# Is the "rat park" study flawed? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 27, 2018, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338 "2018-08-27T06:16:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Machinaforce](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/aeb1de/32.png) [@Machinaforce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machinaforce)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/1 "2018-08-27T06:16:43Z")
There is a study going around about rats and addiction. Most call it “rat park” and it pretty much deals with the cause of addiction. > **[Rat Park](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park)** > > Rat Park was a series of studies into drug addiction conducted in the late 1970s and published between 1978 and 1981 by Canadian psychologist Bruce K. Alexander and his colleagues at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, Canada. > At the time of the studies, research exploring the self-administration of morphine in animals often used small, solitary metal cages. Alexander hypothesized that these conditions may be responsible for exacerbating self-administration. To test this hypothesis, Ale... But even I could tell from a cursory glance that this seems a bit off. Saying that it isn’t the drug that is addictive but rather it’s the living conditions subjects find themselves in, which smacks of BS to me (considering the opioid epidemic). I’m even thinking to myself that humans are more complex than rats, we can’t really judge human behavior based on rats right? I tried to spell this out to people but they cite how rats have similar brain chemistry to humans and so that’s why they were chosen. But doesn’t the study not blame biology though? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/2 "2018-08-27T06:28:10Z")
The conclusion, as I understand it, is that the use of some drugs is related to living in a stressful environment. The scientists who conducted the study seemed to have followed the scientific method by testing different groups of rats in differing environments with different access to drugs. The conclusion seems backed by solid evidence. On the issue of whether a study done on rats can produce information about humans, that’s harder to judge. The study obviously did not put groups of humans through similar experiments. But there has been a large body of work that provides evidence that the psychologies of rats and humans can be compared. And the conclusions of the study match the data that emerges from real human societies. ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/3 "2018-08-27T14:47:52Z")
OP are you acquainted with the studies of heroin use by American soldiers in the Vietnam War: > [@](#): > > Soon a comprehensive system was set up so that every enlisted man was tested for heroin addiction before he was allowed to return home. And in this population, Robins did find high rates of addiction: \*\*Around 20 percent of the soldiers self-identified as addicts. > \*\* > Those who were addicted were kept in Vietnam until they dried out. When these soldiers finally did return to their lives back in the U.S., Robins tracked them, collecting data at regular intervals. And this is where the story takes a curious turn: According to her research, the number of soldiers who continued their heroin addiction once they returned to the U.S. was shockingly low. > > “I believe the number of people who actually relapsed to heroin use in the first year was about 5 percent,” Jaffe said recently from his suburban Maryland home. **In other words, 95 percent of the people who were addicted in Vietnam did not become re-addicted when they returned to the United States.** > **[What Vietnam Taught Us About Breaking Bad Habits](https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2012/01/02/144431794/what-vietnam-taught-us-about-breaking-bad-habits)** > > In the 1970s, a sizable number of U.S. servicemen in Vietnam self-identified as heroin addicts. But when they returned stateside, the number of these soldiers who continued their addiction was surprisingly low. Why? Turns out a massive disruption in... ---
**Author:** ![Apanthro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/43a26b/32.png) [@Apanthro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apanthro)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/4 "2018-08-27T14:51:59Z")
It should be noted that an attempt was made in 1996 to reproduce the study, right down to the breed of rats used in the experiment. In the first experiment the happy rats drank slightly more of the morphine, whereas in the second experiment the isolated rats drank more. They were not able to obtain the same results. > **[Environment is not the most important variable in determining oral morphine...](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9148292/)** > > The role of differential housing on sucrose-morphine consumption in outbred Wistar rats was investigated in two studies. The results of earlier research, indicating rats housed in a quasinatural colony drank significantly less sucrose-morphine than... ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/5 "2018-08-27T15:04:56Z")
I always felt it was flawed because human emotion and, by extension, happiness is way more complex in humans that it is in rats. One of the most well-known human drug addicts was a celebrity that had an actual amusement park in his backyard. It didn’t seem to help. ---
**Author:** ![Apanthro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/43a26b/32.png) [@Apanthro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apanthro)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/6 "2018-08-27T15:15:15Z")
> [@Ann\_Hedonia](#): > > I always felt it was flawed because human emotion and, by extension, happiness is way more complex in humans that it is in rats. > > One of the most well-known human drug addicts was a celebrity that had an actual amusement park in his backyard. It didn’t seem to help. This is simply my own musings, but I think our self-awareness makes it more difficult to stop using drugs in light of adverse consequences. Addiction isn’t as simple as it’s portrayed in Fallout. Use alcohol too much, oops you’re addicted to alcohol, minor stat decrease if you don’t use it. Narcotics alter the way that addicts think. They make you think that everyone is out to get you, that the world is out to get you and that while your drug use is regrettable it’s also necessary in light of the obstacles you must overcome. Combine this with a community of drug users that are willing to cosign risky activities… Not only cessation of drugs is necessary, but a radical social change as well. It sounds to me like the rats were getting their dopamine fix from uninhibited rat sex more than anything else. Maybe they weren’t able to pin down that this water bottle = dopamine 10 minutes later as easily due to this? ---
**Author:** ![Jasmine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jasmine/32/2964_2.png) [@Jasmine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jasmine)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/7 "2018-08-27T15:16:24Z")
There are now and have been quite a few rich and privileged people who have/had an addiction problem. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/8 "2018-08-27T15:21:57Z")
