Conventional wisdom tells us that exposure to chemical substances causes addictions. With repeated use of substances, we develop a dependence that becomes difficult to manage.

But there are problems with this simple explanation. There are far more addictions that involve no substances – so-called “process addictions” – than those that are substance related. And the process addictions look almost exactly like those that involve substances.

There’s evidence from the study of animals that the inability to express inborn drives in a natural setting leads to repetitive, stereotyped behaviors that closely resemble addictions. Horses confined to their stalls for too long or known to develop curious repetitive behaviors such as “head weaving,” “box walking,” and “wind sucking.” Once the animals fall into these behaviors, they become difficult to extinguish.

Equestrians long ago recognized the similarity between these stereotypic patterns and addictions. Tellingly, they refer to them as “stable vices.” Scientists have determined that frustrating environments, like laboratory cages or restrictive social settings, limit animals’ opportunities for the development of fulfilling habits. Every higher animal evaluated developed such stereotypical behaviors in restrictive environments. Astoundingly, substance use by animals is far more common within frustrating environments. This truth is well exemplified by Dr. Bruce Alexander’s “Rat Park studies,” where rats living in enriched environments consumed far less morphine than those confined to standard cages.

Could it be that focusing on substances is misleading? Maybe addictions are best interpreted as a distorted expression of natural drives, particularly the drive for personal fulfillment, within an environment that doesn't allow for their normal and fulfilling instantiation.

In this podcast Deep Divers Mark and Jenna evaluate this idea in a lively discussion based on Tom Whitehead’s upcoming book, Reimagining Psychology.