J. Scott Tonigan,
Ph.D., Gerard J. Connors, Ph.D., and William R. Miller, Ph.D.
The vast majority of
Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) members in the United States are white, and
only a few studies have investigated the program's effectiveness for
ethnic minorities. Project MATCH, a multisite research study aimed at
developing guidelines for assigning alcoholics to appropriate
treatment approaches, also assessed AA effectiveness for minority
clients. Some differences in AA attendance existed among white,
African-American, and Hispanic Project MATCH participants who had
received some inpatient treatment before entering the study, but not
among participants who had not received inpatient treatment. Further
analyses of white and Hispanic Project MATCH participants
demonstrated that although Hispanic clients attended AA less
frequently than white clients, their involvement with and commitment
to AA was higher than among white clients. For both Hispanics and
whites, AA involvement predicted increased abstinence.
Alcoholics Anonymous
(AA) describes itself as a mutual-help program that is based on the
attraction of its members to the program's philosophy rather than on
program promotion (Alcoholics Anonymous 1976). How attractive,
however, is AA to ethnic minorities with alcohol-related problems? In
other words, can a mutual help program with strong Protestant roots
that was started by white, middleclass Americans equally appeal to
clients with diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds? The spread of
AA-based 12-step ideology and practices to 44 countries and the
publication of the AA core literature in at least 8 languages would
argue in the affirmative. Several factors may explain the growth and
acceptance of AA across cultures (Makela 1993). For example, the
12-step philosophy is intentionally broad and open to divergent
interpretations. This ideological flexibility permits its wide
application across diverse cultures holding different beliefs and
values. Furthermore, AA explicitly renounces political affiliations
and shuns associations with other social movements. This isolationism
has facilitated the introduction of AA into geopolitical areas that
have traditionally discouraged the formation of grassroots social
movements.
A slightly different
question is whether minorities consider AA an attractive resource
when the program is practiced within a larger dominant culture, such
as that of the United States. In this situation, minority groups are
asked to both adopt and modify the majority's interpretations,
values, and beliefs about what is most germane in 12-step ideology
and practice. These conditions raise a series of related questions,
such as the following: How do minority groups in the United States
use AA? How, if at all, do practices among AA members vary because of
ethnic and cultural differences? Finally, do ethnic and cultural
factors influence the benefits associated with AA attendance and
involvement? This article addresses those questions based on findings
obtained from epidemiological studies, the Project MATCH treatment
study, and analyses of two samples of Hispanic clients with alcohol
problems recruited in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Findings From
Epidemiological Research
Epidemiological
analyses in the general population of the United States indicate that
AA is well known among Hispanics and African-Americans. Moreover, a
vast majority of the people in those ethnic groups generally would
recommend AA affiliation for alcohol-related problems (Caetano 1993).
Prevalence estimates vary considerably, however, on the extent to
which African-American and Hispanic clients actually select AA as a
resource. For example, Caetano (1993) suggested that the proportion
of people among the general population who were likely to attend AA
was greater among Hispanics (12 percent) than among African-Americans
(5 percent) or whites (5 percent). In contrast, Humphreys and Moos
(1996), in a sample of clients with primary alcohol dependence, found
no ethnic preferences as to whether the clients selected formal
outpatient treatment or AA. Finally, the 1996 AA membership survey
(Alcoholics Anonymous 1997) indicated that about 4 percent of its
members were Hispanic and 5 percent were African-American.
