Communication of support in mutual-aid group meetings for alcoholics’ friends and relatives

Open access


AIMS - This study examines the kinds of support that alcoholics’ friends and relatives provide each other in Al-Anon mutual-aid groups. The study examines, first, the types of supportive communication in mutual-aid group meetings directed toward friends and relatives of alcoholics, and second, how contextual features affect supportive communication in these meetings. DESIGN - The research data were collected through non-participant observations of 11 group meetings and analysed by combined deductive and inductive approaches. RESULTS - Four types of support were detected: emotional, informational, esteem and social network, indicating that meetings serve as potential sources of comfort, learning, self-esteem enhancement and company. Contextual features, such as the 12-step ideology, had an effect on the content and form of supportive communication. CONCLUSION - The key to support in Al-Anon meetings lies in their discretion. That is, the way of communicating support and the contextual features of the meetings established favourable conditions for effective communication of support. The results of this study illustrate the actual communication processes exchanged by the people who have “been there”, providing information useful to anyone in contact with friends or relatives of an alcoholic.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Ablon J. (1974). Al-Anon family groups: Impetus for learning and change through the presentation of alternatives. AmericanJournal of Psychotherapy 28(1) 30-45.

  • Al-Anon (2012 September 1). Onko läheiselläsi alkoholiongelma? [Does someone near you have problems with alcohol?] Retrieved from

  • Al-Anon (2013a July 26). What can I expect at an Al-Anon meeting? Retrieved from http://

  • Al-Anon (2013b April 9). Tilastotietoja jäsenistä. [Membership statistics] Retrieved from

  • Albrecht T. L. & Adelman M. B. (1987). Communicatingsocial support. Newbury Park: Sage.

  • Albrecht T. L. & Goldsmith D. (2003). Social support social networks and health. In T. L. Thompson A. M. Dorsey K. I. Miller & R. Parrott (Eds.) Handbook of healthcommunication (pp. 263-284). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Alcoholics Anonymous (2008 September 2012). Alcoholics Anonymous membership survey 2008. Retrieved from

  • Alexander S. C. Peterson J. L. & Hollingshead A. B. (2003). Help is at your keyboard: Support groups on the internet. In L. R. Frey (Ed.) Group communication incontext: Studies of bonafide groups (pp. 309-334). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Andersen P. A. & Guerrero L. K. (2008). Expressing and managing emotions with nonverbal communication. In L. K. Guerrero & M. L. Hecht (Eds.) The nonverbalcommunication reader (pp. 402-410). Long Grove Illinois: Waveland Press.

  • Anze P. (1979). Role of ideologies in peer psychotherapy groups. In M. A. Lieberman & L. D. Borman (Eds.) Self-help groupsfor coping with crisis (pp. 272-304). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • Arminen I. (1998). Therapeutic interactions:A study of mutual help in the meetings ofAlcoholics Anonymous. Helsinki: Hakapaino Oy.

  • Arminen I. (2001). Closing of turns in the meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous: Members’ methods for closing “sharing experiences”. Research on Language and SocialInteraction 34(2) 211-251.

  • Arminen I. (2004). Second stories: The salience of interpersonal communication for mutual help in Alcoholics Anonymous. Journal of Pragmatics 36 319-347.

  • Arntson P. & Droge D. (1987). Social support in self-help groups: The role of communication in enabling perceptions of control. In T. L. Albrecht & M. S. Adelman (Eds.) Communicating social support (pp. 148-171). Newbury Park: Sage.

  • Barbee A. P. & Cunningham M. R. (1995). An experimental approach to social support communications: Interactive coping in close relationships. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.) Communication yearbook 18 (pp. 318-413). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  • Barber J. G. & Gilbertson R. (1997). Unilateral interventions for women living with heavy drinkers. Social Work 42(1) 69-78.

