A Meta-Analysis of Adventure Therapy Outcomes and Moderators

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.

A Profile of Outdoor Adventure Interventions for Young People in Australia

“…OAIs have been actively researched since the 1950s (Gass et al, 2012), with the majority of such work having been conducted in the United States (Bowen & Neill, 2013a). There have been three noteworthy descriptive studies of OAIs in the United States (Davis-Berman, Berman, & Capone, 1994;Gass & McPhee, 1990;Russell, Gillis, & Lewis, 2008).…”

“…There have been three noteworthy descriptive studies of OAIs in the United States (Davis-Berman, Berman, & Capone, 1994;Gass & McPhee, 1990;Russell, Gillis, & Lewis, 2008). In addition, there has been a recent international meta-analysis of adventure therapy programs (Bowen & Neill, 2013a). Gass and McPhee (1990) provided a descriptive analysis of adventure therapy programs (N = 50) for substance abusers in the United States.…”

“…The median number of state-licensed mental health practitioners involved in each program was three. Bowen and Neill (2013a) conducted a meta-analysis of adventure therapy outcomes, based on 197 studies (154 of these studies were conducted in the United States), representing 17,728 participants. The overall short-term standardized mean effect size for the entire sample and for 10-to 17-year-olds was positive and moderate (g = .47 and .44, respectively).…”

“…This indicates that although Australian OAI participant outcomes are positive, there is room for improvement. Effect sizes for 10-to 17-year-old youth by outcome category for the Australian studies ranged from moderate to very small: academic (g = .39), self-concept (g = .31), behavior (g = .29), clinical (g = .26), family development (g = .25), social development (g = .20), morality/spirituality (g = .02), and physical (g = -.03; Bowen & Neill, 2013b). …”

“…OAIs offer an effective and potentially more appealing modality for youth development and psychotherapeutic treatment than do many traditional, mainstream therapeutic interventions. A growing body of research indicates that OAIs can result in short-and long-term therapeutic change (e.g., Bowen & Neill, 2013a;Pryor, 2009). However, little systematic, sector-wide data is available about the nature of OAI programming in Australia or internationally (Neill, 2003).…”