International Journal of Management and Humanity Sciences. Vol., 4 (1), 4478-4487, 2015 Available online at http://www.ijmhsjournal.com ISSN 2322-424X 2015 Comparison of Characteristics of Drugs Addicts (Opium and Heroin) and Normal People and Analysis of Its Relationship with the Length of Use Saeideh Aziz Mohamadi* MA of Clinical psychology, Department of psychology, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran *Corresponding author Email: mohammadi.msu@gmail.com Abstract In this article we aim to compare personality characteristics of addicts with normal people and analyze its relationship with the length of use. Therefore there are two questions: Are there any characteristic differences between addicts and normal people? Is there any relationship between personality characteristics and the length of drug use? The population includes addicts to opium and heroin between 20 and 50 who referred to Markaze Khoddarmani Behzisti of Tehran with at least diploma in 2007 and normal people working in the same center. The subjects are 150 cases with 50 in each of the three groups mentioned above. The instrument of data gathering is 16-part personality test of Cettle the methodology is after happening and for data gathering, use of descriptive statistical indexes, variance analysis test, independent t tests, double string test and Shefe test. At the end we draw the conclusion that there are significant differences personality characteristics of addicted people and normal ones and there is a significant relationship between personality characteristics and the length of use of drugs. Key words: Personality Characteristics, The Length of Use of Drugs, Addicts, Normal People Introduction One of our society's issues and challenges is high percentage of addiction among our nation. Addiction threats people's personal, social and professional life. Abuse and addiction to drugs that influence behavior is one of the most outstanding socio-psychological damages that can easily destroy foundation of personal, family, social and cultural life of a country and threat activity of human and destroy material and spiritual resources. It is a complex disorder that is along with many biological, mental, social and spiritual causes. Interrelation of all these aspects has made addiction or drug abuse a major personal, family and social issue. Today, addiction is an international health concern. It is hard to find a country in the world that is not contending with this. According to unofficial statistics, 1.5 to 4.5 million people are suffering from addiction in Iran (Ehsanmanesh, 1999: 15). While in industrial countries the rate of it has dramatically decreased in the past two decades, between 1 to 2 percent of their population (Sussman, 1996: 171). Drug abuse not only prevents people from utilized activities and production, efficiency and constructive works, but destroys force, energy, time and resources and facilities of the society toward positive activities, plans and actions. Besides, it imposes high expenses on the person, family and health and medical centers (for prevention and treatment) and judiciary organizations and police (to investigate arrest, imprison and etc.) (Ebrahimi, 2005: 28). The concept of personality is always together with the concept of uniqueness of the person. Personality of a person helps us to recognize them from others. Each of us possesses a set of personality treats that makes us unique. So personality is the organization of different aspects of a persons' behavior and we cannot consider it separate from these aspects (Lotfabadi, 1996: 139). Addiction is the most important abnormality in the world, especially our country. Thinkers believe that it is the most complex concern of today's world and is spreading worldwide, especially among the young. Generally, addiction is a biological, psychological and social disorder. There are different factors working together that cause beginning of drug use. Understanding all the causes and field factors makes the process of prevention, treatment and curing be planned optimally. Therefore being familiar with Underlying factors and advent of addiction and preventive factors are necessary for two reasons:
