LAUSR

In Rosik's (2017) response to my previous article (Jensma, 2016), he indicates that I made an unfortunate comparison between his earlier study (Rosik, 2011) and the outcome study in my article. I agree that such a comparison would be “apples and oranges”—as he calls it—and inappropriate. However, such a comparison was not intended, although I can see how it might have been inferred. My article presented the findings of an outcome study done at ALONGSIDE, a center that offers an intensive outpatient program primarily for missionaries. My literature review brought Rosik's (2011) outcome study to the fore, and the results of my outcome study appeared to be inconsistent with one of the primary findings suggested by Rosik's study. Responsible scholarship required me to try to explain the apparent difference in findings, but this was not the point of the article, and the article was not intended to be a comparison between the two studies. Rosik's re-analysis of his data indicates that both studies in fact showed similar results at three-month follow-up, and my presentation of further data in this response indicates that the results of a one-year follow-up are similar to the results of the three-month follow-up, thus supporting the findings of the outcome study presented in my previous article.