A Conceptual Model and Concluding Remarks
by Jack Darkes, PhD
Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology
Director of Interventions, Alcohol and Substance Use Research Institute, University
of South Florida
Part I: The Psychological
Effects of Anabolic/Androgenic Steroids
Part II:
The Psychological Effects
of Anabolic/Androgenic Steroids
Part III: The Psychological
Effects of Anabolic/Androgenic Steroids
Part IV: The
Psychological Effects of Anabolic/Androgenic Steroids
By now many of you might know more than you ever
expected to about aggression in AAS users and the
role of individual differences and cognitions in
the psychological effects of AAS. You may never
have realized that there was research on AAS’ psychological
effects. And those of you whose interest in AAS
includes only questions about "how much and which
ones do I need to get huge" probably wonder why
anyone would really care whether AAS really do cause
aggression. You probably figured that you knew that
answer already - of course you do! It takes very
little reading of the bodybuilding magazines or
the Internet to learn that most people just accept
that AAS cause aggression. Many writers or posters
to email lists and newsgroups revel in the knowledge
that a little T or a lot of pro-hormones will
make them intimidating, domineering and aggressive.
Of course, if you read my last article, you know
that a desire for those outcomes and the assumption
that AAS have those effects plays a major part in
the behavioral response to AAS, pro-hormones, or
any other potential testosterone increasing supplements.
So, why should we care whether the aggressive
effects of AAS are biologically, psychologically,
socially, or "biopsychosocially" mediated? For one
thing, the same psychological processes that might
lead AAS to cause aggression can underlie
shopping around for the perfect training routine
and the next magic supplement. Some lifters go happily
along for many years, routine shopping and trying
the latest supplements, looking for the magic bullet.
Many spend a lot of money and time taking supplements
they swear do "something" only to find, in the end,
that the research disagrees. Does this deter them?
Typically not, because expectations are powerful
influences that can be manipulated to capture the
attention of potential users. Do such lifters look
in the mirror and see what they want to see? They
may, whether there are positive changes or may not,
because expectancies are also a strong influence
on our perceptions. It is a bit like trying on the
emperor’s new clothes - we often see what we want
to see.
On the other hand, many of you are probably interested
in knowing more about the processes that make such
licit and illicit substances so attractive and underlie
their potential psychological effects. I have merely
suggested the undertaking of a more thoughtful exploration
of the role of psychological factors in motivating
use and "causing" these well-publicized and widely
accepted outcomes. Why care? The public (e.g., the
media, our colleagues and government) does and they
often view resistance trainers in a less than favorable
light. We are usually not seen as a particularly
thoughtful or healthy group. Thanks to some from
among our own group and some researchers who think
they are part of the group, we are often seen as
narcissistic, obsessive, fanatical, and marginally
disordered.
On one hand, you might not care what the general
public thinks and, in some ways, you might not be
wrong. But what they (whoever they are) think of
us, our rituals, and the supplements or drugs associated
with our activity, will likely have a powerful influence
on the passing of laws that limit access to new
and potentially useful products. Many of the arguments
used to support potential bans on certain products
will suggest that they either are AAS or share many
of the effects of AAS. Many of the negative effects
highlighted are psychological in nature. If such
statements are based on unwarranted interpretations
of data or simplistic theories, then arguments against
new products will be accepted with equal faith,
but be equally flawed. Although we can pretend that
we are unaffected by the rest of society, they elect
and influence officials who enact legislation that
limits our access to useful products on the basis
of potentially incomplete or sensationalistic information
they hear on the evening news or read on the front
page. Ultimately, we become powerless through our
illusion of superiority and our isolation.
Do AAS Cause Aggression?
The existing evidence does not support a simple
relationship. There is no doubt that aggression
occurs in some AAS users. Such aggression is real
and can be harmful to users and those around them.
But it is not, regardless of dose, inevitable in
AAS users. No study reviewed reported, at any dose
studied, that all participants reported aggression.
If there is no direct, one-to-one relationship between
AAS use and aggression across a wide range of doses
and users, then we must consider what factors influence
the expression of aggression seen in some users.
The literature suggested several hypotheses.
For instance, in animal models, the individual’s
position in the social hierarchy influenced both
aggressive and submissive behavior under AAS administration.
