Stake Theory as an Explanatory Device in Navajo Alcoholism Treatment Response

Abstract

The usefulness of "stake in society" theory, a form of transactional theory employed by John J. and Irma Honigmann to explain abandonment of frontier-type norms regarding alcohol use by modern Arctic townsmen, is tested in conjunction with differential response to treatment by a group of 110 Navajo alcoholic men. In a modified usage, "stake" is operationally defined by type. It is postulated that many of the men had suffered initial loss of stake in the context of lack of negative sanctions regarding heavy alcohol use in Navajo culture. Navajos who regained a stake in the old society during treatment tended to conform to new norms in the family context, while those who acquired concurrent stakes in both old and modern society were even more outstanding in their adherence to new norms. The failure of those with modern stake alone to acquire new norms regarding alcohol use is tentatively explained in terms of lack of a reference group other than the drinking fellowship, suggesting that what appears to be a preferable stake may not be regarded as such when it is in the context of what the Cornell study (Leighton et al. 1963) refers to as interference with essential striving sentiments of love and recognition, hence in such cases new norms will not take precedence over old. A model for the wider use of stake theory is presented.