Development and Evaluation of Group Counseling Program using Neurolinguistic Programming for Alcoholics

Heejin Kim; Jeongyee Bae

doi:10.12934/jkpmhn.2018.27.2.98

Journal List > J Korean Acad Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs > v.27(2) > 1122530

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kim and Bae: Development and Evaluation of Group Counseling Program using Neurolinguistic Programming for Alcoholics

Original Article

J Korean Acad Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2018;27(2):98-109.

Published online: 17 June 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12934/jkpmhn.2018.27.2.98

Development and Evaluation of Group Counseling Program using Neurolinguistic Programming for Alcoholics

Heejin Kim¹, Jeongyee Bae²

¹Department of Nursing, Dongwon Institute of Science and Technology, Yangsan, Korea

²Department of Nursing, Inje University ․ Inje University Institute for International Safe Community, Busan, Korea

Corresponding author: Bae, Jeongyee https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4877-3753 Department of Nursing, Inje University, 75 Bokji-ro, Busanjin-gu, Busan 47392, Korea. Tel: +82-51-890-6823, Fax: +82-51-896-9840, E-mail: jibai@inje.ac.kr

Received 26 February 201813 April 2018 Accepted 28 May 2018

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of a group counseling program using neurolinguistic programming (NLP) for individuals abusing alcohol.

Methods

In a quasi-experimental study, 48 participants were recruited from five alcohol medical centers. The NLP group counseling program was provided to the experimental group for 90 minute sessions twice a week for 5 weeks. Pre-post data were collected from November, 2014 to April, 2015. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-squared tests, and independent t-tests.

Results

Compared with the control group, participants in the experimental group showed significantly decreasing scores for depression (t=-2.19, p=.033) and alcohol craving (t=-3.59, p=.001). Participants in the experimental group also showed improved self-efficacy related to drinking refusal (t=3.05, p=.004).

Conclusion

Study findings support using the NLP group counseling program with patients abusing alcohol as it is effective in improving depression, drinking refusal self-efficacy, and craving. Therefore, the NLP group counseling program is a useful nursing intervention to prevent relapse in alcoholics.

Keywords: Neurolinguistic programming, Alcoholism, Depression, Self efficacy, Craving

REFERENCES

1. Ministry of Health & Welfare. Korea Centers for Disease Control & Prevention. Korean health statistics 2016 II: Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES-VII-1) [Internet]. Seoul: Ministry of Health & Welfare;2017. December. Report No. KCDC 11-1351159-000027-10 [cited 2018 Jan 04]. Available from:. https://knhanes.cdc.go.kr/knhanes/sub03/sub03_02_02.do.

2. Park HN, Yu SJ. Effects of meditation training program on self concept, abstinence self-efficacy, and abstinence in alcoholic patients. The Journal of Korean Academy of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. 2005; 14(3):304–312.

3. Connors GJ, DiClemente CC, Velasquez MM, Donovan DM. Substance abuse treatment and the stages of change: selecting and planning interventions. 2nd ed.New York: Guilford Press;2012. p. 356.

4. Dawson DA, Grant BF, Stinson FS, Zhou Y. Effectiveness of the derived Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) in screening for alcohol use disorders and risk drinking in the US general population. Alcohol Clinical and Experimental Research. 2005; 29(5):844–854. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ALC.0000164374.32229.A2.

5. Kang EH. The effects of the meditation program known as MBSR-K on the alcohol abstinence self-efficacy and mental health of alcohol dependence [master's thesis]. [Seoul]: Catholic University;2014. p. 96.

6. Vasilaki EI, Hosier SG, Cox WM. The efficacy of motivational interviewing as a brief intervention for excessive drinking: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Alcohol and Alcoholism. 2006; 41(3):328–335. https://doi.org/10.1093/alcalc/agl016.

7. Hwang MO. A study of an NLP career education program's influence on the college students' career self-efficacy and maturity. Journal of Educational Research. 2013; 21:123–144.