AAS users differed from non-users on a number of
personality factors and physical characteristics
that could predate use and might differentially
predict use rather than result from use. As with
research on the use of other drugs and drug-related
behaviors, many potential moderators predict differences
in the exhibition of negative psychological effects
of AAS, including aggression, even when the same
dose is used. Many of these characteristics may
be manifestations of the existing hormonal milieu
that might also predict some level of dominance
and interact with the addition of endogenous hormones.
Research does find a relationship, albeit an imperfect
one, between endogenous T levels and dominant behavior
(see Dabbs, 2000 for a review).
The research suggests, however, that aggression
cannot be solely attributed to the physiological
effects of AAS. Some portion of the effects of AAS
also results from the expectations of the user.
This includes both expectations for the drug effects
and their expectation that they have consumed the
drug. The effects that can be produced via such
expectations can be both physiological and psychological
in nature and are just as "real" as those resulting
from actual drug administration. They are also just
as automatic and "non-volitional" as are biologically
mediated effects.
A Conceptual Model of the AAS/Aggression Relationship
I would like to conclude this series of articles
by suggesting a conceptual model based on the literature
reviewed. This model incorporates the influence
of pre-existing individual characteristics that
might affect the learning of drug expectancies,
the decision to use a drug, and the ultimate expression
of problem behavior associated with the use of the
drug. Such models have long been posited in research
on alcohol use and alcohol-related behavioral problems.
The model presented adapts portions of a model from
the alcohol-use literature recently reported by
Finn and colleagues (Finn, Sharkansky, Brandt, &
Turcotte, 2000). In their model, tendencies toward
excitement-seeking behavior (disinhibitory behavior
and susceptibility to boredom) and proneness toward
social deviance (impulsivity, social isolation,
problems with authority) influenced both the use
of alcohol and the level of expectations for alcohol’s
effects. In addition they evaluated the occurrence
of alcohol-related problems as a function of deviance
proneness, alcohol use, and alcohol expectancies.
Excitement seeking tendencies reliably predicted
both alcohol use and alcohol expectancies and alcohol
expectancies reliably predicted alcohol use. Alcohol
use, alcohol expectancies, and deviance proneness
predicted the level of alcohol-related problems.
The suggested model is intended to serve as a framework
within which to summarize and review the major points
from the previous discussion of the AAS literature
and suggest relationships for further investigation.
Application of the Model to AAS/Aggression
Figure 1 below graphically depicts the application
of a structure similar to that of the above model
(Finn et al., 2000) to the AAS/aggression relationship.
Although the labels of the individual characteristics
from the Finn et al. model are maintained, they
could also be replaced with other characteristics
that differentiated AAS users and non-users (e.g.,
aggressive traits, "abnormal" personality characteristics,
contemplation of use, or dominance/position in the
social hierarchy).
|
|
|
Figure 1: A Conceptual
Model of the AAS and Aggression Relationship.
Click image for enlarged view.
|
The model includes the influence of deviance
proneness and excitement seeking on aggression,
independent of the use of AAS, because both characteristics
have been related to a number of antisocial behaviors,
including aggression against others, in the literature.
It also includes the influence of those characteristics
on the level of AAS expectations, suggesting that
pre-existing characteristics enhance the desirability
and hence the learning of certain expectancies.
Such individual characteristics increase the likelihood
of certain behaviors under the influence of AAS
and influence the learning of the association between
AAS and those outcomes. They may also facilitate
the vicarious or observational learning of such
expectancies due to their affect on the salience
of certain models and outcomes. Those individuals
with such characteristics may be more prone to or
place more importance on dominance or violence,
and therefore be more likely to learn expectancies
for aggression than are those who are less prone
to such behavior. In sum, consistent with previous
discussions of the literature, these characteristics
increase the likelihood of use, the potential for
learning of certain drug use-related expectations,
and the potential for aggressive behavior, independent
of use. This portion of the model addresses the
purported moderation of the both use and aggression
by long-standing individual characteristics.
