Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2022/Childhood trauma and subsequent drug use

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

tDCS for Drug Abuse Treatment[edit source]

Hello there, you have a really interesting and relevant topic and I have really enjoyed reading your chapter so far. For the section you have included on treatment of drug abuse problems I was wondering if you have possibly considered looking at how trans-cranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could be applied to treat drug abuse disorders. I know that it has been used to effectively treat other serious mental health conditions like schizophrenia but I would be curious to see if it could have any effect on drug use.

Thank you very much

Comment[edit source]

Awesome chapter and a fascinating topic to investigate. Just a little formatting tip here. You are able to give tables a title. I noticed under 'attachment theory' the title for your table was in paragraph format and was capitalised in places that it shouldn't be, quickly fixed it up for you! Noah O'Brien (discusscontribs) 06:32, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

U3215603 (discusscontribs) 08:39, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting topic. Found this video that might be of interest to you Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) and Addiction--Zmelmoth02 (discusscontribs) 22:29, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


The topic development has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a general feedback page. Please also check the chapter's page history to see editing changes made whilst reviewing this chapter plan. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below and/or contacting the reviewer. Topic development marks are available via UCLearn. Note that marks are based on what was available before the due date, whereas the comments below may also be about all material on the page at the time of providing this feedback.

Title[edit source]

social contribution]]

User page[edit source]

  1. Excellent – used effectively
  2. Description about self provided
  3. Link(s) provided to professional profile(s)
  4. Link provided to book chapter

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. Excellent – at least one contribution has been made and summarised in a numbered list with direct link(s) to evidence

emotion/Assessment/Chapter#socialcontribution

Headings[edit source]

  1. Excellent – Well developed 2-level heading structure, with meaningful headings that directly relate to the core topic
  2. Keep the preliminary sections relatively brief, to allow the chapter to concentrate on theory, research, and examples/application/treatment of the trauma-related mechanisms that may contribute to problematic drug use

Key points[edit source]

  1. Excellent – key points are well developed for each section, with relevant citations
  2. Good use of in-text links to relevant book chapters. Also embed links to relevant Wikipedia articles: interwiki Wikipedia links for the first mention of key terms.
  3. Consider including more examples/case studies
  4. Overview and Conclusion (the most important sections) are well developed
  5. Be wary of providing too much background information about trauma and drug use as separate concepts. Briefly summarise and provide internal wiki links to relevant book chapters and/or Wikipedia pages for further information. Then focus most of the content of this on directly answering the core question(s) posed by the chapter sub-title.

Figure[edit source]

  1. Excellent – A relevant figure is presented and it is appropriately captioned
  2. Cite each figure at least once in the main text

References[edit source]

  1. Excellent
  2. For APA referencing style, check and correct:
    1. capitalisation - don't capitalise "of", "and" etc. in journal titles
    2. page numbers should be separated by an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-)

Resources[edit source]

  1. See also
    1. Excellent
  2. External links
    1. Excellent
    2. Target an international audience; Australians only represent 0.33% of the world population

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Resource[edit source]

Hi there. Looks like you are smashing it so this resource may be coming a bit late. however it could be a good external link?

It is Johaan Hari's ted talk about his book on addiction which mentions the role of childhood trauma in drug use.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PY9DcIMGxMs U3162201 (discusscontribs) 01:29, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
Thank you this looks really great. U3210431 (discusscontribs) 02:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great structure, some references to help[edit source]

Hi there

Very nicely structured. This topic resonates with me because I work with people with drug abuse due to childhood trauma.

I have some references from my research if they can help you.

I am looking forward to see your final product.

Kind regards

ArtOfHappiness

Ayres, T. C.. (2021). Childhood Trauma, Problematic Drug Use and Coping. Deviant Behavior, 42(5), 578–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2020.1746132

Moustafa, A. A., Parkes, D., Fitzgerald, L., Underhill, D., Garami, J., Levy-Gigi, E., Stramecki, F., Valikhani, A., Frydecka, D., & Misiak, B.. (2021). The relationship between childhood trauma, early-life stress, and alcohol and drug use, abuse, and addiction: An integrative review. Current Psychology, 40(2), 579–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-9973-9

Carliner, H., Keyes, K. M., Mclaughlin, K. A., Meyers, J. L., Dunn, E. C., & Martins, S. S.. (2016). Childhood Trauma and Illicit Drug Use in Adolescence: A Population-Based National Comorbidity Survey Replication–Adolescent Supplement Study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 55(8), 701–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2016.05.010


Good Luck ArtOfHappiness (discusscontribs) 08:18, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that! I will look into those references. U3210431 (discusscontribs) 21:49, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback and future directions[edit source]

Excellent topic choice! Nicely structured chapter.

