He calls this “urge surfing.” Instead of denying our addictive nature or hating ourselves for it, we learn to keep living in spite of it. We remember that our urges do not control us, that we have power over our own decisions. This is easier when utilizing a technique which Marlatt refers to as SOBER—Stop, Observe (our thoughts and emotions), Breathe, Expand (our awareness and our comprehension of potential consequences if we use), and Respond mindfully (make the right choice not to use). When abstinence violation effect kicks in, the first thing we often do is criticize ourselves. This is a problem faced by many addicts and alcoholics, and it actually applies to more than just AVE.
In many cases, initial lapses occur in high-risk situations that are completely unexpected and for which the drinker is often unprepared. In relapse “set ups,” however, it may be possible to identify a series of covert decisions or choices, each of them seemingly inconsequential, which in combination set the person up for situations with overwhelmingly high risk. These choices have been termed “apparently irrelevant decisions” (AIDs), because they may not be overtly recognized as related to relapse but nevertheless help move the person closer to the brink of relapse.
Empirical findings relevant to the RP model
Harm reduction therapy has also been applied in group format, mirroring the approach and components of individual harm reduction psychotherapy but with added focus on building social support and receiving feedback and advice from peers (Little, 2006; Little & Franskoviak, 2010). These groups tend to include individuals who use a range of substances and who endorse a range of goals, including reducing substance use and/or substance-related harms, controlled/moderate use, and abstinence (Little, 2006). Additionally, some groups target individuals with co-occurring psychiatric disorders (Little, Hodari, Lavender, & Berg, 2008). Important features common to these groups include low program barriers (e.g., drop-in groups, few rules) and inclusiveness of clients with difficult presentations (Little & Franskoviak, 2010).
- The dynamic model further emphasizes the importance of nonlinear relationships and timing/sequencing of events.
- For example, the therapist can use the metaphor of behavior change as a journey that includes both easy and difficult stretches of highway and for which various “road signs” (e.g., “warning signals”) are available to provide guidance.
- Teasdale and colleagues (1995) have proposed a model of depressive relapse which attempts to explain the process of relapse in depression and also the mechanisms by which cognitive therapy achieves its prophylactic effects in the treatment of depression.
- Obviously this rhetoric is extreme, but that’s the point—we tend to think in extremes.
- Also, many studies have focused solely on pharmacological interventions, and are therefore not directly related to the RP model.
The RP model has been studied among individuals with both AUD and DUD (especially Cocaine Use Disorder, e.g., Carroll, Rounsaville, & Gawin, 1991); with the largest effect sizes identified in the treatment of AUD (Irvin, Bowers, Dunn, & Wang, 1999). As a newer iteration of RP, Mindfulness-Based Relapse Prevention (MBRP) has a less extensive abstinence violation effect research base, though it has been tested in samples with a range of SUDs (e.g., Bowen et al., 2009; Bowen et al., 2014; Witkiewitz et al., 2014). Self-efficacy (SE), the perceived ability to enact a given behavior in a specified context , is a principal determinant of health behavior according to social-cognitive theories.
3. Summary of the state of the literature
While a lapse might prompt a full-blown relapse, another possible outcome is that the problem behavior is corrected and the desired behavior re-instantiated–an event referred to as prolapse. A critical implication is that rather than signaling a failure in the behavior change process, lapses can be considered temporary setbacks that present opportunities for new learning to occur. In viewing relapse as a common (albeit undesirable) event, emphasizing contextual antecedents over internal causes, and distinguishing relapse from treatment failure, the RP model introduced a comprehensive, flexible and optimistic alternative to traditional approaches. Most notably, we provide a recent update of the RP literature by focusing primarily on studies conducted within the last decade.
In 1990, Marlatt was introduced to the philosophy of harm reduction during a trip to the Netherlands (Marlatt, 1998). He adopted the language and framework of harm reduction in his own research, and in 1998 published a seminal book on harm reduction strategies for a range of substances and behaviors (Marlatt, 1998). Marlatt’s work inspired the development of multiple nonabstinence treatment models, including harm reduction psychotherapy (Blume, 2012; Denning, 2000; Tatarsky, 2002). Additionally, while early studies of SUD treatment used abstinence as the single measure of treatment effectiveness, by the late 1980s and early 1990s researchers were increasingly incorporating psychosocial, health, and quality of life measures (Miller, 1994). The use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) techniques in addictions research has increased dramatically in the last decade  and many of these studies have been instrumental in providing initial evidence on neural correlates of substance use and relapse. In one study of treatment-seeking methamphetamine users , researchers examined fMRI activation during a decision-making task and obtained information on relapse over one year later.
Does 12-Step Contribute to the AVE?
However, these interventions also typically lack an abstinence focus and sometimes result in reductions in drug use. Multiple versions of harm reduction psychotherapy for alcohol and drug use have been described in detail but not yet studied empirically. However, to date there have been no published empirical trials testing the effectiveness of the approach. Here we provide a brief review of existing models of nonabstinence psychosocial treatment, with the goal of summarizing the state of the literature and identifying notable gaps and directions for future research. Previous reviews have described nonabstinence pharmacological approaches (e.g., Connery, 2015; Palpacuer et al., 2018), which are outside the scope of the current review. We first describe treatment models with an explicit harm reduction or nonabstinence focus.
- If, however, individuals view lapses as temporary setbacks or errors in the process of learning a new skill, they can renew their efforts to remain abstinent.
- McCrady  conducted a comprehensive review of 62 alcohol treatment outcome studies comprising 13 psychosocial approaches.
- Subsequently, the therapist can address each expectancy, using cognitive restructuring (which is discussed later in this section) and education about research findings.
- It’s fine to acknowledge them, but not to dwell on them, because they could hinder the most important action to take immediately—seeking help.
- However, it is also possible that adaptations will be needed for individuals with nonabstinence goals (e.g., additional support with goal setting and monitoring drug use; ongoing care to support maintenance goals), and currently there is a dearth of research in this area.