Adventure practitioners asked to justify their work with adolescent populations have no one study to point to that statistically sums up major findings in the field. Whether it be a school board, treatment facility, or funding agency, one study is needed which can combine statistics from many studies into a format to show overall effectiveness of adventure programming. This study used the statistical technique of meta-analysis to demonstrate that adolescents who attend adventure programming are 62% better off than those who do not. While combining various populations and outcomes resulted in an overall effect that could be considered small by some accounts, the study did point to major problems with current research and offers some direction for future researchers to explore.

Wilderness therapy is becoming a more widely used intervention for adolescents, but there have not been any meta-analyses focused solely on its clinical effectiveness for private pay clients. This study's objective was to conduct outcome-based meta-analyses of private-pay wilderness therapy programs, benchmark primary features of this approach, and educate the clinical community as to its effectiveness. The authors conducted a review of all available databases, as well as manual searches. Searches resulted in a meta-analysis based on 36 studies, totaling 2399 participants receiving wilderness therapy. Our metaanalyses found medium effect sizes for all six constructs assessed: self-esteem (g = 0.49), locus of control (g = 0.55), behavioral observations (g = 0.75), personal effectiveness (g = 0.46), clinical measures (g = 0.50) and interpersonal measures (g = 0.54). Subgroup analyses included age of participants, duration of program, open or closed model, presence of a mental health practitioner, and publication year.

This study reports the results of a meta-analysis of 44 studies that examined the impacts of participation in challenge (ropes) course activities. Overall, a medium standardized mean difference effect size was found (d = 0.43). Effect sizes were calculated for various study characteristics, including demographics and outcome. Higher effects were found for adult groups (d = 0.80) and for studies measuring family functioning (d = 0.67). Studies with therapeutic (d = 0.53) or developmental foci (d = 0.47) had higher effect sizes than those with educational foci (d = 0.17). Higher effect sizes for group effectiveness (d = 0.62) affirmed the use of challenge course experiences for team-building purposes. Implications for further research include the importance of recording detailed program design information, selecting appropriate instrumentation, and including follow-up data.

No abstract

No abstract