Thesis (M.A. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2008.

Limited scientific research regarding the effectiveness of Adventure-Based Experiential Learning (AEL) as an instrument to develop personal effectiveness exists. Furthermore, little attention have been given to factors that influence the effectiveness of these programmes. As a result the purpose of this study was twofold. Firstly the study aimed to determine whether AEL is effective in improving the personal effectiveness of participants scientifically. The Review of Personal Effectiveness with Locus of Control (Richards et al., 2002) was used to determine the personal effectiveness of participants. For the first article 23 adolescents currently enrolled in a post-matric development centre were studied. The study consisted of an experimental (n=12) and control group (n=11). The experimental group participated in a five day low risk AEL programme in an urban setting. Pre-post test effect sizes showed that the experimental group experienced significant (d=0.80) development in four areas and medium (d=0.50) development in nine areas of personal development, compared to one medium effect size for the control group. Secondly, the study investigated whether a processed AEL programme will produce higher short-term outcomes in terms of personal effectiveness than a non-processed programme. For the second article a processed experimental group (n=12), a non-processed experimental group (n=12) and a control group (n=11) were studied. The experimental groups participated in identical Jive day low risk AEL programmes, with one group receiving group processing after each activity while the other experimental group did not. Pre-post test effect sizes for the processed experimental group indicated significant improvements (d=0.80) in four constructs and medium improvements (d=0.50) in nine constructs. The non-processed experimental group achieved significant improvements (d=0.80) in one construct and medium improvements (d=0.50) in two constructs. Results indicate the importance of processing for the attainment of AEL programme outcomes. Research into the effect of AEL design and duration as well as the amount and type of processing on outcomes is recommended. / Thesis (M.A. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2008.

Adventure based experiential learning programmes (AEPs) are certainly nothing new (Louw et al., 2007). Its inception can be traced back as far as Plato after which it was revised as a result of the contributions of Kurt Hahn, the German educationalist and organisations such as Outward Bound (Hattie et al., 1997). The positive contribution to personal- and life effectiveness as a result of participation in AEPs and which adventure enthusiasts have laid claim to, has been in existence since the start of Outward Bound in 1942 (Neill, 2000:3). Witt and Crompton (1996) further emphasised value of AEPs by stating that they are internationally recognised as a scientific method that assist in developing the life effectiveness of adolescents and adults. One of the most critical challenges for adventure based experiential learning organisations in the 21st century is the development of applicable AEPs for less privileged groups, according to Neill and Flory (2000a). High school pupils in this day and age pose much bigger challenges to educational institutions. They are more diverse in terms of age, race, socio-economic status, culture, sex, stability, attitudes and values (Upcraft, 1993). To adhere to the above mentioned challenges Kimball and Bacon (1993) recommend AEPs that take place in nature as this serves as a therapy for the gaps in the current educational- and community systems. The purpose of this study was to obtain scientific information regarding the contribution of an adventure based experiential learning program (AEP1) to the improvement of the life- and personal effectiveness of black high school pupils, specifically in light of the current transformation- and empowerment processes. Black high school students were specifically used in this study because no results regarding their participation in AEPs have been found in South Africa. The results of this study will deliver important scientific information regarding this topic, especially in light of the current focus on transformation and empowerment. The test subject consisted of an experimental- (20 boys and 20 girls) and a control group (20 boys and 20 girls) aged between twelve and seventeen years with an average age of 14.5. The experimental group participated in a five day AEP in the Vredefort Dome in the North West province. The study is conducted in the form of a quantitative pre-test post-test design (Thomas & Nelson, 1996:321-322). The questionnaires were administered before, directly after and six months after the initial evaluation to determine the immediate and long term effect thereof. To measure life effectiveness, use was made of the Life Effectiveness Questionnaire (LEQ-H) (Neill et al., 1997:6) with a Cronbach Alpha-value of between 0.78 and 0.93 to measure the development of life effectiveness