The concept of the addictive personality has long captured both public imagination and clinical inquiry, suggesting that certain individuals possess an innate constellation of psychological traits that inevitably predisposes them to substance dependence and behavioral addictions. While contemporary psychiatric science largely regards a singular, monolithic profile as a clinical myth, the interaction between specific personality dimensions, neurobiological vulnerabilities, and environmental stressors remains a cornerstone of modern addiction research.
Addictive Personality
1. Concise Definition
An addictive personality refers to a hypothesized set of enduring personality traits, behavioral tendencies, and psychological vulnerabilities that make an individual uniquely susceptible to developing physical or psychological dependence on substances or compulsive behaviors. Rather than denoting a formal diagnostic entity in modern psychiatric classifications such as the DSM-5-TR or ICD-11, the term functions primarily as an umbrella construct representing heightened vulnerability across multiple domains of psychopathology.
In empirical psychopathology, the construct is conceptualized not as a distinct, categorical personality disorder, but rather as an aggregation of dimensional traits. Prominent among these traits are heightened impulsivity, elevated sensation seeking, high neuroticism, and low conscientiousness. These dimensional vulnerabilities interact with environmental risk factors, neurochemical mechanisms, and cognitive biases, thereby facilitating the onset, maintenance, and relapse patterns characteristic of addictive behaviors.
2. Etymology & Linguistic Origin
The term is a compound of the English noun personality and the adjective addictive. The word addictive traces its lineage to the Latin verb addicere, meaning “to assign, deliver, or surrender legally.” In ancient Roman civil law, an addictus was a debtor surrendered as an indentured bondsman to their creditor, establishing an early etymological link between the root word and servitude, enslavement, or the surrender of personal autonomy.
The word personality derives from the Latin persona, which originally referred to a theatrical mask worn by stage actors to project a specific character or acoustic resonance (per-sonare, “to sound through”). Over centuries, persona evolved into the scholastic Latin personalitas, signifying the essential quality of being an individual person. In early-to-mid-20th-century psychoanalysis and clinical psychiatry, the two concepts merged into “addictive personality” (often discussed in German-language and American psychiatric literature as Suchtpersönlichkeit) to describe an individual whose fundamental psychological organization was assumed to be intrinsically oriented toward compulsive consumption and self-soothing.
3. Pronunciation & Grammatical Form
Pronunciation: /əˈdɪk.tɪv pɜː.səˈnæl.ə.ti/ (British English); /əˈdɪk.tɪv pɜːr.səˈnæl.ə.t̥i/ (American English).
Grammatical Form: Compound noun phrase, countable (plural: addictive personalities). The premodifying adjective addictive modifies the abstract noun personality. Within academic and psychometric discourse, the term is frequently nominalized into descriptive phrases such as “personality-based liability to addiction,” “addiction-prone temperament,” or “phenotypic vulnerability to substance use disorders.”
4. Detailed Conceptual Explanation
For decades, clinicians and researchers sought to identify whether a single, uniform characterological structure consistently preceded the development of chronic addiction. The intuitive appeal of the addictive personality construct stems from the clinical observation that individuals with severe substance use disorders frequently demonstrate shared behavioral patterns: emotional lability, poor distress tolerance, persistent nonconformity, interpersonal detachment, and an apparent inability to regulate rewarding stimuli. However, decades of rigorous empirical psychometrics have demonstrated that no single, invariant personality configuration exists that reliably predicts addiction across all demographics and substances.
Instead, modern differential psychology treats the construct as a polygenic and multidimensional vulnerability profile. This profile involves complex interactions among primary personality traits, cognitive executive functions, and reward sensitivity circuits. Individuals who exhibit severe addictive behaviors typically present with significant deviations within established dimensional frameworks, notably the Big Five personality traits (the Five-Factor Model). The most consistent empirical configuration involves high neuroticism combined with low conscientiousness, often accompanied by varying levels of extraversion and openness depending on the specific substance or activity involved.
