Page 183

AD ALTA

JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

Rem. n

- expresses absolute frequency of the respondents

answers after they finished the activity, f

– expresses relative

frequency.

By choosing the neutral part of scale (on average 25% answers),
the respondents said they did not notice any change in the given
field. 71% respondents on average expressed in the positive
scale and described improvement shortly after the activity. 4% of
respondents marked the negative scale. The entries where the
respondents realized the most benefits are: getting new
experience (82%), realizing bigger responsibility for themselves
and their decisions (81%), improvement in the ability to
cooperate with others (81%), the ability to solve things in new
ways (74%). Adventure activities helped the clients in thinking
about life values (80%). Gaining new experience was marked in
87% of total answers. More than 70% answers marked the
greater stress resistance and the ability to use new experience in
future, in life out of the community.

The second research question focused on the differences in
clients´ opinions during different phases. Hypotheses were made
based on the specialized literature, the hypotheses were further
verified. Four hypotheses proved to be possible to accept. They
say that in four aspects of clients evaluation of adventure
activities there is statistically significant difference among the
respondents who find themselves in the first and third that is the
last phase. The clients in the third phase evaluate better the
development of self-respect, independence, the ability to
cooperate with others and considering life values during the last
adventure activity than the clients in the first phase. The
differences between clients of the first and third phase in other
areas did not reach the statistical significance.

The hypothesis H3 concerned about the self-respect evaluation:
H3

: The clients of the first phase of the treatment evaluate the

change in their self-respect after the adventure activity
differently from the clients in the third phase.

Data to verify this hypothesis were gained in the questionnaire
entry 25. The data was processed through U-test of Mann and
Whitney. The result was 0.023 and based on its comparison with
the level of significance 0.05 it was possible to accept the
alternative hypothesis and claim that the clients in the first phase
evaluate their self-respect change after the last adventure activity
differently from the clients of the third phase. It was possible to
accept H3.

Hypothesis H4 focused on the respondents´ independence after
the adventure activity: H4

: The clients who found themselves

in the first phase of treatment evaluate their independence
change after the last adventure activity differently from the
clients in the third phase.

The data to verify the hypotheses are to be found in the
questionnaire entry 26. The acquired data were processed again
by means of the U test by Mann and Whitney with the result
0.005. When compared with the significance level 0.05 it was
possible to accept the alternative hypothesis. We can say that the
clients in the first phase are less optimistic as for their evaluation
of their independence than the clients in the third phase and that
means during the treatment the independence evaluation
improves.

The hypotheses H3 and H4 base on the knowledge of Záškodná
(2004, p.36), who says that in the personality of a drug addict
there are so called inadequate ambitions as for the individual´s
possibilities, drug gives the addict the feeling of inner strength,
self- respect, and self-confidence which he in fact lacks. The
Rataj´s claims (in Nevšímal, 2007, p. 168) and Kudy (2007, p.
66) inspired us too. They make a link between the number of
adventure activities and the treatment phase and the increasing
ability for self-respect and adequate evaluation of person´s
possibilities. Out of these premises we considered that clients in
higher level of treatment will better evaluate their self-respect
and independence than clients in the lower phase.

Hypothesis H11 evaluated the cooperation after the adventure
activity: H11

: The clients who find themselves in the first

phase of the treatment evaluate the change in the area of
cooperation differently from the clients who find themselves in
the third phase.

We evaluated this data processing the data acquired from the
entry 30 of the questionnaire. The data were evaluated by U test
with the result 0.080, which was compared with the significance
level 0.05. Alternative hypothesis was rejected. It can be said
though that among the data of the research groups there is
difference which only approaches statistical significance.
Therefore we compared it with the significance level 0.1 which
is commonly used in science and for this it was possible to
accept H11.

Hypothesis H11 comes from the claim of Kooyman (2004), who
says that a drug addict´s personality goes during the treatment
through the process of realizing how people handle their
emotions. The author calls this a process of new identity the part
of which is also identification with community life. The ability
to take responsibility in interpersonal relationships is developed.
Another base for hypothesis is the claim of Rataj (in Nevšímal
2007, p. 167), who points out that psychically and physically
demanding situations that arise during adventure activity lead
clients of the Therapeutic community to cooperation and make
them face their ability to be considerate and tolerant to others.
The Guide of the stay at the Therapeutic Community Fides states
that one of the main targets that a client should meet by the end
of the stay client is to be able to communicate plainly and
sincerely. These claims compiled a hypothesis - that the clients´
cooperation should improve.

Hypothesis 20 was about the consideration of the respondents´
life values: H20

: The clients of the first phase evaluate their life

values after the last adventure activity differently from the
clients in the third phase.

The values for the hypothesis were gained from the 34
questionnaire entry. The U test which followed provided the
result 0.080, which was compared with the level of significance
0.05. Although the difference approaches statistical significance
even here it is not possible to accept alternative hypothesis for
the significance level 0.05. Just like above mentioned we
decided to compare with the significance level 0.1 and that way
the hypothesis could be accepted.

Hypothesis 20 was based on the claims that the value system od
the addicted person changes as well as their emotional bonds to
the close people become obsolete. The drug addicted person
neglects their hobbies, duties and other values and spends most
of their time with themselves and their drug (Nešpor at al., 2011,
p. 25). Rataj (in Nevšímal, 2007, p. 168) desrcibes the adventure
activity environemnt as space where one rocks the botom in both
physical and mental sense. This situation leads to the
confrontation with the core of their personality without any
hypocrisy. Based on these two premises we consider that the
adventure activities are space where one thinks over their values
and the longer in the treatment the more they consider this
aspect.

3.2

Research limits

This research can be regarded to be the initial research in the
field of exploring the adventure therapy in therapeutic
communities for the addicted in the Czech Republic. There are a
number of limits that must be taken into account. Although when
setting the independent variables the authors searched in the
specialized literature they observed only those opinions of the
clients that can be influenced by many factors. Therefore it may
be more of a tentative view of how the clients perceive their
experience from the adventure therapy and not objective reality.
To collect data a non-standardized questionnaire was used.
Although it was a quantitative research where a basic sample (all
the chosen clients of a therapeutic community who underwent
adventure activities in 2015 and 2016), a generalization is not

- 183 -