 |
| Jim Morrison |
Being a music fan and musician, I've come to heed the grievous significance of chemical dependency in those musicians that I've looked up to. Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison (The Doors), Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain (Nirvana), Brian Jones (The Rolling Stones), Layne Staley (Alice In Chains), Shannon Hoon (Blind Melon) and Bradley Nowell (Sublime) are but a few examples from the incredibly long list of victims of drug-related deaths. An interesting point of fact to note is that Joplin, Morrison, Hendrix, Jones and Cobain all died at age 27, and are usually included in the "27 Club" among several other lesser known recording artists.
Below, I am posting a paper on a study I performed in 2008 concerning the issue of musicians and chemical dependency. Results and analysis were based on an anonymous online survey I created. The purpose of the study was to determine whether or not being a musician increases the likelihood of being admitted into chemical dependency treatment with an inversely lower rate of recovery than non-musicians. The survey used is also included following the references section. Feel free to comment. Please excuse the crude formatting as the text was pasted from my original paper and some of the spacing was lost.
Chemical dependency in musicians and non-musicians
 |
Layne Staley and Shannon Hoon |
Submitted to:
Dr. Joe R. Limas
Submitted by:
Stephen Johnny Davis
Amberton University
06/05/2008
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of Theory and Application of Research Methods
Abstract
Table of Figures iv
CHAPTER I: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY 1
Introduction 1
Purpose of the Study: 3
Statement of the Problem and Sub problems 3
Hypothesis 4
Variables of the Study 4
Significance of the Study 5
Operational Definitions 5
Assumptions 7
Delimitations 7
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW 8
Group Comparisons 10
Biological and Psychological Difference between Musicians and Non-Musicians 12
Lifestyles and Chemical Dependency 13
Treatment Methods 14
Consideration of Prior Research 15
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 16
Population 16
Sampling Design 16
Data Collection and Measuring Instrument 17
Data Analysis 18
Validity and Reliability 21
CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS and CONCLUSIONS 22
Findings 23
Conclusions 23
Limitations 24
Implications 26
Recommendations for Future Research 26
Reference Section 27
APPENDIX B 29
CHAPTER I: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
This chapter will discuss chemical dependency as it relates to musicians and non-musicians. Prior research findings in the general treatment of chemical dependency will be briefly introduced to provide a framework for the research problem and the significance of this study. The hypothesis of this study will be stated, and several terms that are specific to this study will be defined as well as the different variables. Lastly, the assumptions made going into this study will be discussed as well as the delimitations.
Dr. Joe R. Limas
Submitted by:
Stephen Johnny Davis
Amberton University
06/05/2008
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of Theory and Application of Research Methods
Abstract
A cross-sectional population study of 61 people was performed to test the hypothesis that musicians have a higher rate of admission to drug treatment programs than non-musicians with an inversely higher rate of recovery for non-musicians who have completed treatment than musicians. Questionnaire answers showed musicians were more likely to seek treatment for chemical dependency, however they were also more likely to achieve longer terms of sobriety. This is a significant finding in that one group of people was able to achieve longer terms of sobriety than another group of people. It is not possible to determine from this particular study with any degree of certainty what particular factors caused the two groups to show different treatment outcomes other than the variable of musicianship.
 |
 |
Introduction 1
Purpose of the Study: 3
Statement of the Problem and Sub problems 3
Hypothesis 4
Variables of the Study 4
Significance of the Study 5
Operational Definitions 5
Assumptions 7
Delimitations 7
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW 8
Group Comparisons 10
Biological and Psychological Difference between Musicians and Non-Musicians 12
Lifestyles and Chemical Dependency 13
Treatment Methods 14
Consideration of Prior Research 15
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 16
Population 16
Sampling Design 16
Data Collection and Measuring Instrument 17
Data Analysis 18
Validity and Reliability 21
CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS and CONCLUSIONS 22
Findings 23
Conclusions 23
Limitations 24
Implications 26
Recommendations for Future Research 26
Reference Section 27
APPENDIX B 29
 |
| Bradley Nowell (Sublime) |
This chapter will discuss chemical dependency as it relates to musicians and non-musicians. Prior research findings in the general treatment of chemical dependency will be briefly introduced to provide a framework for the research problem and the significance of this study. The hypothesis of this study will be stated, and several terms that are specific to this study will be defined as well as the different variables. Lastly, the assumptions made going into this study will be discussed as well as the delimitations.
Introduction
Throughout recent history, a number of famous musicians have battled with chronic drug abuse and in some tragic cases this abuse has led to death. Elvis Presley, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, and Kurt Cobain and Layne Staley are some examples of high-profile drug-related deaths of musicians. Some musicians who have continued to battle with their addiction have utilized treatment for drug and alcohol addiction previously. Scott Wylen from Stone Temple Pilots and Velvet Revolver for example has had multiple drug-related arrests and stays in drug treatment facilities and has continued to have issues with addiction (Rolling Stone, 2008).
Musicians frequently live fast-paced, temptation-filled life styles, whether it is on the road gigging from club to club performing into the late nights until the bars close. When exiting treatment, patients are often suggested to avoid the old hangouts and to cease social activities with their using and drinking friends, however this is not always a realistic possibility for musicians. Even with a change of environment musicians have been known to fall right back into old habits. With the case of Staley, after his departure with Alice In Chains, he joined a group of known recovering musicians in a band called Mad Season. Despite the seemingly safer environment, and introspective lyrics written by Staley such as “my pain is self-chosen” (Staley, 1995 from song River of Deceit), Staley continued to use heroin, and ended up re-joining Alice In Chains. During their MTV unplugged performance, Staley was clearly unhealthy with pale skin, dark circles under his eyes, and gloves that were intended to cover the tracks in his hands from heroin injection according to an anonymous source. Several years later Staley was found dead in his apartment in the University District Seattle from heroin overdose. He had been dead for two weeks at the time he was discovered by his accountant.
Throughout recent history, a number of famous musicians have battled with chronic drug abuse and in some tragic cases this abuse has led to death. Elvis Presley, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, and Kurt Cobain and Layne Staley are some examples of high-profile drug-related deaths of musicians. Some musicians who have continued to battle with their addiction have utilized treatment for drug and alcohol addiction previously. Scott Wylen from Stone Temple Pilots and Velvet Revolver for example has had multiple drug-related arrests and stays in drug treatment facilities and has continued to have issues with addiction (Rolling Stone, 2008).
 |
| Michael Jackson |
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to determine whether or not being a musician increases the likelihood of being admitted into chemical dependency treatment with an inversely lower rate of recovery than non-musicians. This study is not intended to ascertain which chemical dependency treatment methods work better than others in relation to musicians or non-musicians, but merely the outcome of treatment in relation to the possible propensity for treatment.
