4.2 Article

Resident and house manager perceptions of social environments in sober living houses: Associations with length of stay

Journal

JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 49, Issue 7, Pages 2959-2971

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcop.22620

Keywords

length of stay; perceptions; program Evaluation; recovery homes; sober living house; social environment; substance-related disorders

Funding

  1. National Institute on Drug Abuse [DA042938]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that perceptions of the social environment in SLHs were associated with length of stay, with scales completed by residents being better predictors of LOS compared to those completed by house managers. Additionally, larger discrepancies between the two groups were linked to shorter LOS. Overall, the social environment, particularly aligned with social model recovery principles, was highlighted as crucial in SLHs.
Aims: Studies have shown persons living in recovery homes for drug and alcohol problems make significant, sustained improvements. However, there is limited information about factors associated with outcomes. This study examined how perceptions of social environment of one type of recovery home, sober living houses (SLHs), were associated with length of stay (LOS). Methods: SLH residents and their house managers (N = 416) completed the recovery home environment scale (RHES) that assessed social model recovery characteristics and the community-oriented program evaluation scale (CPES) that evaluated perceptions of the program environment. Results: Scales completed by residents predicted LOS, but those completed by house managers did not. Larger discrepancies between the two groups were associated with shorter LOS. The RHES was shown to be a stronger predictor of LOS than the CPES. Conclusion: Results highlight the importance of the social environment in SLHs, particularly those most closely aligned with social model recovery principles.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available