Adventure Therapy Theory

Adventure therapy theory draws from a mixture of learning and psychological theories. The learning theories include contributions from Albert Bandura, John Dewey, Kurt Hahn, and Kurt Lewin. These theorists also have been credited with contributing to the main theories comprising experiential education. Experiential education is a theoretical component of adventure therapy. The ideas and thinking of Alfred Adler, Albert Ellis, Milton Erickson, William Glasser, Carl Jung, Abraham Maslow, Jean Piaget, Carl Rogers, B.F. Skinner, Fritz Perls, and Viktor Frankl all appear to have contributed to the thinking in adventure therapy. Adventure therapy is a cognitive-behavioral-affective approach which utilizes a humanistic existential base to strategically enact change through direct experience through challenge.

This theory, though, has been questioned extensively. These questions cover many issues. With all the importance that is placed upon adventure therapy as a therapeutic intervention, the research is restricted to cooperation and trust, and even less research examines therapeutic techniques with adventure therapy and outcomes on pathology. The adventure therapy research field is having difficulty answering the basic questions of how, what, when, where and who. Further research on the standards, requirements, education, and training for individuals conducting adventure therapy is required. The research is based upon the examination of self-concept and social adjustments. In a meta-analysis study to statistically integrate all the available empirical research on adventure therapy, 99 studies were found covering a 25 year span. Out of the 99 studies located, only 43 studies fit the criteria for analysis. Many of the studies excluded were dissertations and the authors stated that dissertation studies did not accurately represent the field of adventure programming. The 43 studies used varied in design, methods, and treatment goals. They report that the limited amount of studies for their meta-analysis is proof of the limitations in the research in adventure programming. The major theme of these questions about adventure therapy is effectiveness. A group has emerged arguing that before any other question in adventure therapy can be answered the question what are the properties that influence the effectiveness of adventure therapy must be answered. This group argues that theory driven research instead of outcome driven research will answer this question. Outcome driven research means that outcomes are the source of explanations for AT theoretical structure. Outcome driven research has generated many conflicting findings that confuse theoretical structure and explanations of effectiveness. The outcomes in adventure therapy research are linked to existing psychological theories of change to explain, modify, or validate AT theory. The theories of change have upwards of 400 forms of therapy and related practices that have emerged from a conglomeration of psychological theories. When outcomes are tied to existing psychological theories within the 400 forms of therapy it is impossible to understand the underlying influences of AT. With all the research to date and the numerous reports of positive outcomes, there is still little understanding of the underlying processes influencing these positive outcomes. This has caused extensive discussion concerning why adventure therapy appears effective in treating a multitude of DSM related mental disorders in children, adolescents, and adults. Several researchers have attempted to explain the underlying process to adventure therapy.

Adventure therapy is described as non-traditional therapy allowing for the pre-therapeutic adolescent to experience their mental health issues, with several theoretical aspects:
1) it is a physical augmentation to traditional therapy for the purpose of a shared history with the participants and the therapist,
2) there is a sense of natural and logical consequences in the activities,
3) environment should be structured into the activities,
4) a participant perceives risk, stress, and anxiety so the they can problem solve and generate their own sense of community for feedback and behavior modeling,
5) participants will transfer their present attitudes and behaviors into the activities,
6) works with a small group of participants, and
7) requires a facilitator that models appropriate behaviors and guides the group towards adaptive self regulation that is based upon appropriate behaviors.

Adventure therapy has normalizing effects on deficits in delinquent adolescent’s developmental process, as a process of moving into formal operational thinking which is achieved through the experiential learning theories. A therapist holds the skills to make the adventure experience a therapy. The theoretical basis of adventure therapy describes the participant as a learning being who achieves their greatest learning outside the classroom, through challenge and perceived risk, promoting social skills through experiencing a group challenge mixed with affect, cognition, psychomotor activity and formal operational thinking generated through metaphor. Experiential learning becomes adventure therapy when the activities are planned and implemented as vehicles for patients to address individual treatment goals. Adventure experiences molded into a more therapeutic group model ran by the therapist can have a more significant effect than the one day intervention run by counselors. It is important to have the clinician as an integral part of the adventure therapy process so that there can be a strong transference of the adventure experience to other aspects of the therapeutic process.

Baldwin, Persing, and Magnuson, though, report that many of these explanations are "…folk pedagogies…" that lack thorough empirical evidence. Adventure therapy research has focused on outcomes without exploring theoretical structure. The focus of AT research needs to concentrate on testing and validating theoretical structure. Adventure therapy’s theoretical structure must be studied and documented. After a theoretical structure is validated then a discussion on outcomes can occur.