Statement of the Problem and Sub-Problems
In a 2008 research study on chemical dependency treatment, results showed that 67% of all patients (with no differentiation between musician and non-musician patients) were still abstinent after 6 months. (Harrison, Hoffmann, Hollister, Gibbs, Luxenberg, 2008) However, even if total abstinence is not achieved, addicted persons have been shown to benefit from treatment. One particular study showed longer terms of abstinence in general alcoholics who have received treatment versus those who have not. (Weisner, Constance 1,2; Matzger, Helen 1,3; Kaskutas, Lee Ann 3,4, 2001).
While several factors dictate the outcome of treatment success, the independent variable of a patient being a musician has not been given significant attention in recent studies, and is not highly weighed in ascertaining treatment methods for incoming patients. This may cause the success rates in previous studies to be misleading in cases where the patient is a musician. As a result, musicians may not be getting the appropriate amount or method of care. A quantitative study with an objective of determining outcomes by using predetermined questions for a sample population.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether or not being a musician increases the likelihood of being admitted into chemical dependency treatment with an inversely lower rate of recovery than non-musicians. This study is not intended to ascertain which chemical dependency treatment methods work better than others in relation to musicians or non-musicians, but merely the outcome of treatment in relation to the possible propensity for treatment.
Statement of the Problem and Sub-Problems
In a 2008 research study on chemical dependency treatment, results showed that 67% of all patients (with no differentiation between musician and non-musician patients) were still abstinent after 6 months. (Harrison, Hoffmann, Hollister, Gibbs, Luxenberg, 2008) However, even if total abstinence is not achieved, addicted persons have been shown to benefit from treatment. One particular study showed longer terms of abstinence in general alcoholics who have received treatment versus those who have not. (Weisner, Constance 1,2; Matzger, Helen 1,3; Kaskutas, Lee Ann 3,4, 2001).
 |
| Andrew Wood (Mother Love Bone) |
Hypothesis
Musicians have a higher rate of admission to drug treatment programs than non-musicians with an inversely higher rate of recovery for non-musicians who have completed treatment than musicians.
Musicians have a higher rate of admission to drug treatment programs than non-musicians with an inversely higher rate of recovery for non-musicians who have completed treatment than musicians.
Variables of the Study
The independent variable in this study is the characteristic of musicianship in an individual. Bear in mind that it is not limited to the characteristic of in a patient.
Dependent variables in this study will include the rate of admission into chemical dependency treatment, and the recovery rate of patients that have been treated.
Extraneous variables include the different types of treatment including inpatient, outpatient, and inpatient into outpatient follow-up and the particular drug(s) of choice of the patient whether it is alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, heroin or other. Another extraneous variable that will not be explored is that of the dual-diagnosis status in patients with for example chemical dependency and bi-polar disorder.
The independent variable in this study is the characteristic of musicianship in an individual. Bear in mind that it is not limited to the characteristic of in a patient.
Dependent variables in this study will include the rate of admission into chemical dependency treatment, and the recovery rate of patients that have been treated.
Extraneous variables include the different types of treatment including inpatient, outpatient, and inpatient into outpatient follow-up and the particular drug(s) of choice of the patient whether it is alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, heroin or other. Another extraneous variable that will not be explored is that of the dual-diagnosis status in patients with for example chemical dependency and bi-polar disorder.
Significance of the Study
The results of this study will be significant for determining whether or not special considerations should be given in treating musicians for chemical dependency. Specifically, treatment facilities may be better prepared in planning treatment curriculums, as well as organizations such as MAP (Musicians Assistance Program) in the assistance they provide in referring its members to treatment.
The results of this study will be significant for determining whether or not special considerations should be given in treating musicians for chemical dependency. Specifically, treatment facilities may be better prepared in planning treatment curriculums, as well as organizations such as MAP (Musicians Assistance Program) in the assistance they provide in referring its members to treatment.
Operational Definitions
For the purposes of this study, there will be a number of operational definitions.
Chemical Dependency: This term will refer to the continued use of any mind-altering chemicals including alcohol by a person despite negative life consequences.
Treatment: Although there are various types and methods of treatment, this term will refer to any state or federally regulated chemical dependency facility services/curriculum including inpatient, outpatient or inpatient to outpatient follow-up.
Musicianship: Because musicianship is such a broad term, for the purposes of this study musicianship will be defined as the characteristic of a person who is actively writing, recording or performing music, or any combination of the three.
Musician: A musician will be an individual with the characteristic of musicianship as previously described.
Non-Musician: Any person that does not exhibit the characteristic of musicianship as previously described.
Recovery: The term recovery has an especially broad meaning in real-life situations however must have some measurable determination for this study. Any patient who completes treatment and remains abstinent for 6 months or more will be considered as exhibiting a state of recovery.
Recovery Rate: This term will refer to the number of patients that have exhibited a sufficient state of recovery.
Length of Recovery: Once a patient has achieved a state of recovery, their length of recovery refers to the entire amount of time they have been abstinent from mind-altering chemicals, not just the amount of time after 6 months.
For the purposes of this study, there will be a number of operational definitions.
Chemical Dependency: This term will refer to the continued use of any mind-altering chemicals including alcohol by a person despite negative life consequences.
Treatment: Although there are various types and methods of treatment, this term will refer to any state or federally regulated chemical dependency facility services/curriculum including inpatient, outpatient or inpatient to outpatient follow-up.
 |
| Kurt Cobain (Nirvana) |
Musician: A musician will be an individual with the characteristic of musicianship as previously described.
Non-Musician: Any person that does not exhibit the characteristic of musicianship as previously described.
Recovery: The term recovery has an especially broad meaning in real-life situations however must have some measurable determination for this study. Any patient who completes treatment and remains abstinent for 6 months or more will be considered as exhibiting a state of recovery.
Recovery Rate: This term will refer to the number of patients that have exhibited a sufficient state of recovery.
Length of Recovery: Once a patient has achieved a state of recovery, their length of recovery refers to the entire amount of time they have been abstinent from mind-altering chemicals, not just the amount of time after 6 months.