Furthermore, the scope of this conceptual framework extends beyond chemical substances (such as ethanol, nicotine, opioids, and psychostimulants) to process or behavioral addictions. These include compulsive gambling, internet gaming disorder, hypersexual behavior, and binge eating. Across these divergent presentations, the common denominator is not a fixed, immutable identity, but rather a functional disturbance in self-regulation, affective modulation, and reward-seeking behavior. Individuals frequently utilize external stimuli as maladaptive coping mechanisms to alleviate emotional distress or fulfill a persistent deficit in basal hedonic tone.
It is equally crucial to delineate the boundaries of the construct. An elevated vulnerability profile does not guarantee the development of an addictive disorder, nor does the absence of these traits confer absolute immunity. Many individuals who exhibit pronounced sensation seeking or elevated impulsivity channel these dispositions into prosocial, high-intensity careers, extreme athletics, or entrepreneurial ventures. The transition from personality liability to overt psychopathology requires the confluence of neurobiological susceptibilities, environmental availability, adverse early childhood experiences, and reinforcing behavioral conditioning.
5. Historical Development
The evolutionary trajectory of the addictive personality construct mirrors broader shifts in the history of clinical psychiatry, moving from speculative psychodynamic theories toward empirical neurobiology and quantitative psychometrics.
In the early decades of the twentieth century, psychoanalytic theorists laid the conceptual groundwork. Prominent psychoanalysts, including Sandor Rado (1933) and Edward Glover (1932), conceptualized addiction not as a direct consequence of physiological pharmacodynamics, but as a symptom of underlying narcissistic neurosis and developmental arrest. Rado introduced the concept of “pharmacothymia” (a craving for chemical relief), arguing that individuals with an underlying personality structure characterized by low frustration tolerance and fragile self-worth used intoxicating substances to achieve a state of artificial elation. These early formulations asserted that the psychological defect preceded chemical exposure.
By the mid-20th century, the disease model championed by the nascent Twelve-Step movement and early clinical researchers such as E. M. Jellinek (1960) popularized the notion of an inherent, lifelong vulnerability. Although Jellinek himself focused heavily on the progressive biological disease course of alcoholism, popular and clinical discourse rapidly adopted the idea that an “alcoholic personality” or “addictive personality” exists prior to the first drink and persists even throughout sustained abstinence.
A critical paradigm shift occurred in the late 1970s and 1980s through empirical evaluations conducted by researchers such as Craig MacAndrew (1965) and Alan R. Lang and colleagues (1983). Lang published a landmark synthesis for the National Academy of Sciences reviewing decades of psychometric and clinical data. His findings conclusively established that there is no singular “addictive personality type” common to all individuals with addictive disorders. Instead, longitudinal research demonstrated that many personality aberrations previously thought to cause addiction were actually consequences of prolonged intoxication, neuroadaptation, social deterioration, and withdrawal.
During the 1990s and 2000s, with the ascent of Cloninger’s biosocial theory of personality and modern neuropsychology, the focus firmly shifted from categorical personality types to dimensional vulnerabilities. Researchers established that traits such as novelty seeking, impulsivity, and negative urgency reflect underlying differences in central neurotransmitter pathways, particularly the dopaminergic and serotonergic systems.
6. Theoretical Foundations
The contemporary study of personality vulnerabilities in addiction is anchored in several prominent theoretical frameworks within personality psychology and cognitive neuroscience:
Eysenck’s PEN Model: Hans Eysenck proposed three overarching supertraits: Psychoticism (P), Extraversion (E), and Neuroticism (N). Across empirical studies, individuals suffering from addictive disorders frequently score high on Psychoticism (characterized by nonconformity, hostility, and impulsiveness) and high on Neuroticism (characterized by emotional instability and autonomic hyperreactivity). Eysenck hypothesized that individuals low in cortical arousal seek external stimulation through substances, while those with high neuroticism use substances for emotional self-medication.
Cloninger’s Psychobiological Model: C. Robert Cloninger formulated a biosocial model of personality that directly connects specific personality dimensions to neurotransmitter functioning. Cloninger outlined three primary temperament dimensions: Novelty Seeking (associated with low basal dopamine levels and a drive for rewarding stimuli), Harm Avoidance (linked to high serotonergic activity and behavioral inhibition), and Reward Dependence (mediated by noradrenergic systems). In this model, high Novelty Seeking combined with low Harm Avoidance significantly elevates the probability of early-onset, aggressive substance abuse, whereas high Harm Avoidance combined with high Novelty Seeking is common in individuals who consume substances to blunt anxious distress.