8. Seol KM. NLP power for self-innovation. Seoul: Hakjisa. 2003. 380.

9. Sohn WH, Hong HY. The effect of NLP group counseling program for the internet addicted adolescents: focused to depression, self-control, stress-control. Journal of Future Oriented Youth Society. 2009; 6(3):45–66.

10. Jacoub AF, Joseph B, Bassam AK. The effectiveness of a program based on (NLP) in the development of social communication for the gifted sixth grade students in Amman. International Journal of Education. 2016; 8(1):162–180. https://doi.org/10.5296/ije.v8i1.9210.

11. Jung YJ, Kim YJ. The effects of NLP counseling program on parenting stress, psychological well-being, and parenting attitude among mothers: the case of those with preschooler or school-aged children. Korean Journal of Health Psychology. 2014; 19(2):485–507.

12. Yoon MS, Kim NH. Mediating effects of social support on the relationship between motivation to change and quality of life among alcoholics. Health and Social Welfare Review. 2015; 35(1):110–135. https://doi.org/10.15709/hswr.2015.35.1.110.

13. Zaharia C, Reiner M, Schütz P. Evidence-based neuro linguistic psychotherapy: a metaanalysis. Psychiatria Danubinia. 2015; 27(4):355–363.

14. Jang SK. The strategy and effectiveness of solution-focused alcohol addiction counseling [master's thesis]. [Daejeon]: Korea Baptist Theological University;2012. p. 274.

15. Marlatt GA, Donovan DM. Relapse prevention: maintenance strategies in the treatment of addictive behaviors. 2nd ed.New York: Guilford Press;2007. p. 416.

16. Kang SJ, Kim SJ. Effects of forgiveness therapy program on self-esteem, anger and forgiveness in people who abuse alcohol. The Journal of Korean Academy of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. 2015; 24(4):300–329. https://doi.org/10.12934/jkpmhn.2015.24.4.300.

17. Hahn HM, Yum TH, Shin YW, Kim KH, Yoon DJ, Chung KJ. A standardization study of Beck depression inventory in Korea. Journal of Korean Neuropsychiatric Association. 1986; 25(3):487–500.

18. Oei TP, Hasking PA, Young RM. Drinking refusal self-efficacy questionnaire-revised (DRSEQ-R): a new factor structure with confirmatory factor analysis. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2005; 78(3):297–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2004.11.010.

19. Kho YM, Hyun MH, Park JS. The mediating effect of drinking refusal self-efficacy on the relationship between drinking restraint and drinking behaviors in college students. The Korean Journal of Health Psychology. 2009; 14(4):891–909.

20. Anton RF, Moak DH, Latham P. The obsessive compulsive drinking scale: a self-rated instrument for the quantification of thoughts about alcohol and drinking behavior. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research. 1995; 19(1):92–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.1995.tb01475.x.

21. Choi MJ, Lee E, Lee BO, Lee PG, Oh BH, Lee CH, et al. The study on reliability and validity of Korean versions of obsessive compulsive drinking scale for outpatient of alcohol dependence. Journal of Korean Neuropsychiatric Association. 2002; 41(1):98–109.

22. Sheoran P. Effectiveness of NLP in dealing with guilt induced anxiety depression and stress: a case study. The International Journal of Indian Psychology. 2016; 4(1):147–156.

23. Park HS, Cho MH, Cho GY, Kim DH. A comparison of drinking refusal self-efficacy and mental health between two groups of Korean nursing students. Journal of Korean Academic Society Nursing Education. 2011; 17(1):110–119.

24. Jung SY. A study on the effect of NLP group counseling program on communication and self-efficacy of university students. Journal of Arts Psychotherapy. 2014; 10(1):1–20.

25. Oh YM. A study on effect of the NLP based customer satisfaction education program on the self-esteem and self-efficacy of service workers [master's thesis]. [Pyeongtaek]: Pyeongtaek University;2010. p. 106.