Assumptions
It is assumed that the research questionnaire will be answered honestly by those participating because it is entirely voluntary and anonymous. It is also assumed that participation will be no more appealing to either non-musicians or musicians. Also, because this is an on-line questionnaire with easy accessibility, it is assumed that the sample size will be a more-than-adequate reflection of the whole population.
Delimitations
There are a few delimitations of this study. First, due to the nature of the research questionnaire being accessed on-line with no log-in or password requirement for the purpose of ensuring anonymity, it is possible that someone could complete the questionnaire multiple times, or give knowingly false answers. Second, although this questionnaire will reside in its own domain and website, it will largely be advertised through on-line networking websites such as Myspace and Facebook. Although these sites contain members from all age groups, this may or may not bias the age group and lifestyle demographics of the research sample. Lastly, this study is limited by the brief period of 10 weeks allotted for research and presentation of research findings.
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter two will introduce several issues regarding chemical dependency treatment as it relates to particular groups, differences between musicians and non-musicians, and examining the efficiency of particular methods of treatment. In the preparation for this study, there were no specific comparative studies found between musicians and non-musicians regarding chemical dependency treatment efficiency.
This study is based on the hypothesis that musicians have a higher rate of admission to drug treatment programs than non-musicians with an inversely higher rate of recovery for non-musicians who have completed treatment than musicians. At this time there is no direct opposition to the hypothesis presented in this study. This creates an element of importance in researching this topic. “Certainly an inordinate number of rock musicians have died in their twenties, which is not surprising considering that lifestyle factors, including drug and alcohol abuse, played a role in most of these deaths” (Cross, 2007, p. 14) There has been a correlation between the deaths of famous musicians from drugs as it relates to age. “Kurt Cobain was not alone when his life was cut short so tragically and so young. There have been other rock legends who also died, some say mysteriously, at the age of 27” (BBC Radio 2. Access date 19 June, 2007). Some refer to this as the 27 Club which includes musicians who died of both drug-related and non-drug-related deaths. Along with Cobain, other musicians who died from drug-related at the age of 27 circumstances include Jim Morrison of the Doors, Janis Joplin, and Jimi Hendrix.
Despite the lack of direct prior research, it will be useful to examine issues surrounding chemical dependency in different groups of people and how they compare. For example, in a Los Angeles County from 1998 though 2000, African American and Hispanic patients were significantly less likely to complete treatment as compared with Caucasian patients (Bluthenthal, Jacobson, Robinson, 2007).
Although there has been no specific link yet discovered through preparations for this study pertaining to physiological or cognitive differences between musicians and non-musicians with regard to chemical dependency, it is useful to examine prior research regarding differences in the brain when comparing musicians with non-musicians.
Also, as with many issues pertaining to physical and mental health, lifestyle will be examined as it correlates to chemical dependency. Treatment method effectiveness will also be explored. A supported hypothesis of this study would conclude that there is a need to take musicianship into account when planning treatment. One aspect is that of treatment length. There is prior research literature that will be discussed that opposes the suggestion that treatment length correlates to the results in the patients’ recovery.
There are a few delimitations of this study. First, due to the nature of the research questionnaire being accessed on-line with no log-in or password requirement for the purpose of ensuring anonymity, it is possible that someone could complete the questionnaire multiple times, or give knowingly false answers. Second, although this questionnaire will reside in its own domain and website, it will largely be advertised through on-line networking websites such as Myspace and Facebook. Although these sites contain members from all age groups, this may or may not bias the age group and lifestyle demographics of the research sample. Lastly, this study is limited by the brief period of 10 weeks allotted for research and presentation of research findings.
 |
| Bon Scott (AC/DC) |
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter two will introduce several issues regarding chemical dependency treatment as it relates to particular groups, differences between musicians and non-musicians, and examining the efficiency of particular methods of treatment. In the preparation for this study, there were no specific comparative studies found between musicians and non-musicians regarding chemical dependency treatment efficiency.
This study is based on the hypothesis that musicians have a higher rate of admission to drug treatment programs than non-musicians with an inversely higher rate of recovery for non-musicians who have completed treatment than musicians. At this time there is no direct opposition to the hypothesis presented in this study. This creates an element of importance in researching this topic. “Certainly an inordinate number of rock musicians have died in their twenties, which is not surprising considering that lifestyle factors, including drug and alcohol abuse, played a role in most of these deaths” (Cross, 2007, p. 14) There has been a correlation between the deaths of famous musicians from drugs as it relates to age. “Kurt Cobain was not alone when his life was cut short so tragically and so young. There have been other rock legends who also died, some say mysteriously, at the age of 27” (BBC Radio 2. Access date 19 June, 2007). Some refer to this as the 27 Club which includes musicians who died of both drug-related and non-drug-related deaths. Along with Cobain, other musicians who died from drug-related at the age of 27 circumstances include Jim Morrison of the Doors, Janis Joplin, and Jimi Hendrix.
 |
| Phil Lynott (Thin Lizzy) |
Although there has been no specific link yet discovered through preparations for this study pertaining to physiological or cognitive differences between musicians and non-musicians with regard to chemical dependency, it is useful to examine prior research regarding differences in the brain when comparing musicians with non-musicians.
Also, as with many issues pertaining to physical and mental health, lifestyle will be examined as it correlates to chemical dependency. Treatment method effectiveness will also be explored. A supported hypothesis of this study would conclude that there is a need to take musicianship into account when planning treatment. One aspect is that of treatment length. There is prior research literature that will be discussed that opposes the suggestion that treatment length correlates to the results in the patients’ recovery.
Group Comparisons in Chemical Dependency
There have been several studies comparing different groups of people in aspects of chemical dependency. In a 1991 study, musicians were used as one of the focus groups found that there was a higher frequency of the use of cocaine by musicians when compared to writers, artists, and controls. Musicians were found to have used marijuana in greater proportion than other groups. The results did not show a significant difference in the use of alcohol, narcotics, hallucinogens, or tranquilizers however (Kerr, Shaffer, Chambers, Hallowell, 1991).
In a study of Jazz musician patients compared with a control group showed differences from typical addicts in family status, heterosexual interests, vocational success, and in having a relatively strong father figure. Taking drugs seemed to quell rage and hostility (Winick, Nyswander, 1961). A recent 2006 study, placed emphasis on the role of marijuana and heroin over several era of Jazz production. (Singer, Mirhej, 2006).