Familiarity of those imposed to addiction and necessary preventive actions for them Selection of the kind of treatment and necessary social and serving actions for addicts (Hoseini, 2003: 86) Drug abuse has become a national concern in our country and different groups have mobilized to explore and control it. Psychologists have tried to explore into psychological aspects of it. Recently it is recognized a kind of invasion that is imposed to the young generation and makes the working force of the national addicted people that not only don not benefit the country, but impose many expenses on the nation and bring corruption. Therefore, recognizing cognitive, emotional and personal deficiencies of them contributes to prevention of it (Bokaee, 2006: 5). By recognizing these problems we can also help them overcome their addiction and free the society of the expenses. Research shows that simultaneity of addiction with personality disorders, weak response to treatment, problems in treatment relationship, resistance against changes predict failure or abandoning curing (Reech and Vasil, 1993, Satker and Alain: 1988, quoted by Verheul, 2001). So far, no systematic research has been done on personality characteristics of addicts in Iran. The previous research have been either so general on the epidemics of addiction or on the spread of it among prisoners. Here we refer to some of them: Sadeghi (2004) conducted a research on factors of return to addiction the results of which show that there is a reverse relationship between the length of avoiding drugs and the chance of return. Khadivi (quoted by Dolatshahi, 1998) showed that addicts have emotions like uselessness, lack of control on the environment and being invaluable. Farahabadi et al (2001) that there a significant difference between the hardness characteristic and its elements in the three groups. Although in hardness and its three elements the mean of athletic women and disabled women are equal, among the disabled women hardness and its elements are lower than athletic and healthy women. Golby and Sheard (2004) shows that professional athletes have higher hardness. Fragala et al, (2005) proves that exercise develops disabled people's mental status by developing their social relationships. Sheard (2009) showed that athletes have more hardness than non-athletes. Fragla et al (2005) also proved that exercise helps the disabled to develop their mental status by improving their social relationships. (Mardior, 2004) proved that about the five personality characteristics there are significant differences between addicts and non-addicts. Verheul, (2001) using DSM classes showed that social personality disorders among men are about 40 to 50 percent. Trol (1997) in another research showed that it is about the same percentage. He stated that border personality disorder and drug use are two forms of psychological disorders that occur in a person. Shea, (1992) reported the relationship between personality characteristics and sensitivity to alcohol as: tendency to motion, no avoiding, and border personality disorders. Where there is tendency to motion, it works as an important factor for border personality disorder and alcohol use. Kruedelbach, (1993) proved that drug abuse causes personality disorders. Morgenstern, (1996) believes that drug abuse damages personality and habits in a way that stopping using them does the same thing. Drake, (1994) drug abusers suffer from social disorders. Although the number of observations in clinical cases is different, it is 49% for men and 20% for women. Conway, (2002) there is a relationship between alcohol use and personality disorders. Nace, (1991) there are differences in race and gender of addicts and non-addicts. Addicted group had features like paranoia, anti-social, border, self-centered, obsession and aggression. Marry, (2006) showed that addicts and their families have initialized quitting drug abuse due to its high loads on the society, the family and the very person. Charlzai, (2004) believes that improving skills of life, cognition, behavior and emotions of self-esteem have a great influence on avoiding drug abuse and addiction. The outcome the abovementioned research says that noticing personality characteristics of addicts and non-addicts has an important role in treatment of addiction. A practical method in raising the level social skills of addicts is developing their self-esteem and self-belief. Based on what said above, the major issue in this paper is comparison of personality characteristics of addicts and non-addicts and the research objectives are as follow: Comparison of personality characteristic differences in addicts (opium and heroin) and normal people Analysis of the relationship between personality characteristics of addicts and the length of use Research questions Are there any differences between addicts and normal people about their personality characteristics? Is there a relationship between addicts' characteristics and the length of use? 4479