26. Alder H. Neurolinguistic programming: the new art and science of getting what you want. London: Piatkus Books;1995. p. 192.

27. Anton RF. Obsessive-compulsive aspects of craving: development of the Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale. Journal of Addiction. 2000; 95(Suppl2):211–217. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1360-0443.95.8s2.9.x.

28. Hall M, Linder-Pelz S. Meta-coaching: a methodology grounded in psychological theory. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring. 2008; 6(1):43–56.

29. Clabby J, O'Connor R. Teaching learners to use mirroring: rapport lessons from neurolinguistic programming. Journal of Family Medicine. 2004; 36(8):541–543.

30. Shin HK. The effects of group counseling program using NLP on new-generation maladjusted soldier's internal control, interpersonal relationship, and military life adaptation [dissertation]. [Seoul]: Seoul Venture University;2014. p. 150.

Table 1.

Description of NLP Group Counseling Therapy

Sessions	Subject	Goal	Contents/Activity	Main techniques
1	Da capo (From the beginning)	Orientation	⦁Introduce summaries of the program and schedule	Establishing rapport & ensuring of representation system
			⦁Make your own preference of representation system and introduce the self
			⦁Understand NLP presupposition
			⦁Select a phrase as a slogan from presuppositions
			⦁Complete preliminary examination
2	Am I a man?	Realizing problems	⦁Explain the definition of alcoholics	Problem definition & explaining the program principles
2	Am I a man?	Realizing problems	⦁Learn NLP program principles and the effects described
3	SMART of you!	Setting the goal	⦁Develop a plan with specific targets for the recovery from alcoholics (SMART)	Setting the goal
			⦁Remember what they achieved past
			⦁Set goals and plans for the future after feeling what I want to be through mind image (Exercise circle of excellence)
4	Just you not me	Effective communication	⦁Maximize the ability to attend to an event or situation in a positive time to communicate effectively	Mirroring, matching & leading
5	Find a new meaning	Challenges for the common linguistic errors	⦁Give new meanings to generate myself	Meta model
			⦁Think positive self-image by myself
			⦁Correct distorted sensing by under standing the way of expression in words or saying
			⦁Evaluate self esteem by means of feeling richness of sources
6	Loving myself once again	See back your life	⦁Write a diary to avoid negative self-evaluation	Dissociation
			⦁Look at myself who is writing a diary
			⦁Look back my life which was ruined by addiction (Past, present, and future)
			⦁Imagine what I want to be after to recovery
7	Opening the door to the world	Relapse prevention	⦁Listen to lectures of relapse and preventing relapse	Anchoring
			⦁Techniques for relapse prevent in high risk situation
			- Understand anchoring
			- Get out of displeasure in high risk of relapse by using anchoring
8	My love, don't cross that river	Controlling negative feelings	⦁Remember risky and negative events because of alcoholism and learning how to control that negative feelings	Association, dissociation
9	Like with him	Internalizing training to develop self-esteem and support system	⦁Familiarize what I have learned how to recover through 4 steps in unconscious level	Modeling
			⦁Find who is helpful to my recovery and a role model I want to be
			⦁Internalize the training
			⦁Set a vision for the future through visualization modeling
			⦁Create a future vision through visualization modeling
10	Past, meet the future	Way of life awareness	⦁Imagine my past, present, and future following time line	Time line
10	Past, meet the future	Way of life awareness	⦁Close recognition and post examination

SMART=Simple & specific, measurable, achievable, responsible, timed; NLP=Neurolinguistic programming.

Table 2.

