The article addresses the adaptation of evidence-based prevention and positive youth development programs for community use. Two complementary approaches for adapting programs are described. In the “adapted” approach, programs are modified to accommodate the culture, climate, and operations of the organization delivering the program. In the “adaptive” approach, programs are modified to accommodate the characteristics, needs and preferences of the individual or family receiving the program. Two examples are provided that illustrate how both adapted and adaptive intervention strategies have been incorporated by community practitioners into the implementation of the Early Risers conduct problems prevention program.
Although worry is central to the diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), it is also commonly observed in other anxiety disorders. In this meta-analytic review, we empirically evaluated the extent to which worry is specific to GAD relative to patients with other anxiety disorders, those with other psychiatric disorders, and nonpsychiatric controls. A total of 47 published studies (N = 8,410) were included in the analysis. The results yielded a large effect size indicating greater severity/frequency of worry, meta-worry, and domains of worry among anxiety disorder patients v. nonpsychiatric controls (d = 1.64). In contrast to the many differences emerging from comparisons between anxiety disordered patients and nonpsychiatric controls, when anxiety disordered patients were compared to people with other psychiatric disorders they differed only on severity/frequency and not on meta-worry or domains of worry. A large effect size indicating greater severity/frequency of worry, meta-worry, and domains of worry among patients with GAD v. nonpsychiatric controls was also found (d = 2.05). However, differences between GAD and those with other psychiatric disorders also emerged for severity/frequency of worry. GAD was associated with greater worry difficulties than other anxiety disorders, which generally did not differ from those with other psychiatric disorders and each other. The implications of these findings for conceptualizing worry in GAD and other anxiety disorders, and the potentially moderating effects of age and gentler are discussed. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Prevention of depression and anxiety disorders is widely acknowledged as an important health care investment. However, existing preventive interventions have only shown modest effects. In order to improve the efficacy of prevention of depression and anxiety disorders, a number of authors have suggested that it is promising to focus on selective prevention programs that are offered to individuals scoring high on clearly established risk factors, whereby the preventive intervention then specifically targets these risk variables. This review presents repetitive negative thinking (worry and rumination) as a promising target for the prevention of depression and anxiety disorders.
Stigma has been described as one of the largest barriers for those who have been diagnosed with a mental disorder, with negative consequences impacting all facets of life, including the workplace. Although many population-based anti-stigma initiatives exist, the need for workplace interventions is being recognized, particularly as the financial costs of mental disorders in the workplace mount. Specific workplace-focused programs are emerging to address this need. The present paper describes efforts to reduce the stigma related to mental disorders in the workplace. Following the review, suggestions are made for future workplace anti-stigma interventions, as well as a discussion of considerations for researchers who evaluate such programs. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A growing body of research has demonstrated important variations in the prevalence, nature, and correlates of suicide across ethnic and sexual minority groups. Despite these developments, existing clinical and research approaches to suicide assessment and prevention have not incorporated cultural variations in any systematic way. In addition, theoretical models of suicide have been largely devoid of cultural influence. The current report presents a comprehensive analysis of literature describing the relationship between cultural factors and suicide in three major ethnic groups (African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos) and LCBTQ(1) sexual minority groups. We utilized an inductive approach to synthesize this variegated body of research into four factors that account for 95% of existing culturally specific risk data: cultural sanctions, idioms of distress, minority stress, and social discord. These four cultural factors are then integrated into a theoretical framework: the Cultural Model of Suicide. Three theoretical principles emerge: (1) culture affects the types of stressors that lead to suicide; (2) cultural meanings associated with stressors and suicide affect the development of suicidal tendencies, one's threshold of tolerance for psychological pain, and subsequent suicidal acts; and (3) culture affects how suicidal thoughts, intent, plans, and attempts are expressed. The Cultural Model of Suicide provides an empirically guided cohesive approach that can inform culturally competent suicide assessment and prevention efforts in future research and clinical practice. Including both ethnic and sexual minorities in our investigations ensures advancement along a multiple identities perspective. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
With the continued operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, studies of the prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder and related symptoms are now common. However, lacking is how these symptoms relate to precipitating conditions and the mitigating effects of social support on these symptoms. This is particularly relevant for reserve military personnel, who have been shown to be greater at-risk for postdeployment problems. The present study examined questionnaire data obtained from Army National Guard (ARNG) units immediately after their return from deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan during 2010 (N=4329 soldiers in 50 units). Findings showed few soldiers displayed risk behaviors (i.e., daily alcohol use, use of illicit drugs, suicide thoughts, and physically threatening others) during and after deployment. Those most likely to have more postdeployment risk behaviors were also those who showed more risk behaviors during deployment. A substantial percentage of soldiers reported combat exposure, postdeployment negative emotions, and postdeployment loss of a personal relationship. These reported outcomes were all related to increased risk behaviors after deployment. The buffering effect of social support on postdeployment risk behaviors was equally evident when data were examined individually and when grouped by unit memberships. Implications of findings for future research, practice, and policies are discussed.