This topic is quite personal to me, and I appreciate your efforts in drawing attention to it and raising awareness within the science community. Kudos to you.

From my lived experience with trauma and familial substance use, I have found Dialectical Behaviour Therapy skills training (Linehan, 2015) to be beneficial. I currently work in this field and have witnessed the impacts of this psychotherapuetic approach on many who have experienced childhood trauma and struggle with substance use. There is growing evidence of the efficacy of such treatment. Cavicchioli et al. (2019) has investigated DBT in the treatment of substance use. Plenty of other research out there, particularly for those who live with comorbidity of substance use and personality disorders.

References

Cavicchioli, Movalli, M., Vassena, G., Ramella, P., Prudenziati, F., & Maffei, C. (2019). The therapeutic role of emotion regulation and coping strategies during a stand-alone DBT Skills training program for alcohol use disorder and concurrent substance use disorders. Addictive Behaviors, 98, 106035–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.106035

Linehan, M. (2015). DBT Skills Training (2nd ed.) U3223109 (discusscontribs) 00:53, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you !
I will definitely consider your suggestion ! U3210431 (discusscontribs) 03:04, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback[edit source]

really well done! great use of case studies and images throuhgout the chapter. this allows the reader to understand and follow through the contents information easily. U3216563 (discusscontribs) 06:40, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit source]

This is so well done, it flowed very well and came together nicely. From what I understand trauma is often a cycle ie the parents are likely to have suffered some trauma themselves is family therapy something that is recommended or are all parties better off seeking individual therapy?--U3037979 (discusscontribs) 22:37, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Book chapter review and feedback[edit source]

This chapter has been reviewed according to the marking criteria. Written feedback is provided below, plus there is a general feedback page. Please also check the chapter's page history to check for editing changes made whilst reviewing through the chapter. Chapter marks will be available via UCLearn along with social contribution marks and feedback. Keep an eye on Announcements.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is a solid chapter that makes good use of psychological theory and research to help address a practical, real-world phenomenon or problem.
  2. Move non-peer reviewed links into the external links section.
  3. For additional feedback, see the following comments and these copyedits.

Overview[edit source]

  1. Solid Overview.
  2. Explains the problem or phenomenon. Perhaps consider prevalence?
  3. Consider introducing a case study or example to help engage reader interest.
  4. Reasonably clear focus question(s).
  5. Local help resources removed as audience is international.

Theory – Breadth[edit source]

  1. Relevant theories are well selected, described, and explained.
  2. Relevant theory is reasonably well explained.
  3. Consider including neurodevelopmental aspects (or some other theory that relates more directly to what EMDR might be effective).
  4. Builds somewhat on previous, related chapters.

Theory – Depth[edit source]

  1. Appropriate depth is provided about the selected theory(ies).
  2. Useful case studies provided to illustrate the problem; answers to the reflection questions would be ideal.
  3. Several claims lack sufficient citation.

Research – Key findings[edit source]

  1. Reasonably good review of relevant research.
  2. More detail about key studies would be ideal.
  3. Greater emphasis on effect sizes, major reviews, and/or meta-analyses would be helpful.

Research – Critical thinking[edit source]

  1. Basic critical thinking about research is evident.
  2. Critical thinking about research could be further evidenced by:
    1. describing the methodology (e.g., sample, measures) in important studies
    2. considering the strength of relationships
    3. acknowledging limitations
    4. pointing out critiques/counterarguments
    5. suggesting specific directions for future research
  3. Some claims are unreferenced (e.g., see the [factual?] tags).

Integration[edit source]

  1. Discussion of theory and research is reasonably well integrated.

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. Key points are well summarised.
  2. Clear take-home message(s).

Written expression – Style[edit source]