The Five-Factor Model (FFM): Within mainstream personality psychology, Costa and McCrae’s Five-Factor Model provides the preeminent taxonomy: Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. Extensive meta-analytic studies confirm that addiction vulnerability correlates consistently with high Neuroticism (especially the facets of anxiety, depression, and vulnerability to stress) and low Conscientiousness (notably the facets of deliberation, competence, and self-discipline). Low Conscientiousness impairs an individual’s capacity to delay gratification and resist immediate impulses in pursuit of long-term goals.
Dual-System Models of Self-Regulation: In cognitive psychology and behavioral neuroscience, dual-system theory posits an ongoing competition between an impulsive, bottom-up reward-processing network (centered in the ventral striatum and amygdala) and a reflective, top-down executive control network (centered in the prefrontal cortex). The personality configuration most susceptible to addiction represents a functional imbalance wherein the impulsive system generates intense incentive salience, while the executive system lacks sufficient inhibitory control to regulate compulsive behaviors.
7. Key Components, Types & Dimensions
Although the notion of a monolithic personality type is empirically unsupported, specific personality dimensions reliably predict addiction risk across heterogeneous populations. These dimensions include:
- Trait Impulsivity: A multifaceted construct characterized by the tendency to act on a whim without premeditation or adequate consideration of future negative consequences. It reflects impairments in motor inhibition and attentional persistence.
- Negative Urgency: A specific facet of the UPPS-P impulsive behavior model denoting the disposition to engage in rash, risky actions when experiencing intense negative affect. Negative urgency is one of the strongest predictive traits for severe, compulsive substance use and behavioral lapses.
- Sensation and Novelty Seeking: The trait-level drive for varied, novel, complex, and intense experiences, accompanied by a willingness to assume physical, social, or financial risks for the sake of such stimulation. It is heavily mediated by the mesolimbic dopamine reward system.
- Neuroticism / Affective Instability: The persistent propensity to experience chronic negative emotional states, including anxiety, guilt, anger, depression, and somatic hypervigilance. Individuals high in this trait frequently display diminished distress tolerance.
- Low Conscientiousness: Deficits in self-regulatory capacity, organized goal setting, perseverance, and ethical constraint, rendering long-term behavioral planning difficult when immediate hedonic rewards are present.
- Compulsivity and Cognitive Inflexibility: The perseverative execution of repetitive, habitual behaviors despite the absence of explicit reward and the presence of severe adverse outcomes, mediated by alterations in frontostriatal circuits.
- Anhedonia and Low Basal Hedonic Tone: A blunted baseline capacity to experience subjective pleasure from standard social or biological reinforcers, creating a chronic incentive to engage in supernormal hedonic stimuli (e.g., concentrated chemical substances or high-stakes gambling).
8. Examples & Illustrative Cases
The following clinical vignettes illustrate how distinct configurations of these underlying personality traits manifest in real-world addiction trajectories.
Case Illustration 1: Novelty-Driven and High-Sensation Trajectory
A 19-year-old university student, historically described by teachers as energetic, fearless, and easily bored, scores in the top 2% of the population on sensation seeking and novelty seeking. In social settings, he frequently volunteers for hazardous activities and displays minimal anxiety regarding physical harm. Upon introduction to psychostimulants and binge drinking, he rapidly escalates dosage to intensify social experiences and alleviate persistent feelings of understimulation. His trajectory is driven by positive reinforcement and an insatiable appetite for peak experiential states, ultimately leading to significant academic failure and poly-substance dependence.
Case Illustration 2: Emotion-Driven and Negative Urgency Trajectory
A 38-year-old corporate accountant exhibits pronounced neuroticism, high harm avoidance, and high negative urgency. She harbors chronic feelings of inadequacy, social anxiety, and emotional vulnerability. Following severe professional stress or interpersonal conflict, she experiences overwhelming affective distress that feels intolerable. To cope with this internal turmoil, she engages in secretive, compulsive online shopping and solitary alcohol consumption. Her behavior is maintained predominantly through negative reinforcement: the transient reduction of emotional pain through chemical and behavioral self-soothing mechanisms, followed rapidly by intense guilt and subsequent relapse.
