Background: Wilderness therapy is one type of residential treatment that has been shown to successfully engage adolescents in mental health and substance use treatment. A growing body of wilderness therapy outcomes research supports this and wilderness therapy is being increasingly recognized as a legitimate intervention for adolescents experiencing challenges with mental health and substance use. Some evidence suggests that not all elements of wilderness therapy necessarily work the same for all clients. The question of client fit in wilderness therapy, or what works for whom, is one that has yet to receive much empirical attention in the literature. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine how participation in one Canadian wilderness therapy program effects two outcome variables, trait emotional intelligence and readiness to change, and how client fit moderates these relationship. Specifically, this research examines: (1) changes in clients’ trait emotional intelligence from pre- to post-wilderness therapy, (2) changes in clients’ readiness to change from pre- to post-wilderness therapy, and (3) if these changes differ by pre-treatment client-level variables – sex, age, funding, digital interference in everyday life, or substance abuse severity. Methodology: Research was conducted with 48 participants ranging in age from 14 to 20 years. A longitudinal case study design was employed. Data were gathered by program staff using standardized data collection tools, modified versions of standardized tools, and administrative forms. Findings/Conclusions: Findings indicate that participation in this Canadian wilderness therapy program leads to statistically significant increases in readiness to change but not trait emotional intelligence. On average, participants who experienced interference in their everyday life due to video games or online activity before wilderness therapy had larger trait emotional intelligence change scores, while participants who experienced interference in their everyday life due to a virtual relationship had larger changes in readiness to change. None of the client-level pre-treatment variables included in this study significantly predicted increases in readiness to change following wilderness therapy. / Graduate / 2021-12-08

A central goal of group-based psychotherapy is for participants to gain insight into how they perceive others and how others perceive them. However, such interpersonal perceptions are challenging to study because any given perception could be a function of the perceiver (some people see everyone as friendly), the target (some people are seen as friendly by everyone), or both. The present article provides an introduction and brief tutorial for how the social relations model (SRM) can be applied to studying such interpersonal perceptions within psychotherapy groups. The SRM is a theoretical and statistical model for understanding the possible sources of dyadic perceptions and behaviors. Specifically, any interpersonal perception within a group can be partitioned into variance due to the person making the rating (perceiver effect), the target of the rating (target effect), the relationship between perceiver and target (relationship effect), and the group as a whole. Research on group psychotherapy is especially amenable to a SRM analysis because the interpersonal context allows multiple perceivers to rate multiple targets, which is a requirement of any SRM analysis. A fictitious study of wilderness therapy is used to highlight the conceptual, methodological, and statistical issues that are addressed with the SRM. Supplementary data and output files are provided to elucidate the analytic process using the WinSoReMo software. Although there are multiple ways that SRM studies and analyses can be conducted, the Win- SoReMo program is specifically designed for round-robin data in which group members rate, and are rated by, other group members.