  1. Written expression
    1. Overall, the quality of written expression is good.
    2. Internationalise: Write for an international, rather than domestic, audience. Australians make up only 0.32% of the world human population.
    3. Some paragraphs are overly long. Each paragraph should communicate one key idea in three to five sentences.
    4. Avoid overly emotive language (e.g,. "the sad reality") in science-based communication.
    5. Use 3rd person perspective (e.g., "it") rather than 1st (e.g., "we") or 2nd person (e.g., "you") perspective[1] in the main text, although 1st or 2nd person perspective can work well for case studies or feature boxes.
    6. Direct quotes should be embedded within sentences and paragraphs, rather than dumped holus-bolus. Even better, communicate the concept in your own words.
    7. "People" is often a better term than "individuals".
    8. Reduce use of weasel words which bulk out the text, but don't enhance meaning.
  2. Layout
    1. The chapter is well structured, with major sections using sub-sections.
  3. Grammar
    1. The grammar for some sentences could be improved (e.g., see the [grammar?] tags). Grammar-checking tools are available in most internet browsers and word processing software packages. Another option is to share draft work with peers and ask for their assistance.
    2. Check and make correct use of commas.
    3. Check and correct use of possessive apostrophes (e.g., cats vs cat's vs cats').[2].
    4. Use serial commas[3] – they are part of APA style and agenerally recommended by grammaticists. See explanatory video (1 min).
  4. APA style
    1. Do not capitalise the names of disorders, therapies, theories, etc..
    2. Numbers under 10 should be written in words (e.g., five); numbers 10 and over should be written in numerals (e.g., 10).
    3. Figures
      1. Figures are very well used.
      2. Figures are well captioned.
      3. Each Figure is referred to at least once within the main text using APA style.
      4. Refer to each Figure using APA style (e.g., do not use italics, check and correct capitalisation).
    4. Citations use correct APA style.
    5. References use correct APA style.

Written expression – Learning features[edit source]

  1. Overall, the use of learning features is excellent.
  2. Very good use of embedded in-text interwiki links to Wikipedia articles. Adding interwiki links for the first mention of key words and technical concepts would make the text more interactive. See example.
  3. Good use of embedded in-text links to related book chapters. Embedding in-text links to related book chapters helps to integrate this chapter into the broader book project.
  4. Use in-text interwiki links, rather than external links, per Tutorial 2.
  5. Excellent use of image(s).
  6. Excellent use of table(s).
  7. Very good use of feature box(es).
  8. Promising use of case studies. Useful reflection questions. How about also providing some clearer guidance through some possible answers?
  9. Good use of interwiki links in the "See also" section.
  10. Basic use of external links in the "External links" section. Address an international audience.

Social contribution[edit source]

  1. ~50 logged, useful, minor to major social contributions with direct links to evidence.
  2. Thanks very much for your extensive contributions.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The accompanying multimedia presentation has been marked according to the marking criteria. Marks are available via the unit's UCLearn site. Written feedback is provided below, plus see the general feedback page. Responses to this feedback can be made by starting a new section below. If you would like further clarification about the marking or feedback, contact the unit convener.

Overall[edit source]

  1. Overall, this is an excellent presentation

Overview[edit source]

  1. An opening slide with the title and sub-title is displayed and narrated — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation
  2. This presentation has a very engaging introduction to hook audience interest
  3. A context for the topic is established
  4. Focus questions are presented

Content[edit source]

  1. Comments about the book chapter may also apply to this section
  2. The presentation addresses the topic
  3. An appropriate amount of content is presented — not too much or too little
  4. The presentation is well structured (i.e., Overview, Content, Conclusion)
  5. The presentation makes excellent use of relevant psychological theory
  6. The presentation makes excellent use of relevant psychological research
  7. The presentation includes citations
  8. The presentation provides practical, easy to understand information

Conclusion[edit source]

  1. A Conclusion slide is presented with excellent/very good/good/basic take-home message(s)

Audio[edit source]

  1. The audio is interesting to listen to
  2. The presentation makes effective use of narrated audio
  3. Audio communication is clear
  4. Perhaps the presentation is a little fast
  5. Very good intonation
  6. The narration is well practiced
  7. Audio recording quality was excellent

Video[edit source]

  1. Overall, visual display quality is excellent
  2. The presentation makes effective use of animated slides
  3. The font size is sufficiently large to make it easy to read
  4. The amount of text presented per slide makes it easy to read and listen at the same time
  5. The visual communication is effectively supplemented by images and/or diagrams
  6. The presentation is very well produced

Meta-data[edit source]

  1. The chapter title and sub-title (or an abbreviation to fit within the 100 character limit) are used in the name of the presentation — this helps to clearly convey the purpose of the presentation
  2. A written description of the presentation is provided
  3. Links to and from the book chapter are provided

Licensing[edit source]

  1. Possibly all images are from PowToon but this is not explicitly stated.
  2. A copyright license for the presentation is provided in the presentation description but not in the meta-data

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:55, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit source]

Hi.

Drug addiction often results from a mix of personal, societal, and biological factors. Childhood trauma, genetics, mental health disorders, peer pressure, economic challenges, and lack of education can all increase the risk of drug addiction. While personal choice plays a role, blaming individuals without recognizing these factors oversimplifies the issue. Effective treatment requires understanding and addressing these root causes rather than merely assigning blame.

Well done! U3217153 (discusscontribs) 18:45, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]