Running Head: WILDERNESS THERAPY 1
Wilderness Therapy: Brief Review of the Literature
Matthew VanDerZee
Lynchburg College
WILDERNESS THERAPY 2
Research describes wilderness therapy (WT) as a growing alternative approach to treating
a variety of issues, especially in at-risk youth (Bettmann et al., 2011; Larivière et al., 2012).
Furthermore, WT provides a setting where the counselor(s) and client(s) are working together for
an extended period with limited interruptions; thus, providing the counselor(s) with a unique
opportunity not available in traditional therapies. This type of modality provides an active and
engaged approach for the client. WT, however, receives criticism for limited ability to measure
effectiveness and difficulties with generalizability (Gillis et al., 2008; Larivière et al., 2012).
Bettmann, Lundahl, Wright, Jasperson, and McRoberts (2011) examined wilderness and
residential programs to determine the most common reasons that adolescents end up in these
programs. Author McRoberts owns a company, which administers evaluations to adolescents in
WT and other residential programs. This allowed researchers easy access to records of
psychological evaluations that they used to create a sample (Bettmann et al., 2011). These
evaluations, conducted by licensed psychologists, provide a clear picture of the participants’
histories, as well as details regarding diagnoses and personal characteristics. Bettmann et al.
(2011) took a random sample of 500 evaluations, 100 from each year: 2002 to 2006. Of the 500,
only 473 had enough information in order to be considered. Of these, about 85% came from
participants in WT programs, 11% from residential treatment facilities, and about 3.5% from
therapeutic boarding schools (Bettmann et al., 2011). Participants averaged in age at about 16
years with a standard deviation of 1.14 years (Bettmann et al., 2011).
Bettmann et al. (2011) derived quantitative data from the evaluations and by coding
qualitative data. Researchers found that despite parental concerns, the majority of participants
demonstrated higher than average intelligence and achievement scores; however, data showed
that 30.7% of participants were either suspended or expelled from school (Bettmann et al., 2011).
WILDERNESS THERAPY 3
Through analysis, it appears as though the majority of participants in WT and other residential
treatment programs suffer from externalizing behavior problems. Data supports this by revealing
a large number of participants diagnosed with Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD), Parent
Child Relational Problem, or Attention Deficit Disorder Hyperactive-type (Bettmann et al.,
2011). About 40% of participants were taking prescription psychotropic medications at the time,
with 63% having taken them in the past. Bettmann et al. (2011) report a remarkable amount of
criminal and violent behaviors. A reported 86% of participants reported having used illicit
substances, 17.5% had at least one arrest, while 11.4% had at least two. Furthermore, 44% had a
record of assault with 48% reporting violent behavior directed at non-humans (animals or
property) (Bettmann et al., 2011). Overall, this study reveals that the majority of participants in
WT and other residential treatment facilities are delinquent (Bettmann et al., 2011).
Bettmann et al. (2011) explain that this study is limited in generalizability due to the costs
of such private programs. This type of therapy is not available to everyone and requires a
significant amount of money to enter a child. This places each of the participants into a more
limited population sample (Bettmann et al., 2011).
Joanna Bettmann and Anita Tucker (2011) explored the affect of wilderness therapy
(WT) in adolescents’ perceived attachment relationships with their parents and peers. Bettmann
and Tucker (2011) used three measurement scales (Adolescent Attachment Questionnaire
(AAQ), Adolescent Unresolved Attachment Questionnaire (AUAQ), and the Inventory of Parent
and Peer Attachment (IPPA)) to determine participants’ attachment relationships before and after
the 7-week therapeutic process. With thousands of children in residential treatment facilities,
Bettmann and Tucker (2011) argue that it is necessary to understand the relational differences or
lessons taken away from such programs. Furthermore, because clients undergoing WT will
WILDERNESS THERAPY 4
experience loss, separation, and reunion, WT qualifies as an appropriate setting to test and
measure changes in attachment relationships (Bettmann & Tucker, 2011). Bettmann and Tucker
(2011) selected a 7-week WT program that focused on improved communication between
parents/guardians and their children. Critics of wilderness therapy argue that it is too costly or
too dangerous of a therapy, which is limited in significant results because of the inability to
control for the environment. There have also been several reports of abuse, neglect, and
accidental deaths of adolescents participating in the therapy, causing significant speculation as to
the therapy’s ethicality (Bettmann & Tucker, 2011).
Bettmann and Tucker (2011) did not expect the 7-week WT program to alter the
attachment relationships of participants; rather, they anticipated that this would lay a foundation
for greater change in post-study therapy. Participants were 96 adolescents, 59 males and 37