  • Bodie G. D. & Burleson B. R. (2008). Explaining variations in the effects of supportive messages. In C. J. Beck (Ed.) Communicationyearbook 32 (pp. 333-399). New York: Routledge.

  • Bodie G. D. & Jones S. M. (2012). The nature of supportive listening II: The role of verbal person centeredness and nonverbal imme diacy. Western Journal of Communication76(3) 250-269.

  • Bodie G. D. Vickery A. J. & Gearhart C. C. (2013). The nature of supportive listening I: Exploring the relation between supportive listeners and supportive people. InternationalJournal of Listening 27(1) 39-49.

  • Borkman T. J. (1999). Understanding selfhelp/mutual aid: Experimental learning inthe commons. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.

  • Bullis C. & Horn C. (1993) Get a little closer: Further examination of nonverbal comforting strategies. Communication Reports8(1) 10-17.

  • Burleson B. R. Albrecht T. L. Goldsmith D. J. & Sarason I. G. (1994). The communication of social support. In B. R. Burleson T. L. Albrecht & I. G. Sarason (Eds.) Communicatingsocial support: Messages interactionsrelationships and community (pp. xi-xxx). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  • Burleson B. R. & Goldsmith D. J. (1998). How the comforting process works: Alleviating emotional distress through conversationally induced reappraisals. In P. A. Andersen & L. K. Guerrero (Eds.) Handbook of communicationand emotion: Research theoryapplications and context (pp. 245-280). San Diego: Academic Press.

  • Burleson B. R. & MacGeorge E. L. (2002). Supportive communication. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.) Handbook of interpersonalcommunication (pp. 374-424). California: Sage.

  • Burleson B. R. (1994). Comforting messages: Significance approaches and effects. In B. R. Burleson T. L. Albrecht & I.G. Sarason (Eds.) Communicating social support: Messagesinteractions relationships and community (pp. 3-28). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  • Burleson B. R. (2003). Emotional support skill. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.) Handbook of communication andsocial interaction skills (pp. 551-594). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Burleson B. R. (2003). The experiences and effects of emotional support: What the study of cultural and gender differences can tell us about close relationships emotions and interpersonal communication. Personal Relationships10 1-23.

  • Burleson B. R. (2008). What counts as effective emotional support? Explorations of individual and situational differences. In M. T. Motley (Ed.) Studies in applied interpersonalcommunication (pp. 207-228). Los Angeles: Sage.

  • Burleson B. R. (2009). Understanding the outcomes of supportive communication: A dual-process approach. Journal of Socialand Personal Relationships 26(1) 21-38.

  • Callaghan P. & Morrissey J. (1993). Social support and health: A review. Journal ofAdvanced Nursing 18 203-210.

  • Cawyer C. S. & Smith-Dupre A. (1995). Communicating social support: Identifying supportive episodes in HIV/AIDS support group. Communication Quarterly 43(3) 243-358.

  • Cline R. J. W. (1999). Communication in social support groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.) TheHandbook of group communication theoryand research (pp. 516-538). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  • Cohen S. & Wills T. A. (1985). Stress social support and the buffering hypothesis. PsychologicalBulletin 98(2) 310-357.

  • Constantinos K. C. & Liu M. (2009). An analysis of social support exchanges in online HIV/AIDS self-help groups. Computersin Human Behaviour 25 911-918.

  • Cullen J. & Carr A. (1999). Codependency: An empirical study from a systematic perspective. Contemporary Family Therapy21(4) 505-526.

  • Cutrona C. E. & Russell D. W. (1990). Type of social support and specific stress: Toward a theory of optimal matching. In B. R Sarason I. G. Sarason & G. R. Pierce (Eds.) Social support: An interactional view (pp. 319-366). New York: John Wiley.

  • Cutrona E. C. & Suhr J. A. (1992). Controllability of stressful events and satisfaction with spouse support behaviors. CommunicationResearch 19(2) 154-174.

  • Denzin N. K. (1987). The recovering alcoholic. Newbury Park: Sage.