Methodology This research is of scientific, comparative and correlative type. According to the fact that the gathered data were small amounts, initially we used descriptive indexes such as percentage, mean, and standard deviation to analyze the data and for the Cettle personality test we used variance analysis method, independent t, Fischer test and test. Population, subject and sampling The population includes Opium addicts: including all opium addicts with fifth grade of elementary school between 20 and 50 of age living in Tehran who referred to the center to quit in 2007 Heroin addicts: including all heroin addicts with fifth grade of elementary school between 20 and 50 of age living in Tehran who referred to the center to quit in 2007 Normal people: including all non-addicts with fifth grade of elementary school between 20 and 50 of age living in Tehran who work in the center in 2007 As it is clear the sampling includes three groups of opium addicts, heroin addicts and normal people. Each of these groups includes 50 people. Due to the fact that the present research is of clinical type, to select a number for sampling, it was consulted with thinkers and the conclusion was to select 50 people. The method of sampling was accidental. The tools of data gathering: Here, Cettle's 16-principle personality test was used. The test was made by Cettle in 1950 based on the personality list and was revised because of variety of personality characteristics in a way that all the characteristics were categorized under types. The test was used widely so that it was edited and it includes 187 questions of 3 options (Saburi, 1998: 65). The stability of his test was validated so that its results are between 0.83 and 0.93. In 1970 that its 16 factors were validated again, 0.75 was reported and in our country it was reported over 0.80. Research Procedure and steps After review of the related literature and preparation of the data gathering tools and sampling, the researcher referred to addiction treatment centers and spent enough time gathering required data. The data were collected by Cettle's personality test. The questionnaires were filled at sight in cases where the addict did not manage to fill the questionnaire, the answers were inserted after an interview. After the data were collected, they were analyzed and studied by Cettle's assessment approach. Findings The first research question: are there any personal characteristic differences between addicts and normal people? Addicts To analyze their characteristics first the scores got from 16 factor test of Cettle were given a descriptive table. As in table 1, the mean of each 16 factors is as follows: Factor A (Temper) the mean is 8.03 that is an average one. Factor B (intelligence) the mean for this is 3.7 that is a low level of Cettle's assessment scale. Factor C (emotional stability _ new day-orientation) the mean is 11 that is completely inclined to negative pole. Factor E (domination-surrender) the mean is 10.9 that is a low level. Factor F (extroversion and non-extroversion) the mean is 11.8 that is lower than average. Factor G (stable creation-incomplete creation) the mean is 9 that is a low level. Factor H (conspicuousnessaggression) the mean is 11.6 that is lower than average. Factor I (emotional sensitivity- hardness) the mean is 9.9 that is average. Factor L (paranoiac aggression- confidence) the mean is 11.3 that is close to average. Factor M (uncontrolled behavior-pragmatic intentions) the mean is 14.1 that is above average. Factor N (dexterity-lack of dexterity) the mean is 9.5 that is lower than average. Factor O (anxiety lack of confidenceconfidence with relaxation) the mean is 9.6 that is two level upper than average. Factor Q (fundamentalismconservatism) the mean is 9.9 that is lower than average. Factor Q2 (self-efficiency- indecision) the mean is 8.9 that is lower than average. Factor Q3 (will control and stability of temper) the mean is average. Factor Q4 (tension) the mean is 15.4 that is two level upper than average. According to what said above, it is concluded that generally, among addicts, negative characteristics are upper than average and positive characteristics are lower than average in Cettle's assessment scale. 4480
Normal people As in table 2, the mean for each of the 16 factors is as follows: Factor A the mean is 12.8 that is so high. Factor B the mean is 7.42 that is lower than average. Factor C the mean is 14.6 that is upper than average. Factor E the mean is 16.5 that is upper than average. Factor F the mean is 16.5 that is upper than average. Factor G the mean is 3.2 that is upper than average. Factor H the mean is 17.5 that is three levels that is upper than average. Factor I the mean is 13.4 that is two levels upper than average. Factor L the mean is 8.16 that is two levels lower than average that is inclined to negative pole. Factor m the mean is 10.1 that is average. Factor In the mean is 12.18 that is average. Factor O the mean is 10.7 that is upper than average. Factor Q1 the mean is 14.4 that is two levels upper than average so normal people have a good status in fundamentalism. Factor Q2 the mean is 12.8 that is average. Normal people have a good level of efficiency. Factor Q3 the mean is 12.9 that is average. Factor Q4 the mean is 10.5 that is upper than average. Table 1. Raw data of personality characteristics of two addict groups Personality characteristics