The phylogenetic roots of addiction: compulsive drug seeking, natural and drug-sensitive reward, and the acquisition of learned habits
Our rational faculties permit us humans to maximize the utility of our actions. We perform a fundamental type of cost-benefit analysis in which we frame a problem, assign values to the different paths, and then choose from among a set of available options, the course that promises the most favorable outcome. So why then does addiction appear to be so impervious to the associated costs, so unaffected by undesired consequences, and ultimately so resistant to cognitive oversight? The answer may likely be found in the fact that the drivers for compulsive drug seeking and drug taking are located in affective brain circuits, circuits that are structured and patterned by learning with repeated activation. These deep processes exhibit significant resistance to control by our cognitive faculties. The general consensus is that addiction arises from mechanisms that overvalue the magnitude of reward, discount the associated risks, and thereby bias individuals towards compulsive pursuit of addictive drugs. Behavioral disruption and dependence appear to arise at the intersection of a number of connected but separate phenomena: expectations for the occurrence of specific events, behaviors that seek encounters with them, the ability to notice and learn nonrandom, co-occurring conditions, the prediction and valuation of consequences, the forming of enduring memories, and the drivers of focused behavior through compulsion, habits, and acquired routines. It is important to recognize that each one of these individual faculties are present and well developed across the entire phylogenetic tree of bilateral metazoans. The goal of this special volume is dedicated to exploring the degree to which inherent elements can account for addiction and addiction-associated phenomena. In much of the literature on addiction, the underlying processes are often viewed as distinctly mammalian, arising, in part, from the strong cognitive capacities of this taxon. Some phenomena may even be regarded to exist only in primates, or even solely in humans. This supposition arises from the fact that studies are conducted almost exclusively in mammals and primates, while evolutionary antecedents of the behavior are rarely considered. A more comprehensive perspective that examines drug reward and reinforcement in a wider range of organisms demonstrates that many of the component traits are actually well developed across the greater metazoan lineage, and they may well predate the emergence of a mammalian clade by a wide margin. The collection of papers assembled here supports the notion that the capacity to associate cues and quences has not arisen in mammals de novo. Rather, the neural mechanisms for detecting contingencies and for predicting future outcomes are very deeply rooted across broad phylogenetic divisions. Our understanding of an ability to associate paired events has been enriched by work in invertebrate preparations in both classical and operant conditioning scenarios [Cook and Carew, 1986, 1989a, 1989b]. The ability to learn allows us to connect cues and behavioral actions to their associated consequences. Pavlovian conditioning enriches surrounding cues with predictive value. Outcomes with positive valence generate appetitive responses and approach to the associated cues, while those perceived as aversive bring cue avoidance and withdrawal. Humans are not the only life forms capable of such short- and long-term modulations of behavior