This study aims to deconstruct current conceptions about animal-assisted interventions by investigating relationships between human beings and birds of prey. Interactions between birds of prey, or “raptors,” provide novel cases from which to reexamine failed attempts to provide empirical data in support of alternative therapies. Previous research addressing the efficacy of animal-assisted interventions is simply not robust enough to be considered a feasible treatment option by medical professionals. By extension, models of self-regulation in psychology are often presented using reductionist models and oversimplified therapeutic outcomes. Taken together, raptor-human relationships help to highlight the shortcomings of each, as well as potential solutions towards developing comprehensive frameworks for measuring efficacy of multispecies interactions. This study was conducted at a small nature park in Largo, FL where a number of native raptor species are housed, cared for, and trained each day by volunteers. These volunteers made up the sample size for this study with forty participants (n = 40) between the ages of eighteen and seventy five. Drawing on both my own experiences as a raptor handler, as well as the qualitative data collected from volunteers, I employed a neuroanthropological approach to reveal underlying dynamics of the program via a two-stage research plan. Stage 1 of the study addresses the Raptor Program itself in facilitating human-animal interactions. Stage 2 addresses the mechanisms at play during firsthand encounters with birds of prey. Findings suggest that programmatic and regulatory drivers within the program must operate together, often simultaneously, for an animal-assisted intervention organization to be successful. Further, this study calls for the ongoing development of novel methodological approaches in future research to determine the efficacy of animal-assisted interventions at large.

No description available.

ABSTRACT This study examined the effect of holistic practices on anxiety. The study used a pre-experimental design and measured any differences in outcomes in Generalized Anxiety Disorder clients as measured by General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) between the two following groups: 1) the experimental group who received holistic services in addition to traditional treatment such as psychotherapy and/or medication as compared to 2) the control group who received psychotherapy and/or medication alone. Pretest of GAD-7 at intake and post-tests at about 4 months into treatment were measured along with a holistic practice survey and analyzed post-hoc through SPSS data analysis. This study found that GAD-7 scores were improved, with majority of the participants involved in some sort of holistic supplemental practices. However there was no statistical correlation between the two phenomena in this small sample. More research is recommended with larger samples, as well as improved instrumentation that could vet out other possible effects on the GAD scores.

This research explores the experiences and practices of Medical Art Therapists; specifically, how working with clients in a medical setting, often as a part of a multidisciplinary team, impacts the work of an Art Therapist. Researchers reviewed the general literature regarding children and adults’ experiences of hospitalization and utilization of psychosocial services. Medical Art Therapy literature is reviewed next, emphasizing work with children, families, and adults. Informed by the literature, researchers invited Medical Art Therapists to participate in a focus group and/or follow-up survey. Researchers conducted a focus group in which participants discussed their experiences and created response art. A survey was then sent to focus group participants and other respondents who were unavailable for the focus group. Researchers identified four categories that emerged from the survey data: “art as self-expression,” “categorization of Art Therapy,” “considerations specific to the medical setting,” and “range of utility” of Medical Art Therapy. Researchers used these categories to analyze data from the focus group and response art. An additional category emerged from these two data sets: “personal experience.” The response art naturally offered another category for analysis: “features of the art.” Researchers compared findings across all data sets and discovered meanings by setting these findings in the context of the general and Medical Art Therapy literature. Further research is warranted to support expansion in the field of Medical Art Therapy.