of the group. The instrument focuses on psychological and behavioural aspects that are key components of life effectiveness. The LEQ-H consists of 24 questions and assesses the following dimensions: achievement motivation, active initiative, emotional control, intellectual flexibility, self confidence, social competence, task leadership and time management. The results yielded an overall intra-group effect size of d= 0.03 in the short term and a negative effect size of d=-0.03 in the long term. The inter-group results, however, yielded an overall small effect size of d=0.35 in the short term and a medium effect size of d=0.49 in the long term. The overall results obtained indicate that an AEP had a significant intergroup short- and long term effect on the life effectiveness of black high school pupils but it did not have a significant intra-group effect. The hypothesis regarding the positive, immediate and long term effect of the AEP on the life effectiveness of black high school pupils was thus rejected. Albeit that the life effectiveness of black high school pupils did not necessarily improve as a result of the AEP, it is important to note that the socio-economic environment as well as the family structures of the participants seems to have had an impact on the outcome of the study. Furthermore, the fact that the questionnaires were not in their home language, could also have impacted on the results. To measure personal effectiveness, use was made of the Review of Personal effectiveness and Locus of Control (ROPELOC) with a Cronbach Alpha-value of between 0.79 and 0.93 (Richards et al., 2002:1-4). The ROPELOC consists of 45 questions and is made up of six major components with sub-constructs namely personal abilities and beliefs (self-confidence, self-efficacy, stress management, open thinking), social abilities (social effectiveness, cooperative teamwork, leadership ability), organisational skills (time management, quality seeking, coping with change) active. The difference can be determined with regard to the main components as well as the underlying subcomponents. The results yielded an overall small intra-group effect size of d=0.28 in the short term and a small effect size of d=0.42 in the long term. The inter-group results yielded an overall medium effect size of d=0.54 in the short term and a large effect size of d=0.87 in the long term. The overall results obtained indicate that an AEP had a significant short- and long term effect on the personal effectiveness of black high school pupils. The hypothesis regarding the positive, immediate and long term effect of the AEP on the personal effectiveness of black high school pupils was thus accepted. It is thus recommended that AEPs be utilized to improve personal effectiveness of black high school pupils in South Africa. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2009.

Limited scientific research regarding the effectiveness of Adventure-Based Experiential Learning (AEL) as an instrument to develop personal effectiveness exists. Furthermore, little attention have been given to factors that influence the effectiveness of these programmes. As a result the purpose of this study was twofold. Firstly the study aimed to determine whether AEL is effective in improving the personal effectiveness of participants scientifically. The Review of Personal Effectiveness with Locus of Control (Richards et al., 2002) was used to determine the personal effectiveness of participants. For the first article 23 adolescents currently enrolled in a post-matric development centre were studied. The study consisted of an experimental (n=12) and control group (n=11). The experimental group participated in a five day low risk AEL programme in an urban setting. Pre-post test effect sizes showed that the experimental group experienced significant (d=0.80) development in four areas and medium (d=0.50) development in nine areas of personal development, compared to one medium effect size for the control group. Secondly, the study investigated whether a processed AEL programme will produce higher short-term outcomes in terms of personal effectiveness than a non-processed programme. For the second article a processed experimental group (n=12), a non-processed experimental group (n=12) and a control group (n=11) were studied. The experimental groups participated in identical Jive day low risk AEL programmes, with one group receiving group processing after each activity while the other experimental group did not. Pre-post test effect sizes for the processed experimental group indicated significant improvements (d=0.80) in four constructs and medium improvements (d=0.50) in nine constructs. The non-processed experimental group achieved significant improvements (d=0.80) in one construct and medium improvements (d=0.50) in two constructs. Results indicate the importance of processing for the attainment of AEL programme outcomes. Research into the effect of AEL design and duration as well as the amount and type of processing on outcomes is recommended. / Thesis (M.A. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2008.