Q 4 Q 3 Q 2 Q 1 O N M L I H G F E C B A Number 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Mean 15.4 10.02 8.9 9.9 14.6 9.5 14.1 11.3 9.9 11.6 9 11.8 10.9 11 3.7 8.03 Standard deviation 3.4 3.1 2.9 2.9 4.1 2.6 4 3.8 3.2 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.3 2.5 1.5 2.4 Personality characteristics Table 2. Raw data of personality characteristics of normal people Q 4 Q 3 Q 2 Q 1 O N M L I H G F E C B A Number 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Mean 10.5 12.9 12.8 14.4 10.7 13.18 10.1 8.16 13.4 17.5 13.2 16.5 16.5 14.6 7.42 12.8 Standard deviation 3.7 3.5 4.4 3.6 4.2 1.4 3.7 2.5 3.5 3.7 3.9 4.5 3.9 4.1 2.2 1.9 Table 3 Addict group mean Normal group mean Personality characteristics 8.03 12.18 A 3.71 7.42 B 11 14.60 C 10.9 16.5 E 11.8 16.5 F 9 13.2 G 11.6 17.5 H 9.9 13.4 I 11.3 8.1 L 14.19 10 M 9.5 13.18 N 14.69 10.7 O 9.9 14.4 Q 1 8.95 12.88 Q 2 10 12.9 Q 3 15.45 10.5 Q 4 In the table above the mean of personality characteristics of addicts and normal people is reported. The mean of normal people for characteristics A,B,C,E,F,G,H,I,N,Q 1,Q 2,Q 3 are higher. 4481
Table 4. Results of test t for distinguishing differences of mean of personality differences in addicts and normal people Personality characteristics Df T P F A 148 10.33 122 11.24 0.137 2.23 B 148 12.03 72 10.63 *0.006 7.79 C 148 6.52 68 5.62 *0/000 16.8 E 148 8.86 85 8.39 0.477 0.58 F 148 6.95 78 6.35 *0.009 7.01 G 148 7.94 70 6.91 *0/000 22.64 H 148 9.32 95 9.25 0.677 0.18 I 148 6.16 89 5.95 0.248 1.34 L 148-5.22 135-5.93 *0.008 7.22 M 148-5.95 106-6.14 0.688 0.161 N 148 6.56 69 5.70 *0/000 25.02 O 148-5.36 95-5.32 0.427 0.60 Q 1 148 8.06 81 7.56 *0.003 8.82 Q 2 148 6.45 71 5.66 0.001 11.98 148 5.01 0.102 2.7 Q 3 Q 4 88 148 112 4.80-6.73-7.08 0.27 1.22 The results of this table show that between addicts and normal people there are significant differences in B,C,F,G,L,N,Q1,Q2 at certainty level of 99% (p<0.01) 4482
Table 5. variance analysis ANOVA to distinguish differences between addicts' and normal people personality characteristics Significant level groups Significant difference differences Mean difference Coefficient F characteristics 852.49 0.580 291.24 787.88 54.34 A -3.86* 5.36 1370.37 Sum -0.100-3.66* 1.44-2.88* 1.28-4.88* 1.74-3.76* 0.96-3.72* 2.20* -4.84 1.12-3.00* -2.84* 1.74* -3.86* 2.16* 1.62* -2.86* -3.78* 2.02* 2.20* -3.4* 1.66-3.10* 2.44* -1.66* -5.18* 2.28* 459.05 468.52 927.57 483.84 1450.16 1934 1056.64 1871.50 2928.14 790.25 2112.58 2902.83 611.04 1355.50 1966.54 1297.12 1878.88 3176.0 453.81 1612.48 2066.29 534.49 1604.84 1239.33 930.09 1957.40 2887.49 514.57 1474.76 1989.33 866.81 2262.76 3129.57 796 1416 2212 583.72 1761.14 2344.86 425.320 1479.69 1904.94 1461.37 1910.12 3371.49 229.52 3.18 241.92 9.86 528.32 12.73 395.12 14.37 305.52 9.22 848.56 12.78 226.90 10.96 267.24 1091 465.04 13.31 257.28 10.03 433.40 15.39 398 9.63 291.86 11.98 212.66 10.06 730.68 12.99 72.01 24.52 41.49 27.49 33.13 50.74 20.68 24.47 34.92 25.64 28.15 41.31 24.36 21.12 56.23 B C E F G H I L M N O Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 4483
Results of variance analysis between addicts ad normal people in all characteristics show significant difference p= (0.01.( The second question Table 6. Frequency and percentage of the length of use in addicts (opium and heroin) 30.5 and up 24.5 to 30 18.5 to 24 12.5 to 18 6 to 12 Length (month) percent F percent F percent F percent F percent F groups 32 16 24 12 20 10 14 7 10 5 Opium addicts 36 18 30 15 18 9 8 4 8 4 Heroin addicts 34-27 - 16-11 - 9 - Mean In this table the information related to the length of use for the two groups of addicts are given: 10 percent of opium addicts and 8 percent of heroin addicts had 6 to 12 months of use. 14 percent of opium addicts and 8 percent of heroin addicts had 12.5 to 18 months of use. 20 percent of opium addicts and 18 percent of heroin addicts had 18.5 to 24 months of use. 24 percent of opium addicts and 30 percent of heroin addicts had 24.5 to 30 months of use. 32 percent of opium addicts and 36 percent of heroin addicts had 30.5 and up months of use. 56 % of opium addicts had more than 2 years of use length 66 % of heroin addicts had more than two years of use. According to this, the use length of heroin addicts is longer than opium addicts. 4484
