzer (Ed.), Psycho Pharmachology. A third generation of progress. New York. Raven Press.
• Balfour, D. J., & Ridley, D. L. (2000).The effects of nicotine on neural pathways implicated in depression: a factor in nicotine addiction. Pharmacol Biochem Behav, 66(1):79-85.
• Bettinardi-Angres, K. M. S., Daniel. H., Angres, M. D. (2008). Understanding the Disease of Addiction. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 1(2).17-19.
• Bruchas, M. R., Schindler, A. G., Shankar, H., Messinger, D. I., Miyatake, M., Land, B. B., … Lemos, J. C. (2011). Selective p38alpha MAPK deletion in serotonergic neurons produces  stress resilience in models of depression and addiction. Neuron, 71, 498 –511.
• Buss, A. H., & Perry, M. (1992). The Aggression Questionnaire. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 63, 452-459.
• Chih-Hung, K. O., M. D.,Ju-Yu Y, M. D., Shu-Chun L.,Chi-Fen Huang., Cheng-Fang, Yen. (2009).The Associations between Aggressive Behaviors and Internet Addiction and Online Activities in Adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health,44(6), 598-605.
• Coccaro EF, Siever LJ, Klar HM, Mauer G, Cochrane K, Cooper TB, et al (1989). Serotonin studies in patients with affective and personality disorders. Arch GenPsychiatry, 46, 587-599.
• Cuomo, C., Sarchiapone, M., Giannantonio, M. D., Mancini^, M., Roy, A. (2008).Aggression, Impulsivity, Personality Traits, and Childhood. Trauma of Prisoners with Substance Abuse and Addiction. 34(3), 339-345.
• Erika, V., Cox, (2006). Biological Bases of Addiction and Aggression in Close Relationships: Physiological Factors Can Cause Substance Abuse. Yahoo Contributor Network.
• Fava, M., Alpert, J. E., Carmin, C. N., et al., (2004) Clinical correlates and symptompatterns of anxious depression among patients with major depressive disorder in STAR*D. Psychological Medicine, 34,1299:1308.
• Furmark,T. (2002). Social phobia: Over view of community surveys. Acta Psychiatrica Sscandinavica, 105(2), 84-93.
• Harlow, H. F. (1983). Fundamentals for preparing psychology journal articles. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 55, 893-896.
• Hasin, D. S. T., sai, W. Y., Endicott, J. Mueller, T. I., Coryell, W., Keller, M. (1996). The effects of major depression on alcoholism. Am J Addict, 5, 144- 155.
• Khantzian, E. J. (1974). Opiate addiction: A critique of theory and some implications for treatment. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 28(1), 59-70.
• Khantzian, E. J. (1985). The self-medication hypothesis of addictive disorders: focus on heroin and cocaine dependence.  Am J Psychiatry, 142, 1259-1264.
• Kranzler, H. R., Del Boca, F. K., & Rounsaville, B. J. (1996). Comorbid psychiatric diagnosis predicts three-year outcomes in alcoholics: A posttreatment natural history study. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 57, 619-626.
• Marlatt,G. A., Baer, J. S., Donovan, D. M., Kivlaha, D. R. (1988), Addictive Behaviors: Etiology and Treatment. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 223-252.
• Van Ameringen, M., Mancini, C., & Farvolden, P. (2003).  The of anxiety disorders. Department of Psychiatry McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont, Canada. 17(5):561-71.
• Vanaj, M., Latha, N.S., & Rao, D. B. (2004). Student Shyness. New Delhi: APH Publishing Corporation