9. Measurement & Assessment
Assessing personality liabilities related to addiction requires comprehensive psychometric instruments that capture dimensional traits rather than relying on an outdated single-category index. Historically, specialized scales were developed to identify an addictive personality, but these have largely been replaced by broader, empirically validated instruments.
The MacAndrew Alcoholism Scale (MAC), derived from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), represents the most prominent early effort to quantify an addiction-prone personality. Although the MAC achieved moderate predictive utility for general delinquency and substance-related behaviors, researchers demonstrated that it primarily measures non-specific deviance, extraversion, and antisocial tendencies rather than a distinct biological or psychological vulnerability exclusive to addiction.
In contemporary research and specialized clinical assessments, the following psychometric tools are widely employed:
- The UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale: Developed by Whiteside, Lynam, and Cyders, this instrument dissects impulsivity into five distinct operational dimensions: Negative Urgency, Lack of Premeditation, Lack of Perseverance, Sensation Seeking, and Positive Urgency. It is regarded as the gold standard for parsing behavioral disinhibition in addictive disorders.
- NEO Personality Inventory-3 (NEO-PI-3): Measures the Five-Factor Model dimensions. Facets such as N1 (Anxiety), N2 (Angry Hostility), N6 (Vulnerability), C1 (Competence), C4 (Achievement Striving), and C5 (Self-Discipline) are meticulously analyzed to evaluate an individual’s trait-based self-regulation profile.
- Cloninger’s Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI): Evaluates Novelty Seeking, Harm Avoidance, Reward Dependence, and Persistence, alongside Character dimensions (Self-Directedness, Cooperativeness, Self-Transcendence). Low Self-Directedness coupled with extreme Temperament scores reliably identifies clinical vulnerability to personality pathology and comorbid substance use.
- Behavioral Economic Tasks: Beyond self-report scales, objective laboratory paradigms such as the Delay Discounting Task (which measures the rate at which an individual devalues delayed rewards relative to immediate ones) and the Go/No-Go Task (which measures motor response inhibition) provide behavioral indices of trait-level disinhibition.
10. Applications & Practical Significance
Understanding personality dimensions in the etiology of addiction holds profound practical value across prevention, clinical psychotherapy, and organizational interventions.
Targeted Prevention and Early Intervention: In pediatric and adolescent mental health, early screening for high sensation seeking and negative urgency enables clinicians and educators to implement personality-targeted interventions. The PreVenture Program, developed by Patricia Conrod and colleagues, exemplifies this paradigm. Rather than using generic, uniform anti-drug lectures, PreVenture groups adolescents based on specific personality profiles (e.g., sensation seeking, impulsivity, anxiety sensitivity, hopelessness). Brief, cognitive-behavioral workshops tailored to their specific temperaments have demonstrated long-term, statistically significant reductions in the onset and escalation of adolescent substance abuse.
Psychotherapeutic Tailoring: In clinical settings, therapeutic protocols can be personalized based on the patient’s dimensional personality landscape. A patient with elevated negative urgency and high neuroticism requires therapeutic frameworks centered heavily on emotional regulation and distress tolerance, such as Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) or Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT). Conversely, a patient characterized by high sensation seeking and low conscientiousness benefits more from structured contingency management, structured behavioral activation, and vocational channeling toward novel, low-risk, stimulating endeavors.
Relapse Prevention Planning: Identifying an individual’s specific vulnerability profile clarifies the nature of their clinical relapse triggers. While sensation-seeking individuals are most vulnerable to relapse in social, novel, and celebratory settings where reward cues are intense, individuals dominated by negative urgency are acutely vulnerable during acute interpersonal crises, marital conflict, or professional stress.
11. Research & Empirical Evidence
Decades of empirical studies have continually clarified the boundaries of the addictive personality construct. Landmark systematic reviews by researchers including Alan R. Lang (1983), Howard Shaffer (2004), and Kenneth S. Kendler (2003) confirmed that the premise of a unique, pre-existing personality type common to all addictions is empirically untenable. Longitudinal twin studies conducted by the Virginia Twin Registry demonstrate that genetic risk factors for substance use disorders are shared across multiple internalizing and externalizing disorders rather than confined to an isolated personality profile.