Another study compared cocaine-dependent patients with those with marijuana dependence. Results found that marijuana-dependent patients were younger than cocaine-dependent patients. Those with marijuana dependence were also less likely to be dependent on other drugs, including alcohol, and had a lower number of dependence symptoms, but higher withdrawal symptoms (Levin, Brooks, Bisaga, Raby, Rubin, Aharonovich, Nunes, 2006)
With chemical dependency playing such a key role in the many aspects of life and the tendencies of musicians to behave or react in various ways paves a road for further research on group comparisons. This research will be useful for future patient assessment.
Biological and Psychological Difference between Musicians and Non-Musicians
There have also been studies pertaining to psychological differences in musicians when compared with non-musicians. In a 2005 study comparing primary mental abilities between 70 musicians and 70 non-musicians, musicians showed superior performance in two abilities, Flexibility of Closure and Perceptual Speed (Helmbold, Rammsayer, Altenmuller, 2005). Flexibility of Closure was defined by a 1968 study on Cognitive Style and the Ability to Generalize Behavioral Competencies as “…the ability to demonstrate selective attention to a specified set of elements when presented within various settings (the larger the number of settings from which the desired set of elements can be selected, the higher the level of flexibility of closure)” (Carter, 1968, p.1).
Another study examining differences in the brain of musicians, using a voxel-by-voxel morphometric technique, gray matter volume differences were found in motor, auditory, and visual-spatial brain regions when comparing professional musicians amateur musicians and non-musicians. The definition of professional musicians in this instance was limited to the category of keyboard players (Gaser, Schlaug, 2003).
In a 2007 study, musicians were shown to be able to copy drawings of physically impossible objects more accurately than non-musician. It was concluded in the study that visual processing of local details is superior in those with musical training (Stoesz, Jakobson, Kilgour, Lewycky, 2007). Another study showed that brainstem responses in musicians occurred earlier when both speech and music stimuli were presented in auditory and audiovisual conditions. It was concluded that practice-related changes in the early sensory encoding of audiovisual and auditory information was demonstrated by these findings (Musacchia, Sams, Skoe, Kraus, 2007).
As is evident in prior research, musicians and non-musicians have specific psychological and physiological differences. This leaves an open door for further research to examine possible psychological and physiological differences in regard to chemical dependency.
There have been several studies comparing different groups of people in aspects of chemical dependency. In a 1991 study, musicians were used as one of the focus groups found that there was a higher frequency of the use of cocaine by musicians when compared to writers, artists, and controls. Musicians were found to have used marijuana in greater proportion than other groups. The results did not show a significant difference in the use of alcohol, narcotics, hallucinogens, or tranquilizers however (Kerr, Shaffer, Chambers, Hallowell, 1991).
In a study of Jazz musician patients compared with a control group showed differences from typical addicts in family status, heterosexual interests, vocational success, and in having a relatively strong father figure. Taking drugs seemed to quell rage and hostility (Winick, Nyswander, 1961). A recent 2006 study, placed emphasis on the role of marijuana and heroin over several era of Jazz production. (Singer, Mirhej, 2006).
 |
| John Bonham (Led Zeppelin) |
Another study compared cocaine-dependent patients with those with marijuana dependence. Results found that marijuana-dependent patients were younger than cocaine-dependent patients. Those with marijuana dependence were also less likely to be dependent on other drugs, including alcohol, and had a lower number of dependence symptoms, but higher withdrawal symptoms (Levin, Brooks, Bisaga, Raby, Rubin, Aharonovich, Nunes, 2006)
With chemical dependency playing such a key role in the many aspects of life and the tendencies of musicians to behave or react in various ways paves a road for further research on group comparisons. This research will be useful for future patient assessment.
Biological and Psychological Difference between Musicians and Non-Musicians
There have also been studies pertaining to psychological differences in musicians when compared with non-musicians. In a 2005 study comparing primary mental abilities between 70 musicians and 70 non-musicians, musicians showed superior performance in two abilities, Flexibility of Closure and Perceptual Speed (Helmbold, Rammsayer, Altenmuller, 2005). Flexibility of Closure was defined by a 1968 study on Cognitive Style and the Ability to Generalize Behavioral Competencies as “…the ability to demonstrate selective attention to a specified set of elements when presented within various settings (the larger the number of settings from which the desired set of elements can be selected, the higher the level of flexibility of closure)” (Carter, 1968, p.1).
Another study examining differences in the brain of musicians, using a voxel-by-voxel morphometric technique, gray matter volume differences were found in motor, auditory, and visual-spatial brain regions when comparing professional musicians amateur musicians and non-musicians. The definition of professional musicians in this instance was limited to the category of keyboard players (Gaser, Schlaug, 2003).
In a 2007 study, musicians were shown to be able to copy drawings of physically impossible objects more accurately than non-musician. It was concluded in the study that visual processing of local details is superior in those with musical training (Stoesz, Jakobson, Kilgour, Lewycky, 2007). Another study showed that brainstem responses in musicians occurred earlier when both speech and music stimuli were presented in auditory and audiovisual conditions. It was concluded that practice-related changes in the early sensory encoding of audiovisual and auditory information was demonstrated by these findings (Musacchia, Sams, Skoe, Kraus, 2007).
As is evident in prior research, musicians and non-musicians have specific psychological and physiological differences. This leaves an open door for further research to examine possible psychological and physiological differences in regard to chemical dependency.
 |
| Gram Parsons (The Byrds) |
Lifestyle and Chemical Dependency
Lifestyle is a factor that plays a role in the likelihood of a person using drugs. In a 2000 study of 96 individuals who attended raves, twenty percent tested positive for ecstasy through saliva samples (Arria, Yacoubian, Fost, Wish, 2002). Atmosphere and social groups are largely responsible for the exposure of individuals to different substances.
With musicians it is exceptionally easy to find peers that use mind-altering substances. In a study where 32 non-professional musicians from Finland were interviewed, it was concluded, “…especially descriptions of drinking at gigs suggest that in the late 1990s in Finland, drinking is experienced as an essential and unavoidable part of amateur band life.” (Gronnerod, 2002) It was also concluded that one of the connecting factors to substance was a means to induce creativity new musical experiences.
A study comparing recovering chemically dependent nurses and nurses not classified as chemically dependent showed major difference in gender, alcoholism and depression in the family, sexual problems, sexual orientation, and marital history including alcoholism in the spouse among other aspects (Sullivan, 1987).
