Jonathan Oliver and Dr. Stephen J. Bahr, Family, Home and Social Sciences

Substance Abuse has been a problem for several generations and is a major contributor to mental health problems. To address the issue of substance abuse, many treatment programs have been established with intentions to offer guidance and support to those individuals seeking relief from addiction and destructive lifestyles. The programs that exist today have different approaches to substance abuse treatment and may be more effective for some individuals than others. Our hope was to learn more about the programs and publish a paper that would be helpful in identifying which types of treatment were most successful.

As an adjunct to the Real Victory project (which helps parolee’s change addictive behavior through goals and support systems) we sought out to identify recent evaluations with scientific evidence supporting successful treatment programs. We wanted to compare the statistics and theories behind these programs and identify what made them work.

We reviewed empirical studies published in peer reviewed journals and government documents. Searches were limited to publications from 1995-2006. After sorting through 784 abstracts, approximately 120 articles were relevant to our research objectives. We read and examined the articles and we narrowed the number of useful articles that could be compared to about 50.

We found it difficult to gauge the validity of program evaluations due to a lack of uniform standards by which to judge them. Most reviews and evaluations were on an individual program basis and were not conducive to quick comparison between varying treatment types (i.e. 12-step, drug court, token reinforcement). We hypothesized though, that we could use this information to classify successful programs and even possibly establish a useful tool which could be used in allocating scarce funds to more successful treatment types.

In reading about substance abuse treatment, we learned that effective drug treatment programs could help reduce the high recidivism rates among parolees, thus improving the cyclical movement of criminals between society and the criminal justice system. We recognized the importance of our efforts to identify which types of treatment were working and why. We also recognized that comparing the different research findings would not be a walk in the park.

We examined each research article looking for the specific ways that researchers controlled for confounding variables in their study. Some important factors were for us to identify if each study had random assignment of participants into groups and if the researcher used adequate controls for selection bias. Since the majority of research claimed to have positive outcomes, we spent a great deal of time in this process of determining which studies used scientific methods in determining a successful outcome.

After we compared the studies which had the necessary scientific data to support a successful treatment program we noticed that we had a lot less research articles to compare and work with. We then focused our attention on gaining insight as to what theories were behind each treatment program and to better understand why they worked. One such theory that proved very insightful was the Character Development Model of Cherrington & Cherrington (2000).

A key aspect of their model is how behavior can cause change in attitudes and values. When individual behavior is not consistent with attitudes, there is a natural tendency to rationalize and justify the conduct. When a behavior is excused once, it becomes easier to excuse it a second time and the rationalization process can lead to a change in attitudes and values. If this model is used to evaluate treatment programs, it suggests that interventions that focus on only one of these concepts may be less effective than interventions that focus on two or more. Programs that focus on changing attitudes, for example, may be more effective if they also include interventions directed toward changing behavioral intentions and behavior. The implication of their model is that treatment programs are likely to be most effective if they occur at all four levels, by influencing attitudes, behavioral intentions, behaviors, and behavioral evaluations.

During our months of working together on the paper, we had opportunities to make a poster and present it at the Mary Lou Fulton poster presentation, and travel to Hollywood, California and share our findings with other researchers in addiction treatment at the 2006 Pacific Sociological Association Conference. These experiences were great opportunities to share what we had found and also talk with other researchers and learn what their findings were. The chance to work as a research assistant with other students and a faculty mentor has been a very uplifting and insightful experience for me. It helped build my confidence and helped me gain more appreciation for the faculty at BYU. Every student in our group was met with encouragement and support from our mentor who allowed us students to learn, grow, and research at our own pace.

Although our research group has not completed our paper and submitted it for publication, we have all gone in directions that continue to cultivate a better understanding of what we initially set out to accomplish in our research. I have continued to study the process of change that occurs in individuals as they strive for a new life free from substance abuse and addiction, through reading and working with substance abusers. Like the other students in our research group, I am applying to graduate school to become a counselor in the addiction treatment and mental health field. If all goes as planned I’ll attend Boise State University next fall and upon graduating, work at an upcoming facility for at-risk youth.

The opportunity to learn through mentored research has not only sparked an increasing interest in finding answers to one of societies biggest problems, but it has interested me enough to make a career out of it. I hope to help others understand how to overcome their own problems while I seek more understanding on how to address the issue at hand. This also comes with trying to improve myself daily and I am hopeful for future answers that will come and the changes that will ensue with research in the field of addiction. I thank those that awarded us an ORCA grant and hope to contribute much time and effort to finding answers while educating and assisting others as they overcome addictions.