Findings From Project
MATCH
Project MATCH is a
multisite research study aimed at developing practical guidelines for
assigning patients with alcohol problems to appropriate treatment
based on patients' characteristics (Project MATCH Research Group
1993, 1997). Study participants were recruited at 10 locations
throughout the country and were randomly assigned to one of three
psychosocial therapies: (1) cognitive behavioral therapy, (2)
motivational enhancement therapy, or (3) 12-step facilitation
therapy. Cognitive behavioral therapy consisted of skills training to
achieve the treatment goals- that is, teaching clients the skills
necessary to cope with situations (e.g., stress or social occasions
at which alcohol is served) that might induce drinking. Additional
emphasis was placed on skills thought necessary to avoid a full
relapse should drinking occur. Motivational enhancement therapy, in
contrast, supportively encouraged the clients to take responsibility
for changes in their behavior. This approach focused on enhancing the
client's self-efficacy and mobilization of resources to promote and
sustain change. Finally, 12-step facilitation therapy guided the
clients through the first five steps of the AA program and actively
promoted affiliation with AA. All three therapy approaches were
manual guided, and each participating therapist administered only one
type of therapy. All clients were offered 12 weeks of the assigned
therapy on an outpatient basis. During that time, AA attendance was
neither promoted nor discouraged in the cognitive-behavioral and
motivational-enhancement therapy approaches. After the treatment
period, the clients were followed at 3-month intervals for 12 months.
At each follow-up, their AA attendance and AA involvement1 were
determined. An initial analysis has suggested that more than 70
percent of the entire Project MATCH sample elected at least minimal
AA attendance and that more than 30 percent of the sample attended AA
throughout the 12 months of follow-up (Tonigan et al. in press).
The study included two
groups of participants: (1) the aftercare sample, who had already
completed at least 7 days of residential treatment before being
recruited to the study, and (2) the outpatient sample, who had
received no residential treatment (for a more detailed description of
the samples, see Project MATCH Research Group 1997). Most clients in
both samples fulfilled the diagnosis of alcohol dependence and
reported no other current drug dependence (aside from marijuana use).
Because Project MATCH
also included minority clients, the study's findings can be used to
examine minority participation in AA after formal treatment. In fact,
Project MATCH offers a unique perspective on AA participation among
different ethnic groups for two reasons. First, the study included
both clients who did and clients who did not receive residential
treatment (i.e., the aftercare and outpatient samples). Second, the
measures with which AA attendance and involvement were determined had
strong reliability and were corroborated by independent sources
(Tonigan et al. 1996, 1997, in press).
The proportions of
clients of various ethnicities who attended any AA meetings during
treatment and during the four consecutive 3-month follow-up periods
differed between the outpatient and aftercare samples. In the
outpatient sample, the client's ethnicity (i.e., white, Hispanic, or
African-American) did not predict AA attendance at any follow-up
point after controlling for the psychosocial treatment the clients
had received (figure 1): Relatively equivalent proportions of each
ethnic group attended AA. These findings are similar to those
reported in single-group studies in which clients were not randomly
assigned to different treatments (e.g., Humphreys et al. 1994;
Humphreys and Moos 1996). Furthermore, no differences in AA
attendance existed among ethnic groups in the outpatient sample after
a long-term follow-up (i.e., after 3 years).
In the Project MATCH
aftercare sample, the proportion of clients who attended any AA
meetings generally was higher than in the outpatient sample (figure
2). In addition, some ethnic differences existed in AA attendance
during the 12-month follow-up period. Proportionally fewer African-
American than Hispanic or white clients reported AA exposure during
the first 6 months after treatment. In addition, the difference
between African-Americans and whites became statistically significant
during the last 3 months of the 12-month follow-up period. Other
studies, however, have reported that African-Americans were as likely
to attend AA after residential treatment as were whites and that AA
attendance was beneficial to African-Americans (Humphreys et al.
1994). No difference in AA exposure existed between Hispanics and
whites in the aftercare sample during the first 9 months after
treatment. During the last 3 months of the follow-up period, however,
significantly fewer Hispanics than whites reported any AA exposure,
and no significant differences in AA exposure existed between
Hispanic and African-American clients.
Studies Comparing
Hispanic and White Clients
The frequency of AA
attendance and the associated benefits for Hispanic and white clients
who had received formal treatment were investigated in more detail in
a long-term (i.e., longitudinal) study of Hispanic and non-Hispanic
clients in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and in the Hispanic and white
clients recruited in Albuquerque for the Project MATCH study. The
first of these two studies examined factors associated with relapse
(Miller et al. 1996). In this study, Hispanic clients attended AA
significantly less frequently than did non-Hispanic clients during
the 6 months after study recruitment. Conversely, the Hispanic
clients reported attending a significantly higher number of formal
outpatient treatment sessions than did the non- Hispanic clients
(Arroyo et al. 1998). Regardless of ethnic group membership, however,
AA attendance was associated with significantly less intense drinking
when drinking did occur and with significantly lower total alcohol
consumption.