Lifestyle is a factor that plays a role in the likelihood of a person using drugs. In a 2000 study of 96 individuals who attended raves, twenty percent tested positive for ecstasy through saliva samples (Arria, Yacoubian, Fost, Wish, 2002). Atmosphere and social groups are largely responsible for the exposure of individuals to different substances.
With musicians it is exceptionally easy to find peers that use mind-altering substances. In a study where 32 non-professional musicians from Finland were interviewed, it was concluded, “…especially descriptions of drinking at gigs suggest that in the late 1990s in Finland, drinking is experienced as an essential and unavoidable part of amateur band life.” (Gronnerod, 2002) It was also concluded that one of the connecting factors to substance was a means to induce creativity new musical experiences.
A study comparing recovering chemically dependent nurses and nurses not classified as chemically dependent showed major difference in gender, alcoholism and depression in the family, sexual problems, sexual orientation, and marital history including alcoholism in the spouse among other aspects (Sullivan, 1987).
Treatment Methods
It is also important to examine the effectiveness of chemical dependency treatment methods in relation to different demographics. Prior research has concluded that demographic factors can play a role in the effectiveness of treatment. In a recent 2008 study, social model residential treatment and clinically-oriented day hospital programs were examined to decide whether the outcomes delivered with comparable overall costs, as well as within gender and ethnicity factors (Kaskutas, Zavala, Parthasarthy, Witbrodt, 2008). With women and whites, the outcome of costs at day hospital versus residential were similar, however for non-whites, residential treatment showed significantly higher costs. Men showed marginally higher costs in residential treatment. The study also concluded that residential treatment stays were significantly longer however the weekly costs were lower.
However, there is argument that treatment method is not a significant factor when comparing inpatient, outpatient, and inpatient-to-outpatient, a study of 319 alcoholics with or without concurrent drug use disorders, a 6-month follow-up of 73% of the patients revealed a 67% abstinence rate with no significant differences between inpatient, outpatient, and inpatient-to-outpatient (Harrison, Hoffman, Gibbs, Hollister, Luxemburg, 1988). These findings did not use musicians as a focus group or variable.
It is also important to examine the effectiveness of chemical dependency treatment methods in relation to different demographics. Prior research has concluded that demographic factors can play a role in the effectiveness of treatment. In a recent 2008 study, social model residential treatment and clinically-oriented day hospital programs were examined to decide whether the outcomes delivered with comparable overall costs, as well as within gender and ethnicity factors (Kaskutas, Zavala, Parthasarthy, Witbrodt, 2008). With women and whites, the outcome of costs at day hospital versus residential were similar, however for non-whites, residential treatment showed significantly higher costs. Men showed marginally higher costs in residential treatment. The study also concluded that residential treatment stays were significantly longer however the weekly costs were lower.
However, there is argument that treatment method is not a significant factor when comparing inpatient, outpatient, and inpatient-to-outpatient, a study of 319 alcoholics with or without concurrent drug use disorders, a 6-month follow-up of 73% of the patients revealed a 67% abstinence rate with no significant differences between inpatient, outpatient, and inpatient-to-outpatient (Harrison, Hoffman, Gibbs, Hollister, Luxemburg, 1988). These findings did not use musicians as a focus group or variable.
Consideration of Prior Research
After examining prior research literature on these topics of group differences, psychological and physiological differences in musicians, chemical dependency lifestyles and treatment methods, a framework for this study has been established. It opens the door for this study to explore how musicians compare to non-musicians regarding chemical dependency treatment, as there are several differences in both social and psychological aspect of each group. It also offers the opportunity to determine the efficiency of treatment length for both groups. It certainly reveals that more research is needed on this topic.
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY
I. Population
This third chapter will discuss the methodology used for this research. The study population will be examined in terms of the sampling design, the data collection instrument used, the means to measure the collected data, and the analysis of the data.
Finally, the design, collection, measurement and analysis will be discussed in terms of validity and reliability. The strengths and weaknesses of the study data will be addressed.
II. Population
Sampling Design
For the purpose of testing the hypothesis of this research, it was necessary to gain access to a population of people who may or may not have had chemical dependency treatment. In addition, it was necessary to make a distinction between those who sought treatment that were musicians and those who sought treatment that were not musicians. It was determined that a cross-sectional study design would be the most effective. As the aim is to collect data from people who have previously sought chemical dependency treatment, the reference period for this study is retrospective. It was also useful to gauge the demographics with questions regarding age, education level, and gender.
This was a non-experimental study. There were no independent variables that could be manipulated or changed. The goals were to determine the total number of people who sought chemical dependency treatment, finding which of two groups they fall into, and the treatment outcomes for both groups. In this way, effects may hypothetically be linked with a cause.
 |
| Layne Staley (Alice In Chains) |
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY
I. Population
This third chapter will discuss the methodology used for this research. The study population will be examined in terms of the sampling design, the data collection instrument used, the means to measure the collected data, and the analysis of the data.
Finally, the design, collection, measurement and analysis will be discussed in terms of validity and reliability. The strengths and weaknesses of the study data will be addressed.
II. Population
Sampling Design
For the purpose of testing the hypothesis of this research, it was necessary to gain access to a population of people who may or may not have had chemical dependency treatment. In addition, it was necessary to make a distinction between those who sought treatment that were musicians and those who sought treatment that were not musicians. It was determined that a cross-sectional study design would be the most effective. As the aim is to collect data from people who have previously sought chemical dependency treatment, the reference period for this study is retrospective. It was also useful to gauge the demographics with questions regarding age, education level, and gender.
This was a non-experimental study. There were no independent variables that could be manipulated or changed. The goals were to determine the total number of people who sought chemical dependency treatment, finding which of two groups they fall into, and the treatment outcomes for both groups. In this way, effects may hypothetically be linked with a cause.
Data Collection and Measuring Instrument
Due to the sensitive nature of the research topic, it was necessary to stress the anonymity factor of the questionnaire to potential participants of this study. Participants were not individually contacted to request their participation. It was also not possible to gain access to confidential records of treatment facilities or likely feasible to determine which of their patients had been musicians.
An instrument had to be developed that not only guaranteed anonymity of its participants, but also needed the distributing power to reach enough people so that a large enough cross-sectional study population could be accumulated. It was determined that an online form questionnaire was the best way for people to gain access to the questions without being seen. Not only would their answers be safe, nobody would be able to find out if they had ever participated in this questionnaire. There was no place to have them fill out a form, and no third party that needed to be contacted for assistance in finding participants.