Adventure based experiential learning programmes (AEPs) are certainly nothing new (Louw et al., 2007). Its inception can be traced back as far as Plato after which it was revised as a result of the contributions of Kurt Hahn, the German educationalist and organisations such as Outward Bound (Hattie et al., 1997). The positive contribution to personal- and life effectiveness as a result of participation in AEPs and which adventure enthusiasts have laid claim to, has been in existence since the start of Outward Bound in 1942 (Neill, 2000:3). Witt and Crompton (1996) further emphasised value of AEPs by stating that they are internationally recognised as a scientific method that assist in developing the life effectiveness of adolescents and adults. One of the most critical challenges for adventure based experiential learning organisations in the 21st century is the development of applicable AEPs for less privileged groups, according to Neill and Flory (2000a). High school pupils in this day and age pose much bigger challenges to educational institutions. They are more diverse in terms of age, race, socio-economic status, culture, sex, stability, attitudes and values (Upcraft, 1993). To adhere to the above mentioned challenges Kimball and Bacon (1993) recommend AEPs that take place in nature as this serves as a therapy for the gaps in the current educational- and community systems. The purpose of this study was to obtain scientific information regarding the contribution of an adventure based experiential learning program (AEP1) to the improvement of the life- and personal effectiveness of black high school pupils, specifically in light of the current transformation- and empowerment processes. Black high school students were specifically used in this study because no results regarding their participation in AEPs have been found in South Africa. The results of this study will deliver important scientific information regarding this topic, especially in light of the current focus on transformation and empowerment. The test subject consisted of an experimental- (20 boys and 20 girls) and a control group (20 boys and 20 girls) aged between twelve and seventeen years with an average age of 14.5. The experimental group participated in a five day AEP in the Vredefort Dome in the North West province. The study is conducted in the form of a quantitative pre-test post-test design (Thomas & Nelson, 1996:321-322). The questionnaires were administered before, directly after and six months after the initial evaluation to determine the immediate and long term effect thereof. To measure life effectiveness, use was made of the Life Effectiveness Questionnaire (LEQ-H) (Neill et al., 1997:6) with a Cronbach Alpha-value of between 0.78 and 0.93 to measure the development of life effectiveness of the group. The instrument focuses on psychological and behavioural aspects that are key components of life effectiveness. The LEQ-H consists of 24 questions and assesses the following dimensions: achievement motivation, active initiative, emotional control, intellectual flexibility, self confidence, social competence, task leadership and time management. The results yielded an overall intra-group effect size of d= 0.03 in the short term and a negative effect size of d=-0.03 in the long term. The inter-group results, however, yielded an overall small effect size of d=0.35 in the short term and a medium effect size of d=0.49 in the long term. The overall results obtained indicate that an AEP had a significant intergroup short- and long term effect on the life effectiveness of black high school pupils but it did not have a significant intra-group effect. The hypothesis regarding the positive, immediate and long term effect of the AEP on the life effectiveness of black high school pupils was thus rejected. Albeit that the life effectiveness of black high school pupils did not necessarily improve as a result of the AEP, it is important to note that the socio-economic environment as well as the family structures of the participants seems to have had an impact on the outcome of the study. Furthermore, the fact that the questionnaires were not in their home language, could also have impacted on the results. To measure personal effectiveness, use was made of the Review of Personal effectiveness and Locus of Control (ROPELOC) with a Cronbach Alpha-value of between 0.79 and 0.93 (Richards et al., 2002:1-4). The ROPELOC consists of 45 questions and is made up of six major components with sub-constructs namely personal abilities and beliefs (self-confidence, self-efficacy, stress management, open thinking), social abilities (social effectiveness, cooperative teamwork, leadership ability), organisational skills (time management, quality seeking, coping with change) active. The difference can be determined with regard to the main components as well as the underlying subcomponents. The results yielded an overall small intra-group effect size of d=0.28 in the short term and a small effect size of d=0.42 in the long term. The inter-group results yielded an overall medium effect size of d=0.54 in the short term and a large effect size of d=0.87 in the long term. The overall results obtained indicate that an AEP had a significant short- and long term effect on the personal effectiveness of black high school pupils. The hypothesis regarding the positive, immediate and long term effect of the AEP on the personal effectiveness of black high school pupils was thus accepted. It is thus recommended that AEPs be utilized to improve personal effectiveness of black high school pupils in South Africa. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2009.

No / This study focuses on to explore the impact of social power on organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and the role of OCB as a mediator of the relationship between social power and personal and organizational effectiveness. Data were collected by administering self rated questionnaires to male middle-level executives (N = 250) in face to face conditions from motor cycle manufacturing organisations based in northern India. The mediator analysis (by using AMOS) showed that all the fit indexes were in the acceptable range which indicates that OCBs have mediated significantly between social power and effectiveness. Other results as analyzed through multiple regression analysis showed the significant impact of social power on the dimensions of OCB and effectiveness as it was hypothesized. The study suggests the potential benefits of using positive forms of social power by supervisors as part of their managerial style in order to enhance OCBs and in turn increase personal and organizational effectiveness. This study advances the research on the concept of OCB and social power in an Indian work context.

Thesis (M.A. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2006.

