An Existential Model of Flourishing Subsequent to Treatment for Addiction: The Importance of Living a Meaningful and Spiritual Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined recovering alcoholics who were struggling to rebuild their lives 2 years after completing a professional treatment program for addiction. Sixty-eight British adults provided data describing whether or not their personal, interpersonal, and community (civic) functioning had improved from the period of maximum suffering before treatment to a point 2 years after being discharged. Results showed the magnitude of overall Quality of Life (QoL) improvement was significantly and positively correlated with the amount of meaning that respondents perceived to be present in their life at the point of 2 year follow-up. In general, the total QoL scale score was not related to whether or not respondents indicated they were striving for spiritual goals. Spiritual striving, however, was found to moderate the strength of the association between meaning making and the community/societal sphere of QoL. When a sub-sample of 26 spiritual strivers was examined, greater meaning making was found to be related to better personal well-being, interpersonal well-being, and (civic) functioning in society. However, among the 26 individuals who did not see themselves as spiritual seekers, greater meaning making was only related to QoL assessed at the personal and interpersonal levels of analysis. These findings are consistent with Viktor Frankl's notion that suffering can be a catalyst for a more fulfilling way of being—provided that people are able to see meaning and purpose in their suffering. The apparent adaptive consequences of perceiving self-transcendent meaning were particularly broad in scope within the spiritual seeking sub group, who may have experienced a sanctified sense of meaning in their life. A Broad Spectrum Model of QoL is proposed to describe the more generalized salutary effects of sacred (as opposed to secular) meaning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".