Running head: LIN ARTICLE CRITIQUE PART ONE

LIN ARTICLE CRITIQUE PART ONE Liberty University

LIN ARTICLE CRITIQUE PART ONE Summary

This article begins by assessing that anger and violence, linked with substance abuse and alcohol users, is significantly higher as compared to the general population. The reduction of anger is the feature and potential focus of recovery programs. According to the article, Anger and resentment are pivotal emotions for most recovering alcoholics. (Lin, Enright, Krahn, Mack, & Baskin, 2004) Resentment is the unexpressed anger people keep in themselves which in turn triggers a user to break sobriety. Current approaches in anger management and expression are the focus of substance abuse treatment centers. Also, according to the article, there are not many sources or data documenting the efficacy of this type of therapy. Cognitive behavioral and group therapies seem to have some efficacy in coping skills Resentment and anger are justifiable means which can lead to violent behavior and problems in daily function of life. Lin et al., (2004) state that there are four phases in the progress of forgiveness therapy: uncovering, decision, work, an discovery. Forgiveness therapy (FT) has shown decrease of frequency of anger and resentment and improved coping skills. The Lin article advocates FT by hypothesizing that clients participating in FT will demonstrate reduced anger, depression and anxiety leading to vulnerability to substance abuse. All participants of the study were diagnosed as substance abuse dependent and participated in the following tests: 1) Enright Forgiveness Inventory, 2) Beck Depression Inventory II 3) Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory 4) State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Each test provided positive feedback to the participants meeting the criteria for the study of anger and resentment correlating with substance abuse. Vulnerability to substance abuse was based upon thoughts and feelings of the participants while experiencing

LIN ARTICLE CRITIQUE PART ONE anger and resentment. Treatment was based upon self- paced progress and (FT) Forgiveness Therapy was introduced in contrast to excusing, condoning, forgetting and reconciliation.

Reframing was the focus for participants based upon similar cognitive behavioral theory and was used to teach the participant to see the offender as a person with their own problems and fears. This is called the work phase. A discovery phase focuses on what has been learned from the work phase. (Lin et al., 2004) An alternative therapy was used on other participants to measure a contrast in treatment and recovery referred to as (ADC) Alcohol Drug Counseling. A hypothesis was made in the comparison of the two treatments: Forgiveness Therapy and Alcohol Drug Counseling. The FT group reflected greater improvement than that of the ADC recipients. Less vulnerability was noticed with the FT recipients. In discussing the overall study, the researchers concluded that confronting resentment from the past reduced substance abuse and emotional health was improved. Also, self-esteem was improved and depression was reduced with the participants of the FT group as compared to the ADC group. The overall summary of the researchers concluded that substance abuse can be a symptom of unresolved anger and resentment, which one needs to be aware of this as counselors to avoid treating symptoms rather than causes. Cautious thought is heavily recommended by the researchers, given that the study is new and not based upon past studies. A recommendation of comparison of FT with other anger-focused therapies is encouraged for further study regarding improved results. (Lin et al., 2004) Critique of Title The title, in its description, is very specific and relevant to the study described. The concise expression is as comprehensive, yet specific as possible regarding the subject and study

LIN ARTICLE CRITIQUE PART ONE

conducted. The types of individuals participating in the study mentioned in the title; for example the words, dependent substance users who are effected by anger and mood are written within the title. A specific theory Effects of Forgiveness is mentioned and its effects upon a specified group of participants who are involved in the study. The author did avoid entitling the results in the article. The results are discussed later in the article under discussion and in the method of study. A yes or no question was also avoided in the title of this article, leaving the conclusions and discussions to be based upon comparison of the study. In this article, this researcher found there is only one title with no subtitle. The main title is satisfactory as laying the foundation for the specific study and the participants involved. Critique of Abstract The purpose of the study was not clearly implied in the abstract, but rather results of the therapy were summarized. Some of the research methodology was mentioned in the article regarding Forgiveness Therapy. However, the Alcohol Drug Counseling method was not mentioned in the abstract but rather mentioned further into the article. The highlights of the results were described fairly well within the abstract, arguing the positive results of the Forgiveness Therapy methodology of treatment. Overall, the abstract is very effective in displaying a summary and interest in the comprehensive article. It gives results and method summaries clearly and concisely along with how the study was conducted. This researcher feels appropriateness was displayed with in the abstract. The purpose of the study was not as clearly stated in the abstract but it is mentioned further into the closure of the article. Critique of Literature Review This researcher noticed the problem the article was referring to was identified within

LIN ARTICLE CRITIQUE PART ONE the introduction; using the opening sentence of introduction. The statement was specific and

concise without bringing any maleficence to any specific group or individual. The importance of the problem area substance abuse as relating to resentment and anger (Lin et al., 2004) was referred to in the article with clarity, urgency and comparison with that of another alternative method of treatment. According to table 3 of the article, pretest and post-test changes advocate forgiveness therapy as showing significant improvement with participants over the ADC method (Lin et al., 2004). The two main theories of treatment, which are mentioned and compared, are (ADC) Alcohol Drug Counseling and (FT) Forgiveness Therapy. The article descriptively compares and contrasts the two theories and their procedures. According to Lin, We hypothesized that individuals in residential treatment for alcohol and drug dependence, after receiving treatment augmented by FT, would demonstrate less anger, depression, anxiety and vulnerability to substance use and more self esteem that those receiving residential treatment augmented with a similar amount of a more standard regimen, alcohol and drug counseling (ADC). That was not focused on anger reduction. (Lin et al., 2004, p.1115) The purpose statement is stated later in the introduction, which precedes a hypothesis. However the purpose is not clearly stated but rather suggested through a statement, hypothesis and later results. Excessive citing on a singular point was found on two accounts of this article. Eight citations for researchers developing new therapeutic approach of forgiveness therapy, and seven citations referring to robust results of forgiveness therapy with certain populations were found. (Lin et al., 2004, p.1115) It appears to this researcher that the article reflects positive criticism when comparing forgiveness therapy with alcohol drug counseling. For example, The forgiveness treatment was effective in bringing the clients up to normal levels; whereas clients

LIN ARTICLE CRITIQUE PART ONE

undergoing the alternative treatment continued to manifest low self-esteem through the follow up. (Lin et al., 2004, p.1119)

A distinguishing of research rather than opinion has been stated through usage of tables, statistics and quotations of current results in comparison. Under the results category section, the two treatments of forgiveness therapy and alcohol counseling were compared followed by a case study. ( Lin et al., 2004, p. 1117) The review portion of the article was again concise, direct, and clearly presented an opened interest for further reading. The focus and purpose were evident from the first few sentences and began to unfold in a chronological manner.

Critique of Research Hypothesis

The article states the question concerning the validity and value of forgiveness therapy and results of forgiveness and it relates to anger, resentment and substance abuse. The authors of the article affirm that forgiveness therapy should be researched further and has validity in usage for dependent substance abuse suffers. The research hypothesis was clearly stated as mentioned in this critique of page six under critique of literature review. The efficacy of the research is reflected in the article in a comparative research study of two theories of treatment. Results are clearly shown with some past research cited as guidelines and foundational directive for the study. Since very little past research has been conducted, the efficacy of the research is foundational in itself and argues for further study to establish valuable truths and theories for treatment reliability.

LIN ARTICLE CRITIQUE PART ONE References Lin, W., Enright, R. D., Krahn, D., Mack, D., Baskin, T. W. (2004). "Effects of Forgiveness Therapy on Anger, Mood, and Vulnerability to Substance Use Among Inpatient

Substance-Dependent Clients". Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 72, 6, 1114 - 1121.