| Course | ADC 665 Advanced Addiction Theories |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | Technique selection paper |
| Length | About 1,098 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Psychology and Addiction Studies |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for ADC 665 Module 3
Rewards, Skills and Conversations About Change: Techniques for a Methamphetamine Client
Student Name
Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University
ADC 665: Advanced Addiction Theories
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Rewards, Skills and Conversations About Change: Techniques for a Methamphetamine Client
Kim, twenty-six, has used methamphetamine most days for two years. She lost her job at a restaurant six months ago and now lives with her mother in Baton Rouge, who told her she had to get help or move out. At intake with Renee, Kim said she was "not sure" she wanted to quit, only to cut back, and that she had tried stopping twice on her own and lasted four days each time. Kim, Renee and the program are teaching composites. This paper selects techniques for her treatment.
What Treatment Must Address
Kim's needs fall into three areas. She is ambivalent: she wants her mother's support and her life back but does not yet see herself as someone who will stop entirely. She has no medication option with approval for methamphetamine use disorder, so psychosocial treatment carries most of the weight. And she lacks skills for handling the cravings, boredom and friends that brought her back to use after her two attempts.
The Meta-Analytic Evidence
Dutra et al. (2008) pooled controlled studies of talking and behavioral treatments for drug and alcohol problems. Overall, treatments had moderate effects. Contingency management, alone or combined with cognitive behavioral therapy, produced the largest effects, while cognitive behavioral therapy alone and relapse prevention produced smaller ones. Results also varied with the drug: trials with cannabis users showed the biggest gains and trials with people using several drugs the smallest. Dropout was common across treatments, which points to the need to keep clients engaged.
Prendergast et al. (2006) focused on contingency management. Across studies, rewarding verified abstinence or treatment attendance improved outcomes, with larger effects for opioid and cocaine use than for tobacco or polysubstance use. Effects were larger when rewards were given immediately after a negative test. However, they tended to weaken once rewards stopped, a central limitation for any program using the technique.
Lundahl et al. (2010) reviewed motivational interviewing across a wide range of problems. Its effects were small but reliable, comparable to other active treatments, and it typically achieved them in less time. For substance use, effects were meaningful and lasted beyond the end of treatment in many studies.
| Technique | Who delivers | Frequency and length | Materials |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contingency management | Program staff trained in protocol | Urine tests twice weekly for twelve weeks; immediate reward | Prize bowl or voucher record; testing supplies |
| Cognitive behavioral skills | Renee | Weekly 50-minute session for twelve weeks | Skills workbook; craving log |
| Motivational interviewing | Renee | First two sessions, then woven through | Change plan worksheet |
| Step down from incentives | Renee and staff | Weeks nine to twelve, rewards thinning | Plan for natural rewards |
Why These Three
Contingency management leads because it has the strongest evidence for stimulants and responds directly to the immediate reinforcement methamphetamine provides. Cognitive behavioral skills are added because Dutra et al. (2008) found larger effects when they were combined, and because Kim needs skills that will last after the incentives. Motivational interviewing comes first because Kim is ambivalent; if she does not engage, no other technique will reach her. The three address different needs and support each other.
How Each Will Be Delivered
In the first two sessions, Renee uses motivational interviewing to explore Kim's own reasons for change, such as rebuilding her relationship with her mother and getting back to work, and to develop a change plan in her words. From the second week, Kim gives urine samples twice weekly. Each negative test earns a draw from a prize bowl, with the number of draws increasing for consecutive negative tests and resetting after a positive one. Weekly cognitive behavioral sessions teach her to recognize triggers, manage cravings, refuse offers and plan her days, using a workbook and a craving log.
When Rewards End
Prendergast et al. (2006) found that effects weaken after incentives stop, so the plan builds in a transition. From week nine, rewards thin gradually, and sessions focus on replacing them with natural rewards, such as earning money through work, regaining her mother's trust and doing activities she had enjoyed before. The cognitive behavioral work aims to make these rewards visible and reachable. If Kim's tests turn positive during the step down, the team will consider extending the incentive period.
Practical Barriers
Contingency management costs money, and some staff object to rewarding people for not using drugs. Renee addressed the first by using a prize-bowl approach, which costs less than vouchers, and the second by presenting the evidence at a staff meeting, comparing the cost with the cost of relapse and readmission.
Working With Kim's Goal
Kim said she wanted to cut back rather than stop. Motivational interviewing does not require Renee to argue her out of this. Lundahl et al. (2010) found that the approach works by drawing out a client's own reasons rather than imposing the counselor's, and arguing tends to strengthen the side of ambivalence the counselor opposes. Renee accepted Kim's goal as a starting point while making the contingency management terms clear: rewards would be given for negative tests, which meant days without any use. Kim agreed to try two weeks of complete abstinence as an experiment, knowing she could revisit the goal afterward. By the end of the two weeks, with six prize draws and her mother's evident relief, she said she wanted to keep going.
Early Engagement
Dutra et al. (2008) found high dropout rates across psychosocial treatments, so the first weeks matter. Renee scheduled the first contingency management test within three days of intake rather than waiting for a full assessment, so that Kim could earn a reward quickly. She also called Kim the day after any missed appointment. Prendergast et al. (2006) found that immediate rewards produced larger effects, and the same principle applies to engagement itself: early, concrete benefits make it easier to keep coming back.
