Title: Running Addiction: Positive or Negative?

Abstract:  This paper critically analyzes several academic studies published in renown journals addressing the addictive behaviors of highly committed runners.  By comparing and contrasting the studies presented in these journals this paper attempts to decide whether running addiction is a positive or a negative addiction.  After carefull scrutiny and examination of all of the studies a conclusion is finally attained explaining that running addiction is both positive and negative, but the ultimate question is really how the running affects the person's quality of life.

Introduction:

     There has been a lot said about the "addictive" nature of running in many distance runners.  Some people argue that running is a negative addiction while others argue that it is a positive addiction.  First of all it is imperative to define what an addiction to running really is.  According to Weinberg and Gould in their book, Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology, an exercise addiction is a psychological and/or physiological dependence on a regular regimen of exercise characterized by withdrawal symptoms after 24 to 36 hours without exercise (370). So with this definition, an addictive runner can be defined as someone who is dependent on a regular regimen of running and will experience withdrawals on non-running days.  For simplification of research and time, it will be easiest to think of an addicted runner as one that is intensely involved and obligated to running.  So exercise addiction is no new concept, but is being addicted to running a positive or negative addiction?

Defining the Addiction

     The firts step to take when answering this question is to define the differences between positive and negative addiction to exercise or running.  Often when describing addictions the addictions are compared to certain drug addictions such as heroin or cocaine addictions with resemblence to these addictions meaning the addiction is a negative addiction.  Positive addictions generally allow people to integrate the behavior, in this case running, into their daily lives to increase life satisfaction while not compromising the quality of family life, work, friends, and health(Weinberg & Gould 370-371).  This contrasts a negative addiction which is characterized by the runner being absolutely committed to running at all costs with the activity taking all priority in their lives, withdrawal symptoms on non run days and often an awareness of a compulsion to the activity(Weinberg & Gould 371-372).

Analysis of the Research

Once these distinguishing characteristics of positive and negative running addictions are understood, then research can be conducted and reviewed to classify running addiction as positive or negative.  In this paper I will be reviewing a number of sholarly articles and studies that have been published concerning running addiction, and by doing this hopefully I will be able to classify running addiction as either positive or negative.

Gail Leedy's article, "Committment to Distance Running: Coping Mechanism or Addiction?" in the Journal of Sport Behavior addresses the anxiety and depression rates related to "Highly Committed" runners compared to the rates for "Recreational Runners"(Leedy, 2000).  The study in this article used a questionaire that was given to runners before a running event.   The questionaire gave each runner a score for their depression and anxiety levels.

In Psychology, Health & Medicine an article called "Runners' anxiety and mood on running and non-running days" by Szabo et al the idea of withdrawal with running addiction is addressed very clearly.  In this study runners from metropolitan area running clubs were givin questionaires to fill out every evening for 21 days to assess their moods and anxiety levels each day. The subjects also listed any outside factors affecting mood or anxiety to eliminate confounding factors(Szabo, Frenkl, Janek, Kalman, & Laszay, 1993).

Conboy's research published in the Journal of Sport Behavior divided its subject into specific classes based on running committment and addiction.  This study examined the withdrawal affects experienced by the different classes of runners on run and non run days(Conboy, 1994). 

Comparing and Contrasting

The reslults of Leedy's study showed that addicted runners had lower anxiety and depression scores than recreational runners, which suggests a positive addiction related to running(Leedy, 2000).  This agreees with Conboy's study in the Journal of Sport Behavior where he found that runners were in general in better moods on run days than on non run days(Conboy, 1994).  On the other hand Szabo et al's study showed that addicted runners showed withdrawal symptoms on non-running days.  This withdrawal effect suggests a negative addiction associated with running(Szabo, Frenkl, Janek, Kalman, & Laszay, 1993).  Precariously, Conboy found results that leave Szabo et al's conclusion in question.

An interesting difference between Conboy's and Szabo's studies is that Conboy concluded that highly commited runners actually showed less withdrawal effects than runners that were only moderately committed.  These results presented by Conboy suggest that some emotional strength is built from a positive running addiction(Conboy, 1994).Although these studies were much different, they all give insight to the addictive nature of running.  Though Szabo's study suggests a negative addiction characteristic associated with addicted runners, it also agreed with Leedy and Conboy's studies in that runners felt less anxiety and better moods on running days(Szabo, Frenkl, Janek, Kalman, & Laszay, 1993). By this comparison it is very hard to decide if running addiction is positive or negative.

Conboy, Leedy, and Szabo would agree that running can have positive effects, and that addicted runners benefit from the positive effects of running where non-runners do not.  To decide if running addiction is positive or negative it is beneficial to look further into the results and methods of the studies in these articles.  Leedy's article mentioned that the stress relief aspects of running resemble those of a drug which would suggest a negative addiction, and this compares to Szabo's article that observed that the withdrawal experienced by addicted runners is also similar to that of a drug(Leedy, 2000).  So in this light running addiction is indeed very much a negative addiction, but this is not a safe conclusion to make just yet.

Szabo's research showed a correlation between addictive running and negative withdrawal, but it did not show a causation.  There could have been other factors involved in the negative moods of runners on the non-run days.  Perhaps the same thing causing the non-run day is what is causing the withdrawal type symptoms(Szabo, Frenkl, Janek, Kalman, & Laszay, 1993).  In Leedy's article the stress relief aspect that makes running fall under the negative addiction category is not completely validated in her findings.  She also found that the addicted runners in her study reported positive motivations for their running habits, such as fitness and health(Leedy 2000).  So this suggests that the stress relief is really just an outcome of the running and not the driving force behind it. Finally Conboy's study reported that the results be interpreted loosely because the addicted runners may have different mindsets that allow them to look at non running days in a more positive light, such as a beneficial part of training(Conboy, 1994). 

Leedy's article only addresses runners at one specific running event.  This concerns me because the sample used may not be a representative sample of the population of addicted runners.  Szabo's study seemed to have a much more representative sample of addicted runners, but still the sample was full of volunteers, so it was not a truly random sample.  Because of the restrictions on human study, collecting data about running addiction becomes difficult to do randomly and blindly, but all of the studies found significant trends to support their data.  This seems to validate their work to some extent.

     In conclusion, running has addictive effects, and many obligatory runners show both positive and negative addictive behaviors.  Many runners show withdrawal symptoms on non-running days and the positive results from consistent running is very apparent.  The studies out there about addictive running are inconclusive about whether running addiction is "positive" or "negative", but some conclusions can be made.  Instead of asking if running is either positively or negatively addictive, it would be more appropriate to ask the following question: is a high committment to running going to favor a more healthy or a less healthy lifestyle?  The anwer to this question is probably less scientific than it is personal.  What makes a person happy or mentally and physically stable is probably going to be healthier for that person.  People must just be aware that making a strict committment to lots of running could lead to an "addiction", and they are the only one's who can control how much of their running dictates the rest of their lives. 

References:

Conboy, John K.  (1994).  The effects of exercise withdrawal on mood states in runners.  Journal of Sport Behavior, 17(3), Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.eou.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pbh@AN=9411130982&site=ehost-live.

Leedy, G.M. (2000). Commitment to distance running: coping mechanism or addiction. Journal of Sport Behavior, 23(3), Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.eou.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pbh&AN=3566295&site=ehost-live.

Szabo, A., Frenkl, R., Janek, G., Kalman, L., & Laszay, D. (1993). Runners' anxiety and mood on running an non-running days. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 3(2), Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.eou.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pbh&AN=787766&site=ehost-live.

Weinberg, R.S., Gould, D. (1995).  Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology.  Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.