Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34177709›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Drive and Instinct-How They Produce Relatedness and Addiction.

Thomas Ringwood, Lindsay Cox, Breanna Felldin, Michael Kirsch, Brian Johnson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Thomas RingwoodDepartment of Psychiatry, State University of New York (SUNY) Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, United States.
Lindsay CoxDepartment of Psychiatry, State University of New York (SUNY) Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, United States.
Breanna FelldinDepartment of Psychiatry, State University of New York (SUNY) Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, United States.
Michael KirschInstitute of Physiological Chemistry, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Brian JohnsonDepartment of Psychiatry, State University of New York (SUNY) Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Addictive drugs are responsible for mass killing. Neither persons with addiction nor the general populace seem conscious of the malevolence of governments and drug dealers working together. How could this be? What is the place of psychoanalysis in thinking about deaths from addiction and in responding to patients with addiction? To answer these questions, we revise concepts of SEEKING, drive, instinct, pleasure, and unpleasure as separable. We review the neurobiological mechanism of cathexis. We discuss how addictive drugs take over the will by changing the SEEKING system. We review how opioid tone in the central nervous system regulates human relationships and how this endogenous hormonal system is modified by external opioid administration. We differentiate the pleasure of relatedness from the unpleasure of urgent need including the urgent need for drugs. We show how addictive drug-induced changes in the SEEKING system diminish dopaminergic tone, reducing the motivation to engage in the pursuit of food, water, sex, sleep, and relationships in favor of addictive drugs. With this neuropsychoanalytic understanding of how drugs work, we become more confidently conscious of our ability to respond individually and socially.

Indexed as

addictiondriveinstinctmass psychologyneuropsychoanalysispsychoanalaysis

Identifiers

PMID34177709
PMCPMC8225325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.