Tracking Kim's Progress
Renee will track progress through the urine results already collected for contingency management, the number of cognitive behavioral sessions attended, Kim's craving log and a short monthly rating of her confidence in staying abstinent. Renee will review these with Kim every four weeks and with her supervisor at the end of the twelve weeks, when the decision about continuing care will be made.
Conclusion
Dutra and colleagues found contingency management and its combination with cognitive behavioral therapy most effective, Prendergast and colleagues showed its benefits and its fading after rewards end and Lundahl and colleagues showed motivational interviewing produces reliable effects efficiently. For Kim, the three techniques combine to address her ambivalence, reward early abstinence and build skills that last once the prizes stop.
References
Dutra, L., Stathopoulou, G., Basden, S. L., Leyro, T. M., Powers, M. B., & Otto, M. W. (2008). A meta-analytic review of psychosocial interventions for substance use disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 165(2), 179-187. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.06111851
Lundahl, B. W., Kunz, C., Brownell, C., Tollefson, D., & Burke, B. L. (2010). A meta-analysis of motivational interviewing: Twenty-five years of empirical studies. Research on Social Work Practice, 20(2), 137-160. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731509347850
Prendergast, M., Podus, D., Finney, J., Greenwell, L., & Roll, J. (2006). Contingency management for treatment of substance use disorders: A meta-analysis. Addiction, 101(11), 1546-1560. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2006.01581.x
What the ADC 665 Module 3 instructions ask for
The third module of ADC 665 typically asks for a paper on evidence-based techniques. Follow the Module 3 instructions in your Aspen course; the client here is a composite. Describe a client and the problems treatment should address. Review evidence for several techniques, preferring meta-analyses and saying what they found for the client's substance. Select techniques and justify the choice, including any combination. Describe how each would be delivered in practice: who does what, how often and with what materials. Address the limits of each technique, such as what happens when incentives end. APA 7 governs the references; define contingency management and similar terms at first mention. Where a client's goal differs from abstinence, explain how the techniques still apply.
How this ADC 665 Module 3 example is built
Kim, the composite client, is twenty-six, uses methamphetamine daily and came to Renee's Baton Rouge program after her mother set a deadline. Dutra and colleagues' meta-analysis of psychosocial treatments reports the strongest effects for contingency management, alone or with cognitive behavioral therapy, and stronger results for some drugs than others. Prendergast and colleagues' contingency management meta-analysis reports benefits across substances and weaker effects after incentives end. Lundahl and colleagues' review of motivational interviewing reports small, durable effects achieved in less time. A table sets out who delivers each technique, how often and with what materials, and a plan covers the step down from incentives. A section addresses Kim's wish to cut back rather than stop.
Where the marks sit in the ADC 665 Module 3 rubric
A strong technique paper links each choice to evidence relevant to the client's substance and situation and then makes delivery concrete. This example selects contingency management because it has the strongest stimulant evidence, adds cognitive behavioral skills to carry gains beyond the incentive period and uses motivational interviewing to address Kim's ambivalence. The delivery table names frequency, materials and staff. The paper takes the main weakness of contingency management seriously, planning for the period when rewards end. It also discusses cost and staff attitudes, which often decide whether a technique is used at all. Kim's own goal of cutting back is handled honestly rather than overruled.
ADC 665 Module 3 help from the desk
Technique papers often list well-known techniques without saying why they fit the client or how they would be delivered. Start with the client's substance and readiness. Use meta-analyses, and say what they found for that substance. Describe delivery in enough concrete detail that a supervisor could check it: how often urine tests are taken, what rewards are given and how cognitive behavioral sessions are structured. Address weaknesses honestly, such as fading effects after incentives. Consider practical barriers, such as cost and staff discomfort with paying clients for negative tests. If the client's goal differs from yours, say how you will work with that difference instead of ignoring it.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More ADC 665 and Psychology and Addiction Studies sample papers
- ADC 665 Module 1: Theories and Evidence in Addiction Counseling
- ADC 665 Module 2: Counselor Attitudes and the Alliance
- ADC 665 Module 4: Individualizing Treatment
- ADC 665 Module 5: Treatment Planning
- ADC 665 Module 6: Case Management
- ADC 665 Module 7: Ethics in Addiction Practice
- ADC 665 Module 8: Integrating Knowledge, Skills and Attitudes
- PSY 650 Module 7: Research Ethics
- ADC 605 Module 5: Family and Community Prevention
- PAC 415 Module 6: Harm Reduction Ethics
- PAC 499 Module 3: Literature Review
ADC 665 Module 3 questions, answered
What does ADC 665 Module 3 usually ask for?
Aspen's ADC 665 covers evidence-based techniques in this module, so a paper selecting and describing techniques for a client with evidence is typical. Your Module 3 prompt has the specifics.
What is contingency management?
A technique that gives tangible rewards, such as vouchers or prize draws, for verified behaviors like negative urine tests, with rewards often increasing for continued abstinence.
Which psychosocial treatment works best for stimulant use?
Dutra and colleagues' meta-analysis found contingency management, alone or with cognitive behavioral therapy, had the largest effects; no medication is yet approved for methamphetamine use disorder.
Where can I find a free ADC 665 Module 3 sample paper?
You can read the whole paper here: meta-analytic evidence for three techniques, a delivery table for one client and a plan for when incentives end.
Does motivational interviewing work?
Lundahl and colleagues' meta-analysis found small but reliable effects, similar to other active treatments while usually taking less time.