A systematic qualitative study investigating why individuals attend, and what they like, dislike, and find most helpful about, smart recovery, alcoholics anonymous, both, or neither.

BACKGROUND

Some individuals seeking recovery from alcohol use disorder (AUD) attend Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) while others choose newer alternatives such as Self-Management and Recovery Training ("SMART" Recovery). Some even attend both, while some choose not to attend either. Little is known about why people choose which pathway(s), and what they like, dislike, and find helpful. Greater knowledge could provide insights into the phenomenology of recovery experiences and enhance the efficiency of clinical linkage to these resources.

METHODS

Cross-sectional, qualitative, investigation (N = 80; n = 20 per condition; 50%female) of individuals attending either AA-only, SMART-only, both, or neither. Participants were asked why they initially chose that pathway, what they like and dislike, and what helps. Responses were coded using an inductive grounded theory approach with utterances recorded and categorized into superordinate domains and rank-ordered in terms of frequency across each question and recovery pathway.

RESULTS

AA participants reported attending due to, as well as liking and finding most helpful, the common socio-community aspects, whereas SMART attendees went initially due to, as well as found most helpful, the different format as well as the CBT/science-based approach. Similar to AA, however, SMART participants liked the socio-community aspects most. "Both" participants reported liking and finding helpful these perceived relative strengths of each organization. "Neither" participants reported reasons for non-attendance related to lower problem severity - perceiving no need to attend, and anxiety about privacy, but reported using recovery-related change strategies similar to those prescribed by AA, SMART and treatment (e.g., stimulus control, competing behaviors). Common dislikes for AA and SMART centered around irritation due to other members behaviors, a need for more SMART meetings, and negative experiences with SMART facilitators.

CONCLUSION

Common impressions exist among individuals selecting different recovery pathway choices, but also some differences in keeping with the group dynamics and distinct approaches inherent in AA and SMART. AA attendees appear to go initially for the recovery buoyancy derived from the social ethos and camaraderie of lived experience and may end up staying for the same reason; those choosing SMART, in contrast, appear to attend initially for the CBT/science-based content and different approach but, like AA participants, may end up staying due to the same camaraderie of lived experience. Those participating in both AA and SMART appear to capitalize on the strengths of each organization, suggesting that some can psychologically accommodate and make use of theoretically distinct, and sometimes opposing, philosophies and practices.