A critical meta-analysis conducted by Malouff, Thorsteinsson, Rooke, and Schutte (2007) analyzed Five-Factor Model profiles across 1,776 individuals with substance use disorders compared to normative controls. The results unequivocally confirmed that individuals with substance use disorders scored significantly higher on Neuroticism (d = 0.59) and significantly lower on Conscientiousness (d = -0.73) and Agreeableness (d = -0.42) compared to healthy populations. However, the researchers emphasized that this exact profile is identical to the personality profile observed across major depressive disorder, anxiety disorders, and borderline personality disorder, demonstrating that the personality configuration represents a general liability for distress and behavioral dysregulation rather than an “addiction-specific” syndrome.
Furthermore, contemporary neuroimaging studies using functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) have mapped these personality dimensions directly onto neural circuits. Volkow et al. (2011) showed that individuals with low striatal dopamine D2 receptor availability exhibit heightened novelty-seeking behavior and an increased vulnerability to the reinforcing properties of addictive substances. Longitudinal neurodevelopmental projects, such as the European IMAGEN study, have tracked thousands of adolescents to map brain structure and personality traits prior to drug exposure. These studies confirm that structural reductions in orbitofrontal cortex volume correlate with high impulsivity and predict future escalations in substance consumption, confirming a premorbid dimensional vulnerability rather than a unified characterological defect.
12. Cultural & Cross-Cultural Considerations
The interpretation and phenotypic manifestation of personality traits tied to addiction are deeply influenced by cultural context, social norms, and systemic factors.
In individualistic, Western societies, traits such as high sensation seeking and nonconformity are frequently romanticized or integrated into consumer culture, entertainment, and risk-tolerant corporate ecosystems. In such environments, individuals with elevated sensation seeking may have widespread access to a vast array of recreational substances and commercialized gambling, accelerating the transition from latent trait to overt addictive disorder.
Conversely, in collectivistic cultures characterized by strong social cohesion and strict behavioral conformity, the expression of sensation seeking and impulsivity is often heavily constrained by family expectations, communal scrutiny, and legal penalties. In these settings, individuals with identical neurobiological vulnerabilities may not turn to illicit chemical substances, but may instead develop behavioral compulsions that are more socially tolerated or covert, such as obsessive work behaviors (workaholism), compulsive electronic gaming, or mobile betting platforms.
Furthermore, cross-cultural psycholinguistics reveals that the label “addictive personality” is predominantly an Anglo-American cultural idiom. In many traditional societies, addiction is framed through spiritual, familial, or moral lenses rather than as an immutable, internal personality configuration. Applying Western diagnostic concepts uncritically across distinct cultural milieus can lead to clinical misattribution, obscuring the profound role played by historical trauma, marginalization, poverty, and local cultural norms in driving substance use disorders.
13. Criticisms, Debates & Limitations
The concept of the addictive personality remains controversial and has drawn sharp criticism from research scientists, clinical practitioners, and public health ethicists.
Scientific Invalidity and Confounding: The primary critique is that the construct lacks construct validity. Cross-sectional studies that attempt to assess the “addictive personality” routinely fail to distinguish between premorbid personality traits (dispositions present before substance exposure) and consequential personality alterations (the neurobiological, psychological, and behavioral deterioration caused by chronic neurotoxicity, sleep deprivation, nutritional deficits, and the trauma of chronic illicit procurement). Conflating the consequences of severe addiction with its premorbid causes represents a fundamental methodological error.
Determinism, Fatalism, and Stigmatization: Labeling a person with an “addictive personality” carries serious clinical risks. For many patients, the label induces fatalism: if addiction is hardwired into their fundamental character, long-term recovery and behavior change can appear impossible. It may also provide an internal justification for relapse (“I cannot help it; it is just my addictive personality”). From a public health perspective, the term risks pathologizing diverse, non-pathological human variations in temperament and contributes to social stigma, reinforcing the outdated moral belief that individuals with addiction suffer from an inherent, permanent character defect.
