Discusses specific studies, but does not mention some main points that lead to effectiveness such as the importance of teachers and the long-term effect. I found further evidence on several points that made the program effective. For example, a large sample size in the recorded data which makes the evidence stronger to demonstrate the effectiveness of the program. Botvin didn't limit himself to one study, he experimented with different populations around the world. Even today he is studying to make his program larger and more successful than today. Wilson's strengths include clearly stating that the program is effective and providing few examples to prove his point. But its weakness is not providing the reader with enough information about the program's effectiveness and the rationale behind the examples to demonstrate the program's effectiveness. The evidence he provided did not convince me because he did not mention whether the studies he mentioned were recent or old. In order to accept the program as effective, I would prefer to have the dates of when the studies took place. From the research I did, I found information about the background and developer of the program. He doesn't give Botvin credit for developing the program. In my research, I found the long-term effects, more evidence on studies, and how teachers hold many sessions to teach students about the program. The sample size used in the trials I found provided a better approximation of how the LST works. LST, to this day, is an effective program for up to twelve years