Therapeutic Wilderness Programs (TWP) are a fast growing segment of the adolescent treatment arena. Scientific literature on TWPs shows that researchers have skipped the natural step of identifying the population of adolescents admitted for treatment. To fill the gap in TWP research, this archival study identified demographic features and distinctive foundational aspects that represent the TWP treatment population. Comparison samples were taken from two TWPs, two residential treatment centers (RTC) and an outpatient therapy clinic (OP). At each of the five sites, basic descriptive data from client records were combined to represent multiple characterizing indexes that are in common usage for description of adolescent clinical populations. Data from TWPs (n = 150) were compared to both RTC (n = 152) and OP (n = 154) data in order to identify statistical and clinical differences across settings (primarily using Chi-square and Cramer's V). Results showed significant differences (p < .05) between TWP admits and RTC/OP admits in demographic (e.g. age; adoptive status), school related behavioral problems, nature and type of primary diagnoses, treatment history (psychiatric and psychological), psychosocial history, legal issues, substance use, and family dynamics descriptors. A number of differences (TWP vs. OP and TWP vs. RTC) showed a moderate to large effect size (Cramer's V > .3). Important clinically significant differences include: the nature of current primary disorder (TWP admits show more externalizing); presence of a mood disorder (RTC/OP present with more mood disorders); attendance at previous outpatient treatment (RTC/OP access outpatient treatment more); admittance to previous inpatient treatment (TWPs more commonly had a single inpatient admission; RTC more commonly had more than one inpatient admittance); family communication and family adaptability (TWPs family communication and family adaptability rated lower). These client features appear to be distinct identifiers of TWP admits when compared to RTC/OP admits. Other characterization indices emerged as identifiers between TWP vs. OP (e.g. school suspension; diagnostic severity; and arrests) and TWP vs. RTC (e.g. suicidal ideation; self mutilation; and prescribed psychiatric medication) separately. Implications for researchers, clinicians, educational consultants, and families are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the Applied Ancestry program meets its objectives of assisting at-risk youth with regard to character development. The sample consisted of 40 youth (12-17 yrs) enrolled in the Anasazi Foundation Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare program. These teens were randomly assigned to either the control (n = 22) or treatment (n = 18) group. To measure the impact of Applied Ancestry on character development the VIA Signature Strengths Survey, developed by the VIA Institute, was used. A pre-post test comparison found no difference between the two groups, however the overall negative changes in survey scores for the entire sample (N = 40) were found to be statistically significant. The negative change in scores was attributed, in large part, to participants' self-concept at the time they took the survey, with lack of humility being a key factor in pre test scores.

Wildnerness therapy is becoming increasingly popular as a treatment for adolescents. It has been established as an efficacious treatment in previous literature, but the mechanisms as to why have thus far remained a mystery. This research is looking at the connection between wilderness therapy and DBT, another evidence-based treatment. This study will examine 156 adolescents, comparing the efficacy of wilderness therapy to traditional inpatient and intensive outpatient. Pre-treatment assessments of suicidal ideation, emotional regulation, and distress tolerance will be taken. It is expected that there will be main effects for each of the treatments, but that wilderness therapy will be strongest. Additionally, it is expected that emotion regulation and distress tolerance will act as mediators, and their effect on suicidal ideation will be even greater than that of treatment.

The proposed study aims to employ a longitudinal within-subjects design to examine the relationship between young men’s levels of conformity to masculine norms and their therapeutic outcomes after participating in a wilderness-based adventure therapy intervention. Specifically, we plan to use multiple regression, including hierarchical multiple regression, analyses to investigate whether men’s level of conformity to masculine norms (as measured by the CMNI, Mahalik, et al., 2003) moderates the relationship between outcome variables measured at pre-intervention vs. post-intervention, and at post-intervention vs. 6-month follow-up. The outcome variables (criterion dependent variables) include: 1) therapy outcomes as measured by the OQ-45 (Wells et. al., 1996); 2) therapeutic insight/process outcomes as measured TRS-R (Kolden et al. 2000). / text

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.

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.

Thesis (M.S.W.)--Smith College School for Social Work, Northampton, Mass., 2009. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 51-58).

Background: Mental health issues and harmful substance use are problems that affect many Canadian youth. Wilderness therapy (WT) is a residential adventure-based therapy modality shown to have some success in treating these issues. Further research is needed regarding the ways that participants change, and if there are certain individuals that benefit more from this treatment than others. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore the changes in presenting problems and trait emotional intelligence of participants at one WT organization in Ontario, Canada. The working alliance - shown to have a positive impact on therapeutic treatment - along with sex and age, were examined to determine if these elements moderate outcomes. Methodology: Two separate samples were created from archival data provided by the participating organization. The first sample includes pre and post Youth Outcome Questionnaires (N=30, 14 to 18 year olds). The second sample includes pre and post Trait-Emotional Intelligence Questionnaires (N=68 youth, 16 to 20 year olds). All participants in both groups completed one Working Alliance Inventory post-WT. Descriptive statistics were calculated, paired t-tests were run, and Pearson correlation matrices and visualizations were created. Findings/Conclusions: Findings indicate that older male individuals report greater reductions in presenting problems as a result of their participation in WT. Trait emotional intelligence did not seem to change, and the working alliance did not seem to moderate any of these outcomes. / Graduate