  • Dennis M. R. Kunkel A. & Keyton J. (2008). Problematic integration theory appraisal theory and the Bosom Buddies breast cancer support group. Journal of AppliedCommunication Research 36(4) 415-436.

  • Dolin D. J. & Booth-Butterfield M. (1995). Reach out and touch someone: Analysis of nonverbal comforting responses. CommunicationQuarterly 41(4) 383-393.

  • Feng B. (2009). Testing an integrated model of advice giving in supportive communication. Human Communication Research35(1) 115-129.

  • Flick U. (2007). Designing qualitative research.

  • Goldsmith D. J. & MacGeorge E. L. (2000). London Sage. The impact of politeness and relationship on perceived quality of advice about a problem. Human Communication Research26(2) 234-263.

  • Goldsmith D. J. (1994). The role of face-work in supportive communication. In B. R Burleson T. L. Albrecht & D. J. Goldsmith (Eds.) Communication of social supportmessages interactions relationships andcommunity (pp. 29-49). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  • Gorman J. M. & Rooney J. F. (1979). The influence of Al-Anon on the coping behavior of wives of alcoholics. Journal of Studieson Alcohol 4(11) 1030-1038.

  • Guerrero J. K. & Hoobler G. D. (2002). Nonverbal singnals. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.) Handbook of interpersonalcommunication (pp. 240-299). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  • Guerrero J. K. Hecht M. L. & DeVito J. A. (2008). Perspectives on defining and understanding nonverbal communication. In L. K. Guerrero & M. L. Hecht (Eds.) The nonverbalcommunication reader (pp. 3-20). Long Grove Illinois: Waveland Press.

  • Guest G. MacQueen K. M. & Namey E.E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. Los Angeles: Sage.

  • Helgeson V. S. & Gottlieb B. H. (2000). Support groups. In S. L. Cohen G. Underwood & B. H. Gottlieb (Eds.) Social supportmeasurement and intervention: A guide forhealth and social scientists (pp. 221-245). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Hogg J. A. & Frank M. L. (1992). Toward an interpersonal model of codependence and contradependence. Journal of Counselingand Development 70 371-375.

  • Holmstrom A. J. & Burleson B. R. (2011). An initial test of cognitive-emotional theory of esteem support messages. CommunicationResearch 38(3) 326-355.

  • Huhtanen P. & Tigerstedt C. (2010). Kuinka paljon kärsimme muiden juomisesta? [How much do we suffer from others’ drinking?] In P. Mäkelä & C. Tigerstedt (Eds.) Suomijuo [Finland drinks] (pp. 220-233). Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.

  • Humphreys K. (2004). Circles of recovery:Self-help organizations for addictions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Jacobson D. E. (1986). Types and timing of social support. Journal of Health and SocialBehavior 27(3) 250-264.

  • Jones S. M. & Guerrero L. K. (2001). The effects of nonverbal immediacy and verbal person centeredness in the emotional support process. Human CommunicationResearch 27(4) 567-596.

  • Jones S. M. & Wirtz J. G. (2007). “Sad monkey see monkey do”: Nonverbal matching in emotional support encounters. CommunicationStudies 58(1) 71-86.

  • Kurtz L. F. (1994). Self-help groups for families with mental illness or alcoholism. In T. J. Powell (Ed.) Understanding the self-helporganization (pp. 293-313). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  • Le Poire B. A. (2004). The influence of drugs and alcohol on family communication: The effects that substance abuse has on family members and the effects that family members have on substance abuse. In A. L. Vangelist (Ed.) Handbook of family communication (pp. 609-628). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Levy L. H. (1979). Processes and activities in groups. In M. A. Lieberman & L. D. Borman (Eds.) Self-help groups for coping withcrisis (pp. 234-271). San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.

  • Lieberman M. A. (1976). Change induction in small groups. Annual Review of Psychology27 217-250.