Homogeneity Test of General Characteristics between Two Groups (N=48)

Variables	Categories	Total (N=48)	Exp. (n=23)	Cont. (n=25)	x² or t	p
Variables	Categories	n (%) or M±SD	n (%) or M±SD	n (%) or M±SD	x² or t	p
Age (year)		48.35±7.03	50.13±3.89	46.72±7.70	3.46	.162
Gender	Male	47 (97.9)	22 (95.7)	25 (100.0)	1.11	.292
Gender	Female	1 (2.1)	1 (4.3)	0 (0.0)
Marital status	Married	7 (14.6)	4 (17.4)	3 (12.0)	0.28	.597
Marital status	Separate or single	41 (85.4)	19 (82.6)	22 (88.0)
Occupation	Yes	30 (62.5)	14 (60.9)	16 (64.0)	0.05	.823
Occupation	No	18 (37.5)	9 (39.1)	9 (36.0)
Income (10,000 won/month)	＜100	38 (79.2)	18 (78.3)	20 (80.0)	0.02	.882
Income (10,000 won/month)	≥100	10 (20.8)	5 (21.7)	5 (20.0)
Religion	Yes	31 (64.6)	17 (73.9)	14 (56.0)	1.68	.195
Religion	No	17 (35.4)	6 (26.1)	11 (44.0)
Education	≤High school	38 (79.2)	18 (78.3)	20 (80.0)	0.02	.882
Education	≥College	10 (20.8)	5 (21.7)	5 (20.0)
Age of first drinking (year)		18.63±2.82	18.43±2.89	18.80±2.80	0.02	.880
Total duration of alcohol use (time)	≤20	13 (27.1)	5 (21.7)	8 (32.0)	0.64	.424
Total duration of alcohol use (time)	＞20	35 (72.9)	18 (78.3)	17 (68.0)
First hospitalization time drinking (year)	20~29	6 (12.5)	1 (4.3)	5 (20.0)	6.37	.095
	30~39	18 (37.5)	7 (30.5)	11 (44.0)
	40~49	18 (37.5)	10 (43.5)	8 (32.0)
	≥50	6 (12.5)	5 (21.7)	1 (4.0)
Number of hospitalizations secondary to alcoholism		10.33±11.55	8.43±10.26	12.08±12.57	2.29	.130
The longest period of sobriety (year)		1.21±1.19	1.52±1.30	0.92±1.01	4.10	.129
Program attendance	Yes	32 (66.7)	18 (78.3)	14 (56.0)	2.67	.102
experience	No	16 (33.3)	5 (21.7)	11 (44.0)

Exp.=Experimental group; Cont.=Control group.

Table 3.

Homogeneity Test of Dependent Variables between Two Groups (N=48)

Variables	Exp. (n=23)	Cont. (n=25)	t	p
Variables	M±SD	M±SD	t	p
BDI	21.35±7.99	20.88±7.79	0.20	.838
DRSE	54.43±15.54	55.56±15.25	-0.25	.801
OCDS	31.48±6.84	29.68±5.63	0.84	.324

BDI=Beck depression inventory; DRSE=Drinking refusal self-efficacy; OCDS=Obsessive compulsive drinking scale; Exp.=Experimental group; Cont.=Control group.

Table 4.

Comparison of Dependent Variables between Two Groups (N=48)

Variables	Groups	Pretest	Posttest	t (p)	Difference	t (p)
Variables	Groups	M±SD	M±SD	t (p)	M±SD	t (p)
BDI	Exp.	21.35±7.99	11.70±7.25	4.37 (.001)	-9.65±10.59	-2.19 (.033)
BDI	Cont.	20.88±7.79	19.28±10.95	0.56 (.583)	-1.60±14.38
DRSE	Exp.	54.43±15.54	76.30±16.36	-4.84 (.001)	21.87±21.69	3.05 (.004)
DRSE	Cont.	55.56±15.25	56.72±15.36	-0.23 (.819)	1.16±25.09
OCDS	Exp.	31.48±6.84	19.83±6.29	5.80 (.001)	-11.65±9.64	-3.59 (.001)
OCDS	Cont.	29.68±5.63	27.08±6.10	1.67 (.108)	-2.60±7.79

BDI=Beck depression inventory; DRSE=Drinking refusal self-efficacy; OCDS=Obsessive compulsive drinking scale; Exp.=Experimental group; Cont.=Control group.

TOOLS

Similar articles