Emphasis on Interpersonal Factors in a Dynamic Model of Relapse

This article presents comments on "Relapse Prevention Needs More Emphasis on Interpersonal Factors" by Stanton which is a comment on the original article "Relapse Prevention for Alcohol and Drug Problems: That Was Zen, This Is Tao" by Katie Witkiewitz and G. Alan Marlatt. In the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American psychologist 2005-05, Vol.60 (4), p.341-342
Main Authors: Witkiewitz, Katie, Alan Marlatt, G
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Addiction
Alcohols
At Risk Persons
Cognitive Behavior Therapy
Critical Thinking
Drug Abuse
Humans
Individual Differences
Interpersonal Relations
Interpersonal Relationship
Mental health
Outcomes of Treatment
Prevention
Psychology
Recidivism
Relapse (Disorders)
Relapse Prevention
Secondary Prevention
Social Support Groups
Substance Abuse
Substance Use Treatment
Substance-Related Disorders - rehabilitation
Treatment Outcomes
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This article presents comments on "Relapse Prevention Needs More Emphasis on Interpersonal Factors" by Stanton which is a comment on the original article "Relapse Prevention for Alcohol and Drug Problems: That Was Zen, This Is Tao" by Katie Witkiewitz and G. Alan Marlatt. In the current comment the authors of the original article respond to Stanton. Witkiewitz and Marlatt acknowledge that Stanton's comment is an important and thoughtful extension of the dynamic model of relapse they originally proposed. Stanton reviewed empirical research on the proximal role of social support in lapse events and provided a careful consideration of why interpersonal dynamics may serve as phasic processes within high-risk situations for relapse. Clearly the data provide support for an emphasis on interpersonal precipitants in the model. It is important to note that the relationship between interpersonal factors and treatment outcomes is not straightforward. The authors agree with Stanton that the dynamic relationship between interpersonal factors and relapse is an important area of future research. In general, the dynamic model of relapse that they proposed should be treated as an empirical question, and they encourage more critical thinking about, and revision of, the model. The field may benefit greatly by returning to the study of individual differences, systemic relapse processes, and the individual dynamics of treatment failure, as well as the protective factors that are predictive of treatment success.
ISSN:0003-066X
1935-990X
DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.60.4.341