The concept outdoor team building implies a set of consecutive learning experience activities that are mainly conducted in the outdoors with the aim of positively influencing the behaviour of the participant (McEvoy & Buller, 1997:209). According to Wagner et al. (1991:53) this form of team building mainly comprises of centre-based team building programs and wilderness-based team building programs. During CBTB the participants live and eat indoors while the participation in structured team building activities takes place outdoors. In contrast to this, the participants in wilderness-based team building live outdoors and take part in strenuous activities such as rock climbing, mountain climbing, orientation, camping, canoeing and sailing. In the corporate world there is currently a tendency to make use of CBTB to increase organizational effectiveness (Buller et al., 1991:58; Irvine & Wilson, 1994:25; Wagner & Campbell, 1994:4; DuFrene et al., 1999:24; lngram & Desombre, 1999:16; Salas et al., 1999:309-310; WiIliams et al., 2003:45). Notwithstanding the increasing popularity of these programs, there exists much scepticism concerning the real value of CBTB (Gall, 1987:58; Wagner & Roland, 1992:61; Wagner & Campbell, 1994:4). The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a difference between a wilderness expedition and a CBTB with regard to personal effectiveness and group effectiveness. According to Borrie and Roggenbuck (2001:3) the most innovative and comprehensive results of the dynamic nature of outdoor team building programs have been found in the wilderness or a type of wilderness environment, Ewert en McAvoy (2000:15) are of the opinion that the participation in activities in the wilderness can have a significant impact on the individual as well as the group. The test subject is identified by means of an availability sample and is randomly divided ahead of time into a control group as well as two separate experimental groups who participated in the CBTB (Venterskroon, Vredefort Dome) and the wilderness expedition (Central Drakensberg). This study is executed in the form of a quantitative pre-test post-test design (Thomas & Nelson, 2001:321-322). To measure personal effectiveness use is made of the Review of Personal Effectiveness and Locus of Control (ROPELOC) with a Cronbach Alpha-value of between 0,79 and 0,93 (Richards et al., 2002:1-4). The instrument focuses on psychological and behavioural aspects that are key components of personal effectiveness (Richards et al., 2002:1). The ROPELOC consist of 45 questions and is made up of seven main components of which three consist of various underlying subcomponents. The difference can be determined with regard to the main components as well as the underlying subcomponents. For the measuring of group effectiveness use was made of an improved version of Herselman’s (1998:149) group effectiveness questionnaire. It was aimed with this questionnaire to determine the effect of CBTB and the wilderness expedition on group effectiveness, as well as which advantages, if any, it has for the individual. This questionnaire consists of open and closed items on group aspects as well as individual aspects, to determine the participants’ attitude with regard to certain variables before and after exposure to the CBTB and the wilderness expedition. The results of this study showed that both experimental groups (CBTB and wilderness expedition) brought about successful change. With reference to personal effectiveness the paired t-tests showed that the CBTB lead to more change with regard to the main components as well as the subcomponents than the wilderness expedition. This change took place with regard to personal ability and beliefs, organizational skills, overall effectiveness, self-efficacy, time management and the coping with change. With regard to group effectiveness the wilderness expedition lead to more change than the CBTB with reference to group cohesion, leadership development, attitude change, success experience, self-concept, self-confidence and dealing with criticism. To determine whether there was a difference between a wilderness expedition and a CBTB with regard to personal effectiveness and group effectiveness, use was made of a covariance analysis. The results of these tests showed that with regard to personal effectiveness there was only one practically significant intergroup difference, namely stress management, and that with regard to group effectiveness two significant intergroup differences were found, namely creativity and group moral. In all of these cases the CBTB exhibited better. On the basis of these results the assumption that CBTB is more effective than a wilderness expedition, for the improvement of personal effectiveness and group effectiveness, cannot be made. It is recommended that CBTB be given preference if the outcomes of the program is personal effectiveness and wilderness expedition be used to improve group effectiveness. / Thesis (M.A. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2006