> [@Apanthro](#): > > It should be noted that an attempt was made in 1996 to reproduce the study, right down to the breed of rats used in the experiment. In the first experiment the happy rats drank slightly more of the morphine, whereas in the second experiment the isolated rats drank more. They were not able to obtain the same results. > > [Environment is not the most important variable in determining oral morphine consumption in Wistar rats - PubMed](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9148292) And [other](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19741591)[studies](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18463628)have provided some, albeit minor, support. The short answer to the thread title question is unequivocally “yes, it is flawed.” The original study suffers from a number of confounds and replicability issues. Moreover, it has at times been used as a tool to oversimplify how we think of addiction. _However_, there should be no doubt that the idea of “demon drugs,” the ones that will addict you the instant you look at them, is patently stupid and IMO more harmful than the opposite inanity that environment is _solely_ responsible. Environment is not a magic bullet for understanding addiction, but it plays an astoundingly important role. Addiction is ridiculously complex, and we eschew embracing that complexity at our peril. ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/9 "2018-08-27T16:07:35Z")
I’ve heard people use this study to justify their recreational opiate use on the grounds that THEY won’t become addicted because they are happy and well-adjusted. I can think of a couple of cases where it didn’t turn out well. ETA: it’s very complicated. I’ve always had a susceptibility for addiction. Part of the reason is my parents gave me a cocktail of alcohol and codeine on Christmas Eve when I was 8 or so, because they wanted us kids to fall asleep quick so they could play Santa. I think it really changed something, Past is past, but I wish they hadn’t done that. ---
**Author:** ![DCnDC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dcndc/32/2842_2.png) [@DCnDC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DCnDC)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/10 "2018-08-27T17:46:45Z")
> [@andros](#): > > _However_, there should be no doubt that the idea of “demon drugs,” the ones that will addict you the instant you look at them, is patently stupid and IMO more harmful than the opposite inanity that environment is _solely_ responsible. > > Environment is not a magic bullet for understanding addiction, but it plays an astoundingly important role. Addiction is ridiculously complex, and we eschew embracing that complexity at our peril. Exactly. There has to be a reason that people can, say, go into the hospital for surgery, spend days, weeks, even months on opioids, and _not_ come out of the hospital a raging junkie. It is well documented that some 20% of US soldiers in Vietnam had become addicted to heroin there, yet 95% of them simply stopped when they came home. It can’t be _just_ the drugs. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/11 "2018-08-27T17:59:32Z")
It makes rather more sense if you think of it in marginal terms; Factors have effects at the margin; It isn’t all or nothing but there is a spectrum of addictiveness in substances, addiction vulnerability in people and addiction promotion in environments. Greater addictiveness or addiction promotion can lead to people who are close-but-not-quite to addiction to tip over. There is a small but substantial percentage of the population which is prone to addiction. Those can become/stay addicted even in good environments. They can also become addicted to just about anything, whether it’s drugs, gambling, sex, etc. A bad environment can increase the propensity of people to use and become addicted to drugs and the more addictive a drug is, the more likely that drug use will become drug abuse. OP says that pointing the finger at living conditions is BS because of the opioid epidemic but when you look at the opioid epidemic you see that it’s mainly among economically vulnerable people living in dying towns. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2018, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/12 "2018-08-27T18:54:13Z")
> [@Jasmine](#): > > There are now and have been quite a few rich and privileged people who have/had an addiction problem. I think you’re assuming that being rich and privileged is the same as being happy. I don’t think that’s a fair assumption. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2018, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/13 "2018-08-28T00:53:28Z")
Don’t have a clue, suppose I could ask…ah, wait, I don’t know any. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2018, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/14 "2018-08-28T14:17:30Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > I think you’re assuming that being rich and privileged is the same as being happy. I don’t think that’s a fair assumption. The rat park implication is not that the rats were not happy, it is that they were not engaged and stimulated. ---
**Author:** ![MikeF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@MikeF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MikeF)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2018, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/15 "2018-08-28T16:31:18Z")
> [@Jasmine](#): > > There are now and have been quite a few rich and privileged people who have/had an addiction problem. Someone once said, “Anecdotes are not evidence”. Unless the point in dispute is an absolute. In such a case a single, proven exception is evidence. That probably has nothing to do with OP, just sayin. ’ ---
**Author:** ![coffeecat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coffeecat/32/3405_2.png) [@coffeecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeecat)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2018, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/16 "2018-08-28T19:54:56Z")
My WAG is that some people do drugs because they’re miserable and trying to kill the pain. Others do drugs because their brain physiology is such that a particular drug makes them feel absolutely wonderful. Everyone else says, “Meh. Crack is nice, but I wouldn’t want to do it all the time.” ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2018, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-rat-park-study-flawed/820338/17 "2018-08-29T13:08:13Z")
In addition to what others have said, anxiety, depression and substance abuse tends to feed off each other and it is sometimes difficult to get to the root cause. For example, if depression is leading you to miss work, causing increased anxiety, causing you to drink too much, causing you to be more depressed, etc. then it is all fine and good to stop drinking, go to AA, etc. but you will end up right back where you started because the drinking is not the issue. Sometimes it works a different way. You become addicted to alcohol which makes you miss work which makes you anxious and then depressed. Prozac is not what is needed in this situation. I see many friends attempting to treat what IMHO is not their root problem.