The Sobell study of guided self-change in substance abuse treatment

¶ … Sobell research was to decide which of the two interventions was most effective. The research methods used by those conducting the interventions were thorough, thoughtful, and meticulous, and totally appropriate for volunteers hoping to at least cut back on their abusive behaviors. The researchers used a "…recruitment, screening, and eligibility" research method with these substance abusers in Toronto, Canada (Sobell, et al., 2009). The respondents answered a newspaper advertisement ("ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT YOUR DRINKING (DRUG USE)?") sponsored by the Addiction Research Foundation (Sobell, 673). The group sessions brought together between four to eight participants and in the group sessions the clients were "…given an opportunity to discuss all assignments and handouts" and were asked to share their experiences, typical of any group session where an intervention was taking place. In the group sessions two therapists each provided the "guided self-change" (GSC) intervention strategy with one person at a time (while all could hear the therapy) and in the one-on-one session the "same treatment" was delivered (Sobell, 675). Interestingly, follow-up research twelve months later found little difference between the guided self-change work when it was applied in a group format or when it was conducted work at an individual level. For this reason, a careful reader of this article can justify feeling confident that this research method was appropriate and moreover, it was effective. The entire research project was not only successful, it was germane to the current social problems associated with drugs and alcohol in America.

Analysis -- Question Two

One of the research methods that might be effective when treating those involved with substance abuse problems -- on an individual basis, not necessarily as a group -- would be using the "Case Study" approach. This strategy might not be entirely appropriate for the situation presented by the Sobell piece, because in the article the researchers were soliciting participants that were not necessarily heavy drug users or alcoholics that were drunk day and night. In the Sobell piece it was all voluntary, albeit the case study could be effective. In the Sobell piece the participants voluntarily agreed to participate because they were concerned that they were going over the edge of normality through their habits. That said, the case study method could be used with individuals who went through interventions individually and only later joined in a group format. The case study strategy could be implemented in steps; first by using the "special selection procedures" that would locate those individuals who are worried about their drug and/or alcohol usage (Wade, et al., 2015). On page 30 Wade explains that a case study approach provides "in-depth information on an individual" that in certain circumstances can "shed light on situations or problems" that might not be addressed in "other ways" (Wade, 30). In the case of the research by Sobell, the participants were given the Drug Use History Questionnaire and asked to present "goal statements" (what their hope was in entering into the intervention) and were asked to take the "Situational Confidence Questionnaire" (Sobell, 675) as well. Applying those investigative tools to a case study strategy would be quite seamless, providing the therapist had the necessary experience and competencies to carry out the case study. The problem drinkers and drug users could each be approached individually in a case study scenario and the therapist could certainly get a "more detailed picture of an individual" than with other methods. Hence, the case study research method -- though it has drawbacks, and individuals' "…memories or self-reports may be selective or inaccurate" -- could also provide good, improved behaviors of worried drug and alcohol users (Wade, 30).

Connection -- One

The first concept from the course textbook that can be easily linked to the article is found on page 8, "Using Psychology to Study Psychology." The careful, meticulous review and critique of a psychologically-themed research article entails learning. That is, drugs and alcohol are topics that college students are familiar with. In the Sobell article, the student must use "Strategy #1" in the use of psychology to study psychology; that strategy requires the student to "Read, Recite, Review"; learning about psychology and how psychologists conduct their research requires more than just breezing through a text book (Wade, 8). The focus of the Sobell article was not totally straightforward or simplistic so thought and review had to go into it. The second concept that was of value in the textbook was "What Psychologists Do" (9). Sobell and Sobell, and their colleague Agrawal, are all psychologists, and so to delve into their research ("Dig Deep" Wade writes on page 8) is to learn what they do, and their article took on a social and community problem and came up with results that appear to be worthy. The third concept that relates to the focus of the Sobell piece was the section (35), "Lying With Statistics." Wade points out that people pretending to be knowledgeable throw facts around without necessarily backing them up with empirical or valid data or evidence. In the Sobell piece, everything was presented with full and thorough data and also presented was ways in which the data was acquired.

Connection -- Two

The first way in which the Sobell article relates to the "real world" is the fact that these participants knew full well that they were on the edge of getting into deep addictive problems, and it is no secret that substance abuse is a huge social problem that costs society billions of dollars in related healthcare costs -- along with the damage that drug addicts and alcoholics can cause in their communities. The fact that these participants cut back dramatically on their abusive behaviors helped to make improvements their lives. The second way in which the real world was impacted by the success of the interventions -- indeed "The large and significant reductions and alcohol use…" that the researchers were able to bring about -- also improved the lives of the families of the participants and their loved ones as well as those colleagues they work with (Sobell, 681). The third way the real world was positively impacted was that when an employee has an alcohol problem he or she is likely to show up to work with hangovers, and that is not conducive to good production. Places of employment expect reliable, sober employees, and so when important personal change comes over a person who is an employee -- but who had been coming to work bleary-eyed and even smelling of alcohol -- that gives a positive assist to the real world of work. Overall, the American economy depends on production and profit, and wasted time and effort by substance abusers drags the whole economy down.

Reflection -- Question Two

What I have learned about the need to fully summarize and understand articles (in particular scholarly articles) can be boiled down into three aspects. First the Strategy #2 on page 8 was very helpful. In a scholarly article -- which can often be esoteric or so crammed with data, mathematical equations that it is a turn-off for people in the humanities or the social sciences -- there is a need to test what you have gleaned from the piece. I hadn't thought of that before. I was generally satisfied taking notes, using a lighter on key phrases and facts, and writing a report based on those actions. "Recite aloud what you recall about the major concepts in the section you just finished" (Wade, 8). I had never done that but now I will carry out that exercise. Secondly, I now look up the credentials of those researchers / scholars who conducted the research and wrote the article. Were they professors or just advanced instructors getting their work published? What universities were they working for and what was their major field of study? Not that it always matters -- sometimes the quality of what is presented trumps the credentials of those presenting the material -- but for my own understanding of the material I do now like to know something about the individuals that took the time to do the investigative work and present it in a scholarly format. The third aspect of my summaries and critiques has to do with my own goal of becoming a published writer. I read the material presented and I become a copy editor in my own head. For example, how would have edited that last sentence so it made more sense to the non-scholar? What would I have said in the introduction to get the reader more interested in the material I was about to present? How could I have made this particular article by Sobell, for example, more like journalism (story-telling rather than simply presenting facts and specifics). That said, I know that research papers aren't supposed to be entertaining, but why not try to make them more interesting by including some journalistic strategies? Those are my ideas of how I now look at research articles a bit differently, and how I would go about processing the material.