Most of the helping professionals in the field of substance abuse problems do their work with a lot of engagement and good will. But their work is very often mainly based on a mixture of selectively remembered personal experience and personal convictions while lacking profound scientific knowledge of what really works best for their clients. On the other hand, many clinicians complain that addiction research is not really helpful because their daily work with patients is much more complex than typical research designs.
For this reason, it is with great pleasure that I start my new role as guest editor of the Journal of Groups in Addictions & Recovery by presenting two articles that, besides their diverse subjects, share their emphasis on the need for a better scientific understanding of prevention and treatment efforts in the field:
Nash et al. report on the so-called alternative peer group program that tries to attract reluctant adolescents with substance use disorders by bringing them into contact with successful peers in recovery. Because this is a bidirectional interaction among equals, the authors use an ethnological approach to understand the emerging process of recovery.
The article by Bradshaw et al. shows that hope and being in a state of preparation are advantageous preconditions for family members to benefit from a standardized family program in addiction treatment. To disentangle the complex interactions of many relevant variables, the authors used a structural equation model.
I am sure that both of these articles will contribute to systematic progress in the field.
Johannes Lindenmeyer
Director
salus klinik Lindow
Lindow, Germany