I found the experiment presented for “matching” intrigued me the most. This commonsense idea resides on the principal of pairing drinkers with the program best suited to them. McLachlan (1974) presented a study that correlated drinkers performance at follow up to be affected by the style of treatment and the treatment they received. The matches or mismatches were occurring naturally, no intension to match clients with therapists was done.

The experiment consisted of 94% of alcoholics that received treatment. They were extensively interviewed twelve to sixteen months after completion of the program. A four point Conceptual Level was assessed.

1. Poorly socialized, egocentric, impulsive, cognitively simple

3. Independent, questioning, self-assertive

4. Interdependent, empathetic, and cognitively complex

The therapists were assessed in the same fashion. Follow up treatment was also rated- high or low in structure. It was noted on the amount of contact and counseling completed after treatment ceased. An analysis of this data showed how recovery rates were correlated to matching or mismatching of drinkers Conceptu

3. Does deviance reflect ‘diversity’ or ‘pathology’?

2. Explain why ‘white slavery’ is NOT ‘blind’.

Drinker and therapist mismatched 50%

Some topics in this essay:
Conceptual Level, Heavy Drinking, , Traditionally AA, ‘white slavery’, drinker therapist, heavy drinkers, conceptual level, heavy drinker, afflicted incurable disease, slavery’ blind concept, drinker able, setting mismatched, heavy drinking, understanding heavy, drinker individual, ‘white slavery’ blind, drinker therapist setting,