The form was built and needed to be distributed, and it was determined that myspace.com would be a very efficient way of spreading the word. There were two main reasons that myspace was determined to be effective. First, there are people of all ages, genders, and lifestyles on myspace, so it is in effect a virtual community. Second, myspace has a bulletin feature that enables any user to post a message to all of their contacts “advertising” this questionnaire. Because this questionnaire is interested in a general population, and not only people that have had chemical dependency treatment or only musicians, everyone can feel comfortable giving the questionnaire a “plug”.
Due to the sensitive nature of the research topic, it was necessary to stress the anonymity factor of the questionnaire to potential participants of this study. Participants were not individually contacted to request their participation. It was also not possible to gain access to confidential records of treatment facilities or likely feasible to determine which of their patients had been musicians.
An instrument had to be developed that not only guaranteed anonymity of its participants, but also needed the distributing power to reach enough people so that a large enough cross-sectional study population could be accumulated. It was determined that an online form questionnaire was the best way for people to gain access to the questions without being seen. Not only would their answers be safe, nobody would be able to find out if they had ever participated in this questionnaire. There was no place to have them fill out a form, and no third party that needed to be contacted for assistance in finding participants.
 |
| Elvis Presley |
Data Analysis
The electronic questionnaire was built with the capability of evaluating responses with the capability of filtering responses based on any particular response. For example, it was possible to analyze responses from just those respondents who answered, yes to seeking treatment. Responses could be isolated for those that answered, yes to being a musician and so on.
Data was collected from sixty-one online research questionnaire respondents over a period of approximately three weeks. The majority of respondents completed the questionnaire within the first week of it being posted online, however there were still people responding up to the time of this report.
Treatment Admission Statistics
Results showed that 14.8% of the total respondents were musicians. Out of the musician respondents, 55.6% had previously sought treatment for chemical dependency, while only 13.5% of non-musicians had previously sought treatment. Out of the total number of respondents, musician or not, 50% went through inpatient treatment and 50% did not. Musicians had a 60% likelihood of inpatient treatment as opposed to non-musicians showing only 42.9%.
Of the total respondents that went to inpatient treatment, 50% spent between sixteen to thirty days in the facility, while 50% spent between thirty-one to sixty days. 67% of musicians stayed between sixteen to thirty days, while non-musicians were split 50/50 between the two time-length categories.
Treatment Results Statistics
The two most likely sobriety outcomes for the total respondents that sought treatment were one week of sobriety with 25% of all respondents falling into this category and five or more years of sobriety which also included 25% of all respondents. Of the musicians who had treatment, 40% relapsed after the first week. However, of the musicians who relapsed at any time following their treatment, 40% achieved five years of sobriety or more following a relapse.
Almost 30% of non-musician respondents relapsed after one day of completing treatment and 43% had relapsed by the end of the first week following treatment. Slightly less than 30% had five years of sobriety or more. Non-musicians who relapsed showed a 14.3% likelihood of getting five years of sobriety or more following the relapse. This was in sharp contrast to the 40% of musicians who achieved five years or more following a relapse.
While over 28% of non-musicians that went to treatment never went to 12-Step meetings afterward, all musicians that went to treatment indicated they went to 12-Step meetings at least occasionally. Demographic factors such as age, gender, and education levels had no significant differences in results.
Validity and Reliability
The data collection and measurement instruments used for this study were effective in measuring what the research was intended to measure, providing a high degree of face validity. The questionnaire results were able to capture the different groups of focus, including those who sought chemical dependency treatment who were not musicians, and those who were musicians, with measurement ability capable of filtering responses for both groups. Results were also able to capture and filter responses for those who were musicians that did not seek treatment, as well as non-musicians that did not seek treatment. With the ability to filter responses for each group, this study was able to isolate particular demographics, and treatment outcomes among the different groups, providing a high degree of content validity.
Questions were effective in providing a high degree of accuracy and precision of measurement. This made the data collection and analysis very reliable. Questions contained no ambiguity as the wording was specific, and provided definitions of terms so that there was no confusion in answering questions.
There was no ambiguity in the wording of the research questionnaire. As there was only one opportunity to answer questions, reliability factors for repeated responses were not relevant. Due to time and financial constraints, the study was unable to test reliability with parallel form of the same test.
In summary, the study was conducted with an effective method of finding an appropriate cross-section population and efficiency in collecting data. Because responses could be filtered, the study was able to isolate particular group responses electronically and accurately. The anonymity, absence of ambiguity in the questionnaire and absence of repeat participation reliability factors provided a highly efficient research methodology. The data was partially congruent with the hypothesis in that musicians were more likely to enter treatment, although they were also more likely to gain long-term sobriety.
CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
I. Introduction
Chapter 4 will focus on the findings of this study. The results from the research questionnaire will be discussed in detail, along with study conclusions, limitations encountered during the research, implications of this study, and suggestions for further research on this topic.
II. Findings
Data was collected from sixty-one online research questionnaire respondents over a period of approximately three weeks. The majority of respondents completed the questionnaire within the first week of it being posted online, however there were still people responding up to the time of this report.
The data analysis showed that there were a substantially higher proportion of musicians who had sought chemical dependency treatment than non-musicians. Musicians also had a higher likelihood of inpatient treatment versus outpatient than non-musicians.
Musicians showed a higher propensity to relapse quickly, however also had a higher propensity to achieve long-term sobriety following a relapse.
Results also showed that over a quarter of non-musicians never followed up treatment with 12-Step involvement, while all musicians reported at least some degree of involvement with 12-Step groups.
III. Conclusions
While several factors dictate the outcome of treatment success, the independent variable of a patient being a musician has not been given significant attention in previous research studies, and has not been highly weighed in ascertaining treatment methods for incoming patients. It was assumed that this might have caused the success rates in previous studies to be misleading in cases where the patient was a musician. While the study was premised with an assumption that musicians might not be getting the proper level of treatment, the study’s results have raised new questions as to why it might be that musicians showed more success following treatment than non-musicians. The results showed that over a quarter of non-musicians that went through treatment never followed up with 12-Step meetings, while all of the musicians that went through treatment reported going at least occasionally. It is concluded that 12-Step involvement is an important factor in recovery success, however not the only factor.
The research hypothesis was partially based on the assumption that musicians often return to social environments containing drugs and alcohol. However, due to the inferior success rates of non-musicians, the study results have altered the previous assumption and suggest that it may be erroneous to assume that non-musicians have a lesser degree of pressure to return to their previous social environments.
 |
| Keith Moon (The Who) |
Questions were effective in providing a high degree of accuracy and precision of measurement. This made the data collection and analysis very reliable. Questions contained no ambiguity as the wording was specific, and provided definitions of terms so that there was no confusion in answering questions.