Diagnostic Proliferation and Diagnostic Overshadowing: In clinical settings, relying on this lay concept often obscures underlying, fully treatable psychiatric disorders. An individual who meets criteria for Major Depressive Disorder, Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Bipolar Disorder, or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) may be casually labeled as having an “addictive personality.” This diagnostic overshadowing frequently delays or prevents the delivery of evidence-based pharmacotherapy and targeted psychotherapy directed at their primary psychiatric conditions.
14. Related Terms & Distinctions
To avoid conceptual ambiguity, the addictive personality construct must be carefully distinguished from related concepts in psychopathology and personality theory:
- Substance Use Disorder (SUD): A formal clinical diagnosis defined in the DSM-5-TR characterized by a problematic pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress, assessed by 11 explicit behavioral, physical, and psychological criteria. The addictive personality is an informal, non-diagnostic personality hypothesis, whereas SUD is an officially recognized clinical disease category.
- Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD): A formal Axis II personality disorder defined by a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others, recurring criminality, deceitfulness, and lack of remorse. While ASPD shares high levels of impulsivity and sensation seeking with addiction-prone profiles and frequently co-occurs with severe substance abuse, it represents a distinct and severe diagnostic entity characterized by interpersonal exploitation and moral detachment.
- Impulsivity: A single, specific psychological trait involving rapid, unplanned action in response to internal or external stimuli without regard to consequences. Impulsivity is one of several specific dimensional risk factors within the broader conceptualization of addiction vulnerability, not an overarching personality type.
- Compulsivity: The tendency to perform repetitive, stereotypic acts according to rigid rules to alleviate internal anxiety or distress, often mediated by distinct cortico-striatal circuits compared to initial reward-driven impulsivity.
- Reward Deficiency Syndrome (RDS): A genetic and neurochemical hypothesis proposed by Kenneth Blum suggesting that individuals with specific dopamine D2 receptor polymorphisms experience a blunted natural reward cascade, driving them toward intense external reinforcers. RDS provides a putative neurobiological mechanism for hedonic seeking, whereas the addictive personality focuses on broad behavioral and psychological trait manifestations.
15. Summary / Key Takeaways
The concept of a singular, distinct, and uniform “addictive personality” is a clinical myth that is not supported by modern psychiatric science or empirical psychometrics. No isolated psychological archetype exists that invariably dictates the development of an addictive disorder. Decades of longitudinal research have demonstrated that traits previously considered unique to addiction are either common to multiple internalizing and externalizing disorders or are the psychological consequences of the addiction process itself.
Nevertheless, human personality reliably influences addiction liability through specific dimensional traits. High neuroticism, low conscientiousness, elevated sensation seeking, and pronounced negative urgency interact with genetic vulnerabilities, environmental pressures, and neuroadaptive brain mechanisms to heighten the risk of substance use and behavioral compulsions. Deconstructing the simplistic myth of the addictive personality allows clinicians and researchers to adopt a nuanced, dimensional biopsychosocial approach—facilitating targeted early prevention, individualized clinical psychotherapy, and the reduction of social stigma.
References
- Cloninger, C. R. (1987). Neurogenetic adaptive mechanisms in alcoholism. Science, 236(4800), 410–416. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.2882604
- Conrod, P. J., Castellanos-Ryan, N., & Strang, J. (2010). Brief, personality-targeted coping skills interventions and survival as a non-drug user over 2 years in adolescents. Archives of General Psychiatry, 67(1), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2009.173
- Kotov, R., Gamez, W., Schmidt, F., & Watson, D. (2010). Linking “big” personality traits to anxiety, depressive, and substance use disorders: A meta-analysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 119(4), 768–785. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020327
- Lang, A. R. (1983). The addictive personality: A review of research and theory. In Pathways through drug abuse: A report on the development of addiction (pp. 51–76). National Academy of Sciences.
- Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Rooke, S. E., & Schutte, N. S. (2007). Alcohol involvement and the Five-Factor Model of personality: A meta-analysis. Journal of Drug Education, 37(3), 277–294. https://doi.org/10.2190/DE.37.3.d
- Volkow, N. D., Wang, G. J., Fowler, J. S., Tomasi, D., & Telang, F. (2011). Addiction: Beyond dopamine reward circuitry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(37), 15037–15042. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010654108
- Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The Five Factor Model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(4), 669–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00064-7