The purpose of this meta-analysis is to examine the effects of adventure programs on a diverse array of outcomes such as self concept, locus of control, and leadership. The meta-analysis was based on 1,728 effect sizes drawn from 151 unique samples from 96 studies, and the average effect size at the end of the programs was .34. In a remarkable contrast to most educational research, these short-term or immediate gains were followed by substantial additional gains between the end of the program and follow-up assessments ( ES = .17). The effect sizes varied substantially according the particular program and outcome and improved as the length of the program and the ages of participants increased. Too little is known, however, about why adventure programs work most effectively.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This study reports on a meta-analytic review of 197 studies of adventure therapy participant outcomes (2,908 effect sizes, 206 unique samples). The short-term effect size for adventure therapy was moderate (g = .47) and larger than for alternative (.14) and no treatment (.08) comparison groups. There was little change during the lead-up (.09) and follow-up periods (.03) for adventure therapy, indicating long-term maintenance of the short-term gains. The short-term adventure therapy outcomes were significant for seven out of the eight outcome categories, with the strongest effects for clinical and self-concept measures, and the smallest effects for spirituality/morality. The only significant moderator of outcomes was a positive relationship with participant age. There was also evidence that adventure therapy studies have reported larger effects over time since the 1960s. Publication bias analyses indicated that the study may slightly underestimate true effects. Overall, the findings provide the most robust meta-analysis of the effects of adventure therapy to date. Thus, an effect size of approximately .5 is suggested as a benchmark for adventure therapy programs, although this should be adjusted according to the age group.

No abstract

The present study investigated the dishonest academic behaviours of Australian university students (N = 954) and their relationships with demographic factors, academic policy advised to students, academic self-efficacy, and academic orientation. It was hypothesised that higher levels of dishonesty would be associated with low learning-orientation, high grade-orientation, low academic self-efficacy and nonreceipt of information about the rules of cheating and plagiarism. Descriptive analyses revealed high levels of three types of self-reported academic dishonesty: cheating, plagiarism and falsification. Regression analyses revealed demographic variables, academic orientation and academic self-efficacy to have differential predictive value for the three types of dishonesty, underlining the argument that it is misleading to measure academic dishonesty as a unidimensional construct. The results are discussed in terms of implications for strategic interventions and university policy formulation.

Ostroff, Woolverton, Berry, and Lesko in 1996 examined the adolescent subsample of Veit and Ware's 1983 normative data for the Mental Health Inventory and recommended a two-factor rather than the original five-factor model for the assessment of adolescents' mental health. Analysis of a 30-item version with a new independent sample of 878 adolescents in another English-speaking country supported a two-factor model of psychological well-being and distress for boys and girls. Internal consistency was > .9, and scores were stable (approximately .7) over a 10-wk. period. Boys reported slightly better mental health than girls, as in the original American research.