Over the past 30 years, the topic of psychotherapy integration has moved from a latent theme to a clear movement, and the commentaries made in this issue of Applied and Preventive Psychology document these changes. More than ever before, the field of psychotherapy has become increasingly interested in achieving a consensus. The question is becoming what, not who is correct. We are now better able to identify stages of change that cut across different orientations, as well as underlying principles of change. Still, we are not “there yet,” and need to confront the limitations stemming from an overvaluation of what is “new,” and to develop a common language with which to communicate what we know. It is also suggested that a two-way bridge between research and practice can represent the future of psychotherapy integration.
Over the past 30 years, the topic of psychotherapy integration has moved from a latent theme to a clear movement, and the commentaries made in this issue of Applied and Preventive Psychology document these changes. More than ever before, the field of psychotherapy has become increasingly interested in achieving a consensus. The question is becoming what, not who is correct. We are now better able to identify stages of change that cut across different orientations, as well as underlying principles of change. Still, we are not “there yet,” and need to confront the limitations stemming from an overvaluation of what is “new,” and to develop a common language with which to communicate what we know. It is also suggested that a two-way bridge between research and practice can represent the future of psychotherapy integration.
The main message of Goldfried's seminal paper on the principles of therapeutic change is reconsidered with regard to three modern issues: the identification of the mediators of treatment outcomes, the methods needed for optimal dissemination of empirically supported treatments, and the struggles associated with therapies that strive to be different. Despite the passage of time, the message holds true.
Over the past 30 years, the topic of psychotherapy integration has moved from a latent theme to a clear movement, and the commentaries made in this issue of Applied and Preventive Psychology document these changes. More than ever before, the field of psychotherapy has become increasingly interested in achieving a consensus. The question is becoming what, not who is correct. We are now better able to identify stages of change that cut across different orientations, as well as underlying principles of change. Still, we are not "there yet," and need to confront the limitations stemming from an overvaluation of what is "new," and to develop a common language with which to communicate what we know. It is also suggested that a two-way bridge between research and practice can represent the future of psychotherapy integration.
Over the past 30 years, the topic of psychotherapy integration has moved from a latent theme to a clear movement, and the commentaries made in this issue of Applied and Preventive Psychology document these changes. More than ever before, the field of psychotherapy has become increasingly interested in achieving a consensus. The question is becoming what, not who is correct. We are now better able to identify stages of change that cut across different orientations, as well as underlying principles of change. Still, we are not “there yet,” and need to confront the limitations stemming from an overvaluation of what is “new,” and to develop a common language with which to communicate what we know. It is also suggested that a two-way bridge between research and practice can represent the future of psychotherapy integration.
Over the past 30 years, the topic of psychotherapy integration has moved from a latent theme to a clear movement, and the commentaries made in this issue of Applied and Preventive Psychology document these changes. More than ever before, the field of