  • Lincoln Y. S. & Cuba E. G. (1985). Naturalisticinquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.

  • Lindlof T. R. & Taylor B. C. (2011). Qualitativecommunication research methods. Los Angeles: Sage.

  • MacGeorge E. L. Feng B. & Thompson E. R. (2008). “Good” and “bad” advice: How to advise more effectively? In M. T. Motley (Ed.) Studies in applied interpersonal communication (pp. 145-164). Los Angeles: Sage.

  • MacGeorge E. L. Feng B. Butler G. L. & Budarz S. K. (2004). Understanding advice in supportive interactions: Beyond the facework and message evaluation paradigm. Human Communication Research 30(1) 42-70.

  • MacGeorge E. L. Lichtman R. M. & Pressey L. C. (2002). The evaluation of advice in supportive interaction: Facework and contextual factors. Human CommunicationResearch 28(3) 451-463.

  • Mäkelä K. Arminen I. Bloomfield K. Eisenbach- Stangl I. Bergmark K. H. Kurube N. Mariolini N. Ólafsdóttir H. Peterson J. H. Phillips M. Rehm J. Room R. Rosenqvist P. Rosovsky H. Stenius K. Sviatkiewicz G. Woronowicz B. & Zielinski A. (1996). Alcoholics Anonymous asa mutual-help movement. Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press.

  • Mäkelä K. (2012). Cost-of-alcohol studies as a research programme. Nordic Studies onAlcohol and Drugs 29(4) 321-343.

  • Miczo N. & Burgoon J. K. (2008). Facework and nonverbal behavior in social support interactions within romantic dyads. In M. T. Motley (Ed.) Studies in applied interpersonalcommunication (pp. 245-266). Los Angeles: Sage.

  • Orford J. Velleman R. Copello A. Templeton L. & Ibanga A. (2010). The experiences of affected family members: A summary of two decades of qualitative research. Drugs: Education Prevention and Policy17(S1) 44-62.

  • Peterson J. L. (2009). “You have to be positive”. Social support processes of an online support group for men living with HIV. Communication Studies 60(5) 526-541.

  • Rack J. J. Burleson B. R Bodie G. D. Holmstrom A. J. & Servaty-Seib H. (2008). Bereaved adults’ evaluations of grief management messages: Effects of message person centeredness recipients’ individual differences and contextual factors. DeathStudies 32 399-427.

  • Riessman F. (1965). The “helper” therapy principle. Social Work 10(2) 27-32.

  • Roberts K. S. & Brent E. E. (1982). Physician utilization and illness patterns in families of alcoholics. Journal of Studies on Alcohol43 119-128.

  • Rychtarik R. G. & MacGillicuddy N. B. (2005). Coping skills training and 12-step facilitation for women whose partner has alcoholism: Effects on depression the partner’s drinking and partner physical violence. Journal of Consulting and ClinicalPsychology 73(2) 249-261.

  • Saulnier C. F. (1994). Twelve steps for everyone? Lesbians in Al-Anon. In T. J. Powell (Ed.) Understanding the self-help organization (pp. 247-271). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

  • Saville-Troike M. (2003). The ethnography ofcommunication: An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Sciff M. & Bargal D. (2000). Helping characteristics of self-help and support groups: Their contribution to participants’ subjective well-being. Small Group Research31(3) 275-304.

  • So J. (2009 May). Communication processesin social support groups: Source of functionsand dysfunctions. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Communication Association Chicago.

  • Wills T. A. (1985). Supportive functions of interpersonal relationships. In S. Cohen & Syme L. S. (Eds.) Social support andhealth (pp. 61-82). Orlando: Academic Press.

  • Wiseman J. P. (1991). The other half: Wives ofalcoholics and their social psychologicalsituation. Aldine de Gruyter: New York.

Journal information
Impact Factor

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.683
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.752

CiteScore 2018: 0.64

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.313
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.456

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 58 25 1
PDF Downloads 35 19 0