Similar attendance
patterns also were seen in the Project MATCH study, in which the
Albuquerque clinical site recruited the majority of the Hispanic
clients (i.e., 100 out of 111) in the outpatient sample. Again,
Hispanic clients had significantly lower rates of AA attendance than
did white clients during the early follow-up periods. This difference
decreased, however, at the 12-month and 3-year follow-ups. It is
noteworthy that in contrast to other cities, AA meetings held in
Spanish are readily available in Albuquerque. Thus, it is unlikely
that lower rates of AA attendance among Hispanic clients in the two
studies were a result of language barriers. In fact, the AA
attendance estimates obtained in these studies may be even higher
than what may be expected in less culturally sensitive regions.
Because AA involvement
and commitment to AA-related principles and practices better predict
a successful outcome than does mere AA attendance (Montgomery et al.
1995), one can also ask whether Hispanic clients who elect to attend
AA become as engaged in AA related activities as do their white
counterparts. To address this question, Tonigan and colleagues (1996)
investigated the relationship between AA attendance and AA
involvement at 6 months after treatment for both Hispanics and
non-Hispanics recruited for the Project MATCH study. Some of the
measures of AA involvement in this study included the extent to which
AA participants practiced each of the 12 steps, had or were a
sponsor, and celebrated AA birthdays. The study found that compared
with whites, Hispanic clients reported higher levels of commitment to
AA-related practices despite lower AA attendance (figure 3). These
findings suggest that for those Hispanics who elect to attend AA, the
program's practices may be readily acceptable and easily adopted.
Current evidence
suggests that AA attendance after treatment is modestly related to
abstinence (Emrick et al. 1993). The influences of ethnicity and the
type of formal treatment received on outcome (e.g., abstinence),
however, have not been evaluated systematically. The two studies
among Hispanics described earlier in this section statistically
controlled for the type of treatment the clients had received. These
analyses detected no differential benefit associated with AA
attendance based on client ethnicity. For both Hispanics and whites,
greater frequency of AA attendance was associated with an increase in
the percentage of abstinent days during follow-up. As in previous
studies, AA involvement predicted a positive outcome more strongly
than did AA attendance for the Albuquerque Project MATCH outpatient
sample, but this relationship did not depend on the clients'
ethnicity. It is not known, however, whether ethnicity mediates
potential benefits of AA in other domains, such as increased purpose
in life, reduced depression, and improved legal or employment status.
This question certainly warrants additional research.
Preliminary Conclusions
The findings described
in this article allow several tentative conclusions. First, the
modest positive association between AA attendance and abstinence that
has been reported previously (Emrick et al. 1993) appears to apply to
all AA members regardless of their ethnic backgrounds. The studies
conducted to date provide no evidence that the drinking status of
people who elect to attend AA is affected by their ethnicity. These
conclusions, however, are based on studies involving pre-selected
participants who had sought formal treatment. Consequently, it
remains unknown whether the benefits associated with AA attendance
apply equally to people with various ethnic backgrounds who do not
seek formal treatment. Second, analyses of the attractiveness of AA
to minority groups have yielded complex findings that defy simple
interpretations. On the one hand, survey research has indicated that
in contrast to whites, fewer Hispanics and African- Americans attend
AA than attend formal treatment. On the other hand, two clinical
trials evaluating outpatient treatment reported inconsistent findings
about the likelihood of Hispanic clients attending AA at the same
rate as did white clients. It is important to note, however, that the
study by Arroyo and colleagues (1998), which reported less AA
utilization by Hispanic clients, only had a relatively short
follow-up period of 6 months. It is unclear whether the ethnic
differences reported in that study would have persisted over longer
follow-up periods. The second study- the Project MATCH aftercare
sample- found the reverse situation: In that study, proportionally
fewer Hispanic and African-American clients attended AA during late
follow-up periods, but no differences from whites existed during
early follow-up. These apparently contradictory findings indicate
that global questions regarding ethnic rates of AA utilization should
be discarded in favor of more specifically focused questions that
consider contextual factors, such as the time since the cessation of
treatment.