The concept outdoor team building implies a set of consecutive learning experience activities that are mainly conducted in the outdoors with the aim of positively influencing the behaviour of the participant (McEvoy & Buller, 1997:209). According to Wagner et al. (1991:53) this form of team building mainly comprises of centre-based team building programs and wilderness-based team building programs. During CBTB the participants live and eat indoors while the participation in structured team building activities takes place outdoors. In contrast to this, the participants in wilderness-based team building live outdoors and take part in strenuous activities such as rock climbing, mountain climbing, orientation, camping, canoeing and sailing. In the corporate world there is currently a tendency to make use of CBTB to increase organizational effectiveness (Buller et al., 1991:58; Irvine & Wilson, 1994:25; Wagner & Campbell, 1994:4; DuFrene et al., 1999:24; lngram & Desombre, 1999:16; Salas et al., 1999:309-310; WiIliams et al., 2003:45). Notwithstanding the increasing popularity of these programs, there exists much scepticism concerning the real value of CBTB (Gall, 1987:58; Wagner & Roland, 1992:61; Wagner & Campbell, 1994:4). The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a difference between a wilderness expedition and a CBTB with regard to personal effectiveness and group effectiveness. According to Borrie and Roggenbuck (2001:3) the most innovative and comprehensive results of the dynamic nature of outdoor team building programs have been found in the wilderness or a type of wilderness environment, Ewert en McAvoy (2000:15) are of the opinion that the participation in activities in the wilderness can have a significant impact on the individual as well as the group. The test subject is identified by means of an availability sample and is randomly divided ahead of time into a control group as well as two separate experimental groups who participated in the CBTB (Venterskroon, Vredefort Dome) and the wilderness expedition (Central Drakensberg). This study is executed in the form of a quantitative pre-test post-test design (Thomas & Nelson, 2001:321-322). To measure personal effectiveness use is made of the Review of Personal Effectiveness and Locus of Control (ROPELOC) with a Cronbach Alpha-value of between 0,79 and 0,93 (Richards et al., 2002:1-4). The instrument focuses on psychological and behavioural aspects that are key components of personal effectiveness (Richards et al., 2002:1). The ROPELOC consist of 45 questions and is made up of seven main components of which three consist of various underlying subcomponents. The difference can be determined with regard to the main components as well as the underlying subcomponents. For the measuring of group effectiveness use was made of an improved version of Herselman’s (1998:149) group effectiveness questionnaire. It was aimed with this questionnaire to determine the effect of CBTB and the wilderness expedition on group effectiveness, as well as which advantages, if any, it has for the individual. This questionnaire consists of open and closed items on group aspects as well as individual aspects, to determine the participants’ attitude with regard to certain variables before and after exposure to the CBTB and the wilderness expedition. The results of this study showed that both experimental groups (CBTB and wilderness expedition) brought about successful change. With reference to personal effectiveness the paired t-tests showed that the CBTB lead to more change with regard to the main components as well as the subcomponents than the wilderness expedition. This change took place with regard to personal ability and beliefs, organizational skills, overall effectiveness, self-efficacy, time management and the coping with change. With regard to group effectiveness the wilderness expedition lead to more change than the CBTB with reference to group cohesion, leadership development, attitude change, success experience, self-concept, self-confidence and dealing with criticism. To determine whether there was a difference between a wilderness expedition and a CBTB with regard to personal effectiveness and group effectiveness, use was made of a covariance analysis. The results of these tests showed that with regard to personal effectiveness there was only one practically significant intergroup difference, namely stress management, and that with regard to group effectiveness two significant intergroup differences were found, namely creativity and group moral. In all of these cases the CBTB exhibited better. On the basis of these results the assumption that CBTB is more effective than a wilderness expedition, for the improvement of personal effectiveness and group effectiveness, cannot be made. It is recommended that CBTB be given preference if the outcomes of the program is personal effectiveness and wilderness expedition be used to improve group effectiveness. / Thesis (M.A. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2006

Taking into consideration outdoor experiential learning's popularity as an effective method for the improvement of personal and group related skills (locus of control (Hans, 2000), self-esteem (Romi & Kohan, 2004), organizational abilities (Russell et al., 2000), social abilities (Meyer, 2000; Hui & Cheung, 2004; Dent, 2006), trust, communication, decision making and group dynamics (Ewert & McAvoy, 2000), there exists much uncertainty how program components relate to outcomes (Russell & Phillips-Miller, 2002; Sibthorp; 2003; Gass & Priest, 2006). Sibthorp et al. (2007:1) and Paisley et al. (2008:201-202) state that too much attention is directed at what participants learn and not how learning takes place. Outdoor experiential learning is mainly centre-based and wilderness-based (Hinkle, 1999:190; Hans, 2000:35), and due to the interchangeable use of these two methods, this confusion has occurred (Gillis & Gass, 2004:601; Epstein, 2004:107-108). In order to develop more successful programs a need has arisen to determine exactly how program components relate to program outcomes (Hans, 2000:33; Russell, 2000:170; Russell & Phillips-Miller, 2002:415; Gass & Priest, 2006:79). Taking this into consideration, Beringer and Martin (2003:30) state that change is usually only attributed to action and experience. In this regard Miner (2003:6), Cole (2005:23), Berger and McLeod (2006:82) and Hill (2007:339) believe that the symbolic meaning of wilderness and its therapeutic role is largely being overlooked or ignored compared to the ecological and experiential values thereof. Although many suggest that the physical environment is important for achieving program outcomes, future research could focus more on the difference of programs in wilderness, unfamiliar non-wilderness environments (such as rope courses) and familiar environments such as classrooms and workplaces (McKenzie, 2000:20). For a clearer understanding on how program components relate to outcomes, Priest (1996) (also see Priest, 1998 and Williams, 2000) indicates by using a comparative study that if group initiatives are more successful than rope courses for the improvement of organizational effectiveness, it can give valuable insight of what specific method should be used for achieving specific outcomes (Priest, 1996:37). Taking this into consideration it is the purpose of this study to compare the effectiveness of a centre-based adventure program with an expedition-based wilderness program with regard to personal and group effectiveness, and to determine if the personal experience of restoration (Kaplan, 1995:172-173; Laumann et al., 2001:31-32), physical self (Berger & McLeod, 2006:91; Caulkins et al., 2006:21), prfmitiveness, humility, timelessness (Cole, 2005:26; Johnson et al., 2005:7), solitude, privacy, freedom of choice (Borrie & Roggenbuck, 2001:7), personal self (Russell & Farnum, 2004:39) and spiritual upliftment (Irvine & Warber, 2002:80; Berger & McLeod, 2006:91) are symbolically unique to wilderness participation. This study made use of a crossover design with a mixed-method approach which De Vos (2005:360) refers to as a combination of quantitative and qualitative research in a single study. In a crossover design all the participants take part in both interventions (Simon, 2002:1), which is, in this case, the centre-based adventure programme and expedition-based wilderness programme. There were 28 third year students (14 men and 14 women), aged 20-23 (x= 21.6 ± 0.7) from the North-West University (Potchefstroom Campus) who took part in this study. The participants were identified using an availability sample and were randomly divided into two experimental groups (7 men and 7 women). The research instrument used to measure personal effectiveness was the Review of Personal Effectiveness and Locus of Control (ROPELOC) developed and piloted by Richards et al. (2002). This questionnaire measures personal effectiveness through seven major components. This questionnaire was administered in the form of a quantitative pre-and post-test to both groups. For the measurement of group effectiveness an improved version of the one,found in Herselman (1998) was used. This questionnaire measures group effectiveness through several factors, such as communication, team spirit, decision making and planning, which are considered important for effective group functioning. In combination with this questionnaire an improved version of the Recreation Experience Preference Scales (Manfredo et al., 1996) was used. This research instrument is developed to determine why people engage in recreation, what people want from it and how people might benefit from it. Both of these questionnaires (group effectiveness and Recreation Experience Preference Scales) were administered in the form of a quantitative post-test to both groups. In combination with the quantitative procedure, one-on-one and focus group interviews were conducted with each participant after every test. With regard to personal effectiveness results indicated that most of the ROPELOC components changed significantly. Between the two programs differences with medium effect (d=0.5) were found in self-confidence (d=0.53), stress management (d=0.42), quality seeking (d=0.62) and coping with change (d=0.49), all in favour of the expedition-based wilderness program. Even though both programs are very effective for the improvement of personal effectiveness, it is strongly recommended that an expedition-based wilderness program should be used. This is mainly attributed to the effect of the wilderness environment. The experience of solitude, privacy and freedom of choice, spiritual upliftment and restoration proved to be the most powerful. In terms of group effectiveness results indicated medium (d=0.5) to significant (d>0.8) differences mostly in favour of the centre-based adventure program in communication abilities (d=0.52), competition within the group (d=0.83) and productiveness (d=0.68). Although both programmes are rated very effective for the improvement of group effectiveness, it is strongly recommended that a centre-based adventure program should be used. This is mainly attributed to active involvement, intense social interaction and continuous group discussions. Furthermore, a significant sequence effect in favour of first attending the centre-based adventure program and thereafter the expedition-based wilderness program was documented, which lead to the conclusion that the two programmes should be used in combination. For a meaningful adventure experience results showed that the personal experience of restoration, physical self, primitiveness, humility, timelessness, solitude, privacy, freedom of choice, personal self and spiritual upliftment made the most important contribution during the expedition-based wilderness program and that this program is most effective in creating this. However, it is possible to experience these components during a centre-based adventure program, but to a lesser extent and with different meaning. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Recreation Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2009.