How Membership in the Collegiate Recovery Community Maximizes Social Support for Abstinence and Reduces Risk of Relapse

  • H. Harrington Cleveland
  • Richard P. Wiebe
  • Jacquelyn D. Wiersma
Part of the Advancing Responsible Adolescent Development book series (ARAD)


According to the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia University, a 2005 survey revealed that 68% of full-time American college students (vs. 59% of nonstudents) reported alcohol use within the past month, with 83% having drunk within the past year. For illicit drugs, 37% of students reported use within the past year (CASA, 2007). In this risky environment, with both substances and users widely available, it is especially important for students who wish to recover from drug and alcohol problems to have a safe place in which to do so. The principal mission of the Center for the Study of Addiction and Recovery (CSAR) at Texas Tech University (TTU) is to provide such an environment for young men and women who wish to maintain abstinence and build a strong recovery while pursuing a college education (CSAR, 2008).


Social Support Social Network Network Member Relapse Risk Alcoholic Anonymous 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Barber, B., Eccles, J., & Stone, M. (2001). Whatever happened to the Jock, the Brain, and the Princess? Young adult pathways linked to adolescent activity involvement and social identity (2001). Journal of Adolescent Research, 16(5), 429–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beattie, M., & Longabaugh, R. (1997). Interpersonal factors and post-treatment drinking and subjective wellbeing. Addiction, 92, 1507–1521.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Beattie, M., & Longabaugh, R. (1999). General and alcohol-specific social support following treatment. Addictive Behaviors, 24, 593–606.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Beattie, M., Longabaugh, R., Elliot, G., Stout, R., Fava, J., & Noel, N. (1993). Effect of the social environment on alcohol involvement and subjective well-being prior to alcoholism treatment. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 54, 283–296.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bond, J., Kaskutas, L. A., & Weisner, C. (2003). The persistent influence of social networks and Alcoholics Anonymous on abstinence. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 64, 579–588.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Booth, B. M., Russell, D. W., Soucek, S., & Laughlin, P. R. (1992). Social support and outcome of alcohol treatment: An exploratory analysis. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 18(1), 87–102.Google Scholar
  7. Center for the Study of Addiction and Recovery (CSAR) (2008). Goals and purpose of the Center. Retrieved on February 24, 2008, from
  8. Cohen, S., & Willis, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychology Bulletin, 98, 310–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davis, M. I., & Jason, L. A. (2005). Sex differences in social support and self-efficacy within a recovery community. American Journal of Community Psychology, 36, 259–274.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Galanter, M., Dermatis, H., Keller, D., & Trujillo, M. (2002). Network therapy for cocaine abuse: Use of family and peer supports. American Journal on Addictions, 11, 161–166.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Goehl, L., Nunes, E., Quitkin, F., & Hilton, I. (1993). Social networks and methadone treament outcomes: The costs and benefits of social ties. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 19, 252–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gordon, A., & Zrull, M. (1991). Social networks and recovery: One year after inpatient treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 8, 143–152.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Groh, D. R., Jason, L. A., & Keys, C. B. (2008). Social network variables in Alcoholics Anonymous: A literature review. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 430–450.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Humphreys, K., & Noke, J. M. (1997). The influence of posttreatment mutual help group participation on the friendship networks of substance abuse patients. American Journal of Community Psychology, 25, 1–17.Google Scholar
  15. Kaskutas, L., Bond, J., & Humphreys, K. (2002). Social networks as mediators of the effect of Alcoholics Anonymous. Addiction, 97, 891–900.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Laudet, A. B., Cleland, C. M., Magura, S., Vogel, H. S., & Knight, E. L. (2004). Social support mediates the effects of dual-focus mutual aid groups on abstinence from substance use. American Journal of Community Psychology, 34, 175–185.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Longabaugh, R., & Beattie, M. C. (1985). Maximizing the cost-effectiveness of treatment for alcohol abusers. NIAAA Research Monograph-15, DHHS Publication No. 85-1322. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  18. Matto, H. (2004). Applying an ecological framework to understanding drug addiction and recovery. Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 4, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mohr, C., Averna, S., Kenny, D., & Del Boca, F. (2001). “Getting by (or getting high) with a little help from my friends”: An examination of adult alcoholics’ friendships. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62, 637–645.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) (2007). Wasting the best and brightest: Substance abuse at America’s colleges and universities. New York: Columbia University.Google Scholar
  21. Procidano, M. E., & Heller, K. (1983). Measures of perceived social support from friends and from family. American Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 1–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Project MATCH Research Group (1997a). Matching alcoholism treatments to client heterogeneity: Project MATCH posttreatment drinking outcomes. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 58, 7–29.Google Scholar
  23. Project MATCH Research Group (1997b). Matching alcoholism treatment to client heterogeneity: Tests of the Project MATCH secondary a priori hypotheses. Addiction, 92, 1671–1698.Google Scholar
  24. Project MATCH Research Group (1998). Matching alcoholism treatments to client heterogeneity: Treatment main effects and matching effects on drinking during treatment. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 59(6), 631–639.Google Scholar
  25. Riehman, K. S., Wechsberg, W. M., Zule, W., Lam, W. K. K., & Levine, B. (2008). Gender differences in the impact of social support on crack use among African Americans. Substance Use & Misuse, 43, 85–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosenberg, H. (1983). Relapsed vs. non-relapsed alcohol abusers: Coping skills, life events, and social support. Addictive Behaviors, 8, 183–186.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. van den Brink, W., & Haasen, C. (2006). Evidence-based treatment of opioid-dependent patients. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 51, 635–646. Weisner et al., 2002.Google Scholar
  28. Wasserman, D. A., Stewart, A. L., & Delucchi, K. L. (2001). Social support and abstinence from opiates and cocaine during opioid maintenance treatment. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 65, 65–75.Google Scholar
  29. Zywiak, W., Longabaugh, R., & Wirtz, P. (2002). Decomposing the relationships between pretreatment social network characteristics and alcohol treatment outcome. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63, 114–121.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Harrington Cleveland
    • 1
  • Richard P. Wiebe
    • 2
  • Jacquelyn D. Wiersma
    • 1
  1. 1.The Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.Fitchburg State CollegeFitchburgUSA

Personalised recommendations