Included in the current influences portion of
the model are the relationships among drug use,
cognition, and current outcome behavior, e.g., AAS
use, expectancies, and aggression. This portion
of the model reflects the mediational role of expectancies
in the relationship between use and outcome and
the paths included from use to both expectancy and
outcome propose that expectancy mediation is partial
in nature. Note that there is a direct path from
AAS use and aggression as well as an indirect path
through expectancy. This acknowledges that some
portion of the aggression seen in AAS users is a
function of an additive biological effect of endogenous
and exogenous testosterone. However, part of the
effect passes through the drug expectancies of the
user. In this model, use predicts expectancies,
both distally (over time) and proximally (during
discrete periods of use). This path addresses the
findings in the AAS literature that suggest that
aggression in AAS users is partly a function of
the users’ expectations for aggressive drug effects
and their expectation (in an experimental sense)
that they have taken the drug (e.g., Bjorkvist,
Nygren, Bjorklund, & Bjorkqvist, 1994). Not included
for the sake of simplicity and because the model
addresses the outcomes of AAS use is a path indicating
the role of expectancy in the initiation and maintenance
of drug use. Nonetheless this role for expectancy
is also important and the relationship between expectancies
and use is likely reciprocal in nature – use is
motivated by expectancies and also influences the
development and elaboration of expectancies. As
patterns of use change, expectancies also change
and as expectancies change, use is also affected.
Conclusion
Human behavior is a complex phenomenon and efforts
to identify single causes or causes within single
systems (i.e., social, biological or psychological)
are likely to provide a limited picture of reality.
Such an effort has suggested that AAS use causes
aggression. Perhaps, in part, this results from
accepting the association between two behaviors,
such as AAS use and aggression, as a cause-effect
relationship. The establishment of cause and effect
requires not only that two phenomena co-occur (as
do AAS use and aggression in some users), but also
occur in a specific temporal fashion (as does AAS-related
aggression in some users, although true longitudinal
studies are lacking). The best test of causation
is the experimental method, involving random assignment
to drug-administration conditions, the administration
of "credible" placebo treatments, and the evaluation
of changes in outcomes of interest among the different
treatment groups.
A concurrent association between AAS use and
aggression has been found in numerous survey-based
studies. Studies have attempted to look at the relationship
between AAS use and aggression over time and reported
some relationship between AAS cycles and increased
aggression through the evaluation of retrospective
reports. Such studies are not truly longitudinal
in nature and are subject to a variety of potential
shortcomings (e.g., retrospective memory biases,
expectancy effects). Experimental studies have not
found consistent evidence for a direct causal relationship
between AAS use and aggression and have suggested
the possibility for an effect of drug expectancy
in aggressive outcomes from AAS, but even these
findings are limited in their scope and generality.
The existing studies suffer from inconsistencies
in assessment strategy (self-report v. observer
ratings), as well as the absence of truly credible
placeboes.
Society often views cause and effect categorically,
tending to favor explanations that are exclusively
biological, social, or psychological and to view
"biologically caused" behavior as primary and "uncontrollable"
and socially or psychologically motivated behavior
as secondary and volitional. These views often underlie
the desire to determine biological causes for behavior.
However, this view is far too simplistic and judgmental.
Many human behaviors occur in an automatic fashion
but are not exclusively based in our physiology.
I hope that this series of articles has made a case
for the erroneous nature of such a dichotomy, as
well as the need for a more sophisticated theoretical
approach to the analysis of AAS-related psychological
phenomena.
Part I: The Psychological
Effects of Anabolic/Androgenic Steroids
Part II:
The Psychological Effects
of Anabolic/Androgenic Steroids
Part III: The Psychological
Effects of Anabolic/Androgenic Steroids
Part IV: The Psychological
Effects of Anabolic/Androgenic Steroids
This article was provided by MuscleMonthly.com
- References:
Bjorkqvist, K., Nygren, T., Bjorklund, A.C.,
& Bjorkqvist, S.E. (1994). Testosterone intake and
aggressiveness: Real effect or anticipation.
Aggressive Behavior, 20, 17-26.
Dabbs, J.M. (2000). Heroes, rogues, and lovers:
Testosterone and behavior. Mcgraw-Hill: New
York.
Finn, P.R., Sharkansky, E.J., Brandt, K.M., Turcotte,
N. (2000). The effects of familial risk, personality,
and expectancies on alcohol use and abuse. Journal
of Abnormal Psychology, 109, 122-133.
|