Finally, in the studies
described in this article, Hispanic clients reported greater gains in
AA involvement while attending fewer AA meetings compared with white
clients. The assessment of minority utilization of AA therefore
should go beyond simple measurements of the frequency of AA
attendance, because such measurements might underestimate the
influence of AA on the recovery efforts of minority clients.
References
Vol. 22, No. 4, 1998
281 J. SCOTT TONIGAN, PH.D., is deputy director of research and
WILLIAM R. MILLER, PH.D., is director of research of the Center on
Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, and Addictions (CASAA), University of
New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
GERARD J. CONNORS,
PH.D., is director of the Research Institute on Addictions, Buffalo,
New York.
References
Alcoholics Anonymous.
Alcoholics Anonymous. 3d ed. New York: Alcoholics Anonymous World
Services Inc., 1976. Alcoholics Anonymous. Alcoholics Anonymous 1996
Membership Survey. New York: Alcoholics Anonymous World Services
Inc., 1997.
ARROYO, J.A.;
WESTERBERG, V.S.; AND TONIGAN, J.S. Comparison of treatment
utilization and outcome for Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites.
Journal of Studies on Alcohol 59:286-290, 1998.
CAETANO, R. Ethnic
minority groups and Alcoholics Anonymous: A review. In: McCrady,
B.S., and Miller, W.R., eds. Research on Alcoholics Anonymous:
Opportunities and Alternatives. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers Center for
Alcohol Studies, 1993. pp. 209-232.
EMRICK, C.D.; TONIGAN,
J.S.; MONTGOMERY, H.; AND LITTLE, L. Alcoholics Anonymous: What is
currently known? In: McCrady, B.S., and Miller, W.R., eds. Research
on Alcoholics Anonymous:
Opportunities and
Alternatives. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers Center for Alcohol Studies,
1993. pp. 41-76.
HUMPHREYS, K., AND
MOOS, R.H. Reduced substance-abuse-related health care costs among
voluntary participants in Alcoholics Anonymous. Psychiatric Services
47:709-713, 1996.
HUMPHREYS, K.; MAVIS,
B.E.; AND STOFFELMAYR, B.E. Are twelve step programs appropriate for
disenfranchised groups? Evidence from a study of post treatment
mutual help involvement. Prevention in Human Services 11(1)165-179,
1994.
MAKELA, K.
International comparisons of Alcoholics Anonymous. Alcohol Health &
Research World 17:228-234, 1993.
MILLER, W.R.;
WESTERBERG, V.S.; HARRIS, R.J.; AND TONIGAN, J.S. What predicts
relapse? Prospective testing of antecedent models. Addiction
91(Suppl.): 155-172, 1996.
MONTGOMERY, H.A.;
MILLER, W.R.; AND TONIGAN, J.S. Does Alcoholics Anonymous involvement
predict treatment outcome? Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment
12(4):241-246, 1995.
Project MATCH Research
Group. Project MATCH: Rationale and methods for a multi-site clinical
trial matching patients to alcoholism treatment. Alcoholism: Clinical
and Experimental Research 17:1130-1145, 1993.
Project MATCH Research
Group. Matching alcoholism treatments to client heterogeneity:
Project MATCH post treatment drinking outcomes. Journal of Studies
on Alcohol 58:7-29, 1997.
TONIGAN, J.S.; CONNORS,
G.J.; AND MILLER, W.R. The Alcoholics Anonymous Involvement scale
(AAI): Reliability and norms. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
10:75-80, 1996.
TONIGAN, J.S.; MILLER,
W.R.; AND BROWN, J.M. The reliability of Form 90: An instrument for
assessing alcohol treatment outcome. Journal of Studies on Alcohol
58:358-364, 1997.
TONIGAN, J.S.; CONNORS,
G.J.; AND MILLER, W.R. Participation and involvement in Alcoholics
Anonymous. In: Babor, T., and DelBoca, F., eds.
Treatment Matching in
Alcoholism. New York: Oxford University Press, in press.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.