There was no ambiguity in the wording of the research questionnaire. As there was only one opportunity to answer questions, reliability factors for repeated responses were not relevant. Due to time and financial constraints, the study was unable to test reliability with parallel form of the same test.
In summary, the study was conducted with an effective method of finding an appropriate cross-section population and efficiency in collecting data. Because responses could be filtered, the study was able to isolate particular group responses electronically and accurately. The anonymity, absence of ambiguity in the questionnaire and absence of repeat participation reliability factors provided a highly efficient research methodology. The data was partially congruent with the hypothesis in that musicians were more likely to enter treatment, although they were also more likely to gain long-term sobriety.
CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
I. Introduction
Chapter 4 will focus on the findings of this study. The results from the research questionnaire will be discussed in detail, along with study conclusions, limitations encountered during the research, implications of this study, and suggestions for further research on this topic.
II. Findings
Data was collected from sixty-one online research questionnaire respondents over a period of approximately three weeks. The majority of respondents completed the questionnaire within the first week of it being posted online, however there were still people responding up to the time of this report.
The data analysis showed that there were a substantially higher proportion of musicians who had sought chemical dependency treatment than non-musicians. Musicians also had a higher likelihood of inpatient treatment versus outpatient than non-musicians.
Musicians showed a higher propensity to relapse quickly, however also had a higher propensity to achieve long-term sobriety following a relapse.
Results also showed that over a quarter of non-musicians never followed up treatment with 12-Step involvement, while all musicians reported at least some degree of involvement with 12-Step groups.
III. Conclusions
While several factors dictate the outcome of treatment success, the independent variable of a patient being a musician has not been given significant attention in previous research studies, and has not been highly weighed in ascertaining treatment methods for incoming patients. It was assumed that this might have caused the success rates in previous studies to be misleading in cases where the patient was a musician. While the study was premised with an assumption that musicians might not be getting the proper level of treatment, the study’s results have raised new questions as to why it might be that musicians showed more success following treatment than non-musicians. The results showed that over a quarter of non-musicians that went through treatment never followed up with 12-Step meetings, while all of the musicians that went through treatment reported going at least occasionally. It is concluded that 12-Step involvement is an important factor in recovery success, however not the only factor.
 |
| Hill Haley |
IV. Limitations
There were several limitations encountered during this study including those dealing with time constraints, budget, exposure, and population size.
This research was developed, performed, and analyzed within a short time constraint of only ten weeks. Due to the lack of time to develop a more capable system of data collection, the population size was far smaller than desired. This is not due to any technological limitation, but rather the extent to which the questionnaire could reach enough people. Had there been more time to allow the questionnaire to reach more people, it is likely that a more optimal number of musicians in particular would be able to provide responses relating to chemical dependency treatment.
Financial constraints limited the ability for the questionnaire to be advertised. Advertising in weekly papers would have potentially provided a much larger response to the online questionnaire.
These limitations ultimately resulted in a population size that was smaller than was desired, however was large enough to make this study worthwhile. As musicians only represented a fraction of the total respondents, it would have been far more useful to have ten times the number of total respondents to give more credibility to the statistical results of this study relating to musicians.
There were several limitations encountered during this study including those dealing with time constraints, budget, exposure, and population size.
This research was developed, performed, and analyzed within a short time constraint of only ten weeks. Due to the lack of time to develop a more capable system of data collection, the population size was far smaller than desired. This is not due to any technological limitation, but rather the extent to which the questionnaire could reach enough people. Had there been more time to allow the questionnaire to reach more people, it is likely that a more optimal number of musicians in particular would be able to provide responses relating to chemical dependency treatment.
Financial constraints limited the ability for the questionnaire to be advertised. Advertising in weekly papers would have potentially provided a much larger response to the online questionnaire.
These limitations ultimately resulted in a population size that was smaller than was desired, however was large enough to make this study worthwhile. As musicians only represented a fraction of the total respondents, it would have been far more useful to have ten times the number of total respondents to give more credibility to the statistical results of this study relating to musicians.
V. Implications
The study disproved the large scope of the research hypothesis. While musicians were found to be more likely to seek treatment for chemical dependency, they were also more likely to achieve longer terms of sobriety. This is a significant finding in that one group of people was able to achieve longer terms of sobriety than another group of people.
There may be several specific social environmental or psychological differences between musicians and non-musicians that may play key roles in the success of chemical dependency treatment. It is not possible to determine from this particular study with any degree of certainty what particular factors caused the two groups to show different treatment outcomes other than the variable of musicianship.
VI. Recommendations for Future Research
Due to the limited population size, it is suggested that further studies with larger populations be performed in order to corroborate the findings of this study. Future research with significantly larger time periods may be able to gain access to a larger population so that more data can be gathered from musicians in particular.
It is further recommended that future research focus on social environments and psychological factors as they relate to musicians and non-musicians in recovery.
The study disproved the large scope of the research hypothesis. While musicians were found to be more likely to seek treatment for chemical dependency, they were also more likely to achieve longer terms of sobriety. This is a significant finding in that one group of people was able to achieve longer terms of sobriety than another group of people.
 |
| Shannon Hoon (Blind Melon) |
There may be several specific social environmental or psychological differences between musicians and non-musicians that may play key roles in the success of chemical dependency treatment. It is not possible to determine from this particular study with any degree of certainty what particular factors caused the two groups to show different treatment outcomes other than the variable of musicianship.
VI. Recommendations for Future Research
Due to the limited population size, it is suggested that further studies with larger populations be performed in order to corroborate the findings of this study. Future research with significantly larger time periods may be able to gain access to a larger population so that more data can be gathered from musicians in particular.
It is further recommended that future research focus on social environments and psychological factors as they relate to musicians and non-musicians in recovery.
References
Edwards, Gavin, (2004, June 16) Revolver Loaded. Rolling Stone, 952 Retrieved July 17, 2008 from http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/scottweiland/articles/story/6185031/revolver_loaded
Staley, L. (1995) River of Deceit [Recorded by Mad Season]. On Above [CD] Location: Columbia Records
Harrison, P. A., Hoffman, N. G., Hollister, C. D., Gibbs, L., Luxenberg, M. G., (1988). Determinants of chemical dependency treatment placement: clinical, economic and logistic factors. Psychotherapy 25, 356-364.