Table 7. Pearson coefficient to analyze the relationship between 16 personality characteristics with the length of use for addicts Personality characteristics Opium length of use description Heroin length of use description Domination R -0.106 Weak negative -0.034 No Or dependence P 0.792 0.213 Externalism Stable creation confusional Conspicuousness Conspicuousness Conspicuousness General intelligence General intelligence Emotional stability Emotional stability Emotional sensitivity Emotional sensitivity Paranoiac aggression Paranoiac aggression Uncontrolled behavior Uncontrolled behavior dexterity dexterity Anxiety lack of confidence Anxiety lack of confidence Fundamentalism Fundamentalism Selfefficiency Self-efficiency Will control Will control Tension R -0.139 Weak negative -0.721 P 0.301 0.704 R -0.090 Weak -0.039 P 0.658 0.231 Weak negative Weak R -0.053 No -0.051 No P 0.611 0.305 R -0.053-0.051 No P 0.611 0.305 No Weak negative R -0.126-0.119 medium negative P 0.627 0.218 R -0.102 Weak negative -0.192 medium negative P 0.055 0.012 R -0.176 Weak negative -0.236 medium negative P 0.209 0.079 R 0.004 0.007 No No P 0.912 0.492 R 0.042 0.068 No No P 0.357 0.665 R -0.246 medium -0.079 P 0.436 negative 0.712 R 0.126 medium 0.162 P 0.262 negative 0.107 R -0.489 negative -0.022 P 0.606 0.301 R -0.002-0.004 P 0.632 0.988 Weak negative medium negative No No R -0.304 medium -0.212 medium negative negative P 0.128 0.034 R 0.071 0.046 No P 0.821 0.651 No The results there is a weak relationship between domination and the length of use (R=-0.11, P=.79). With increase of domination characteristic, drug use decreases and for heroin addicts there is no between domination characteristic and the length of use (R=-0.03,P=.21). The results also show that there is a weak significant negative between extroversion and the length of use for opium addicts (R=- 01.33, P=.79.) With increase of domination characteristic the length decreases and for heroin addicts there is a strong relationship between extroversion and the length of use (R=-0.72, P=.70). For opium addicts there is a weak negative significant between stable creation and the length of use (R=-0.09, P=.66). With increase of this characteristic, the length of use decreases. And for heroin addicts, there is no significant relationship between stable creation and the length of use. And between conspicuousness and the length of use among opium addicts there is no significant negative (R=- 4485
0.07, P=.66). With increase of conspicuousness the length decreases and for heroin addicts, there is no significant between conspicuousness and the length of use (R=-0.09, P=.31). Discussion and Conclusion To answer the first question the data in tables 1 and 2 according to Cettle's personality test we see that there is a difference between 16 characteristics of addicted and normal people. The 16 personality characteristics are consciousness, general intelligence, emotional stability, failure, extroversion, stable creation, confusional conspicuousness, emotional sensitivity, paranoiac aggression, uncontrolled behavior, dexterity, anxiety lack of confidence, fundamentalism, will control and tension. Each of these has a positive and negative pole. The mean scores proved that normal people had the highest level and heroin addicts had the lowest levels of characteristics. Distribution of scores in heroin addicts was more than other groups. And normal people had a better status. The raw data were formed into T scores and the three groups were compared. Addict groups had more distribution of scores and most of 16 characteristics were inclined to negative pole. In the rest, t test was done to show differences. The results show that there are differences between personality characteristics of addicts and normal people. Verheul (2001) showed that addicts have behavioral disorders that are related to their behavior control. They had problems with creativity, anxiety and emotions. Gerstley (1990) showed personality disorders among addicts. He referred to a term behavioral insanity that its symptoms are craziness, schizophrenia, and personality disorders. The results show that there is a relationship between addicts' characteristics and temporal disorders. Khadivi (quoted by Dolatshahi, 1998) compared addicts and normal people and showed that there is relationship between their characteristics and negative attitude. So it is clear that there is a parallel relationship between the results of this research and the previous ones. To answer the second question first the length of use of both groups of addicts were compared. It showed that the length for each group is different and there is a significant relationship between their personality characteristics and the length of use. Because 66 % of heroin addicts had over two years of length, this relationship was more. Lieu (2003) showed that chemical drug addicts have symptoms like dehydration, fits and heart attack. So the length of use influenced physical disorders. Turner, and Hersen (1997) studied composition of opium and showed that long use of it can result in damage of brain and the nerve system. Caplan (2000) reported that long use of drugs results in their behavior and damages it. However such research are not so many. The outcomes prove that the longer the use, the more negative side effects. So the results of this research are in line with the previous ones. In our today society we can see different economic, social