Weisner, C., Matzger, H., Kaskutas, L. A. (2001).
Cross, Charles, R., (2007, February 23) P-I's Writer in Residence Charles R. Cross explores the darker side of 'only the good die young'. Seattle Post-Intelligencer Retrieved July 17, 2008 from http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/writers/304767_writer23.html
BBC Radio 2. Access date 19 June, 2007
Bluthenthal, R, Jacobson, J. O., Robinson, P. L. (2007). Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research; Nov 2007, 31 Issue 11, p1920-1926
Kerr, B., Shaffer, J., Chambers, C., Hallowell, K. (1991)
Journal of Creative Behavior, 25(2), 145-153.
Winick, C., Nyswander, M. (1961) Psychotherapy of successful musicians who are drug addicts. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 31, 622-636.
Singer, M., Mirhej, G., (2006). High Notes: The Role of Drugs in the Making of Jazz. Journal of Ethnicity in Substance Abuse, 5(4), 1-38.
Levin, F. R., Brooks, D. J., Bisaga, A., Raby, W., Rubin, E., Aharonovich, E., Nunes, E.V., (2006) Journal of Addictive Diseases, 25(1), 33-41.
Helmbold, N., Rammsayer, T., Altenmuller, E., (2005). Differences in Primary Mental Abilities Between Musicians and Nonmusicians. Journal of Individual Differences 2005; 26(2), 74–85.
Carter, H. L.,(1968).A Study of One Learner Cognitive Style and the Ability to Generalize Behavioral Competencies. No journal name given. Abstract
Gaser, C. & Schlaug, G., (2003). Brain Structures Differ between Musicians and Non-Musicians. The Journal of Neuroscience, October 8, 2003, 23(27), 9240-9245
Stoesz, B. M., Jakobson, L. S., Kilgour, A. R., Lewycky, S. T.,(2007). Local processing advantage in musicians: Evidence from disembedding and constructional tasks. Music Perception, 25(2), 153-165.
Masacchia, G., Sams, M., Skoe, E., Kraus, N., (2007). Musicians have enhanced subcortical auditory and audiovisual processing of speech and music. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(40), 15894-15898.
Arria, A. M., Yacoubian, G. S., Fost, E., Wish, E. (2002). Ecstasy use among club rave attendees.
Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med. 156, 295–296.
Gronnerod , J. S., (2002). The use of alcohol and cannabis in non-professional rock bands in Finland. Contemporary Drug Problems, 25, 417-440.
Sullivan, E. J., (2006). Comparison of chemically dependent and nondependent nurses on familial, personal and professional characteristics. Journal of Addictive Diseases, 25(1), 33-41.
Kaskutas, L. E., Zavala, K., Parthasarthy, S., Witbrodt, J.,(2008). Costs of day hospital and community residential chemical dependency treatment. Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics, 11(1), 27-32.
Appendix B
Chemical Dependency Treatment of Musicians and Non-Musicians Questionnaire
Exit this survey
1. Chemical Dependency Treatment of Musicians and Non-Musicians Questionnaire
Hello everyone, thank you for responding to my invitation! My name is Steve Davis and I am a graduate student at Amberton University in Garland, TX. I am conducting a research study on Chemical Dependency Treatment as it relates to musicians and non-musicians. There are only 12 questions.
In conducting this study I am attempting to discover if musicians have a higher rate of admission to drug treatment programs than non-musicians with an inversely higher rate of recovery for non-musicians who have completed treatment than musicians. Your answers will help determine if Treatment providers should consider musicianship as an important factor when assessing patients for Treatment.
I have created this web-based questionnaire with NO LOGIN. Your identity is unknown to myself or anyone else and is completely confidential and anonymous. Your answers are simply compiled with others' answers.
Because there is no login, I ask that you only fill this form out once as not to skew the results. I also ask that you please answer these questions honestly. Any questions or concerns may be directed to cdtreatmusic@yahoo.com. Thanks everyone!
1. In the past 3 years, have you recorded music or performed live music?
In the past 3 years, have you recorded music or performed live music? Yes No 2. Have you ever received treatment for alcohol or drug addiction/problems?
If you answer NO, please check NO for #2 and SKIP TO QUESTION #10.
Have you ever received treatment for alcohol or drug addiction/problems? If you answer NO, please check NO for #2 and SKIP TO QUESTION #10. Yes No 3. Was it inpatient or outpatient treatment?
Was it inpatient or outpatient treatment? Inpatient (Check this even if you had an outpatient follow-up.) Outpatient (ONLY if you never went to inpatient.) 4. If inpatient, how long did you stay in the inpatient facility?
If inpatient, how long did you stay in the inpatient facility? Not Applicable (Select this if you answered OUTPATIENT for question #3.) 1-15 Days 16-30 Days 31-60 Day Over 2 months 5. Did you attend an outpatient follow-up?
Did you attend an outpatient follow-up? Not Applicable (Select this if you answered OUTPATIENT for question #3.) Yes No 6. How often do you attend 12-Step meetings?
How often do you attend 12-Step meetings? Never Occasionally Semi-consistently Consistently 7. Without relapsing, how long have you been clean & sober? This includes the sobriety you started in Treatment. (If you relapsed, simply answer how long you were clean & sober before the relapse.)
Without relapsing, how long have you been clean & sober? This includes the sobriety you started in Treatment. (If you relapsed, simply answer how long you were clean & sober before the relapse.) 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month 2 Months 3 Months 4 Months 5 Months 6 Months 6 Months to a Year 1 to 2 Years 2 to 5 Years 5 Years or more 8. If you relapsed after treatment but got clean & sober again, what is your longest length of abstinence?
If you relapsed after treatment but got clean & sober again, what is your longest length of abstinence? Not Applicable (If you've never relapsed since treatment) 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month 2 Months 3 Months 4 Months 5 Months 6 Months 6 Months to a Year 1 to 2 Years 2 to 5 Years 5 Years or more 9. Are you drinking or using now?
(Even if it's just occasionally, please answer YES.)
Are you drinking or using now? (Even if it's just occasionally, please answer YES.) Yes No 10. How old are you?
How old are you? 13-18 19-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56 or older 11. What gender are you?
What gender are you? Male Female 12. What is your education level?
What is your education level? Grade-Middle School High School Diploma or GED Some College Bachelor's Degree Some Graduate Graduate Degree <!--[if !supportAnnotations]-->
<!--[endif]-->