and cultural issues and depression, fatigue and psychological disorders that threat the youth and can cause problems in the future. So planning necessary preparation to avoid the abovementioned problems the officials must focus more on controlling drug use. So the researcher explains the practical outcomes of the research as follow: By practical education and positive thinking we can prevent youth from using drugs. So school teachers and consulters are offered to use the results of this research The producers of the national media are offered to teach positive thinking to reduce social damages so that the public view improves for prevention and contribution to them. It was shown that there is a relationship between the length of use and characteristics of addicts so the people around the addict are suggested to try to stop continuation the use and send the addict to treatment centers for clinical cure because the more the length, the weaker the treatment will be. Families are offered to take more care of their teenagers and if they observe any suspicious behavior refer to consulters and use encouraging behavior. Taking an action earlier would work better and more effective. References Bokaee N, 2006. Instability of addicts' personality, Atre Yas magazine, 99vl, 5, Atre Yas institution publication, Arak. Caplan H, Benjamin S, 2000. Behavioral science psychology, clinical psychology, translated by Nosratollah Afkari, Shahre Ab publication, Aghaz, 1 st publish. Charlzai A, 2004. Psychology of addiction, translated by ranjgar, ravan publication, Tehran. Conway KP, 2002. Personality, Drug of Choice, and Co morbid Psychopathology among substance abusers, Drug Alcohol Dependency, 55,225-234. Dolatshahi B, 1998. Ainzek personality theory, PhD clinical research, psychology Institution, Tehran. Drake S, 1994. Prevalence, symptoms and correlates of antisocial Personality disorder among methadone maintenance clients, Drug Alcohol Dependence. 34, 235-257. 4486
Ebrahimi S, 2005. Old pain of addiction, Hamrah zmagazine, 42, 28, Setade Mobareze ba Mavade Mokhader Publication, Tehran. Ehsanmanesh M, 1999. A history of research conducted about addiction in Iran, Andishe va Raftar magazine, 5vl. 3, 18. Farahabadi S, Manshai GR, Sarshar M, 2001. Analysis of hardness character in women athletes, disabled and healthy women in Tehran, zan o farhang magazine, 2 nd year, 8, 97-108. Fragala MA, Haley SM, Rabin J, Kharasch VS, 2005. A fitness program for children with disabilities, Physical Therapy; 85(11):1182-200. Gerstley LJ, 1990. Antisocial personality disorder in patients with substance abuse disorder: A problematic diagnosis? American Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 173-178. Golby J, Sheard M, 2004. Mental toughness and hardiness at different levels of rugby league, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol37: Issue 5, October 2004, Pages 933-942. Hoseini Z, 2003. Study of knowledge and tendency of girl high school students of Lahijan to drugs, drugs prevention conference articles, Gil publication, Rasht, 86 Kruedelbach N, 1993. Impulsivity, coping styles, and triggers for craving in substance abusers whit personality disorder. Journal of Personality Disorders, 7, 214-222. Lieu K, Teoh S, 2003. The case for Emotional Literacy, Journal of Moral Education, 32, 51-66. Lotfabadi H, 1996. Measuring and assessment, Samt publication, 2 nd publish, Tehran Mardior A, 2004. Comparison of addicts' and non-addicts' personality, drugs prevention conference articles, Gil publication, Rasht. Marry M, 2006. Addict s treatment group, translated by Rahmatollah Nuripur, Ravan publication, Tehran. Morgenstern J, 1996. The co morbidity of Alcoholism and personality disorders in a clinical population: Prevalence Rates and Relation to Alcohol Typology Variables. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 106, 1.74-84. Nace EP, 1991. Axis Co morbidity in Substance Abusers, The American Journal of Psychiatry, 148, (1), 118. Saburi M, 1998. Analysis of addicted and normal people, MA thesis paper, Tehran Islamic Azad University. Sadeghi N, 2004. Study and analysis of cognitive mistakes and non-pragmatic thoughts in addicted men. Shea MT, 1992. Co morbidity of personality disorder and depression: Implications for treatment, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 60, 857-868. Sheard M, 2009. A cross-national analysis of mental toughness and hardiness in elite university rugby league teams, Perceptual and Motor Skills; 109(1):213-23. Sussman S, 1996. Development of a school based drug abuse prevention curriculum for high risk youths, J Psychoactive Drugs; 28: 169-182. Turner SM, Hersen M, 1997. Adult psychopathology and Diagnosis, Third Edition, John Wiley and Sons, INC. Verheul R, 2001. Co-morbidity of personality disorders in individuals with substance use disorders, Euro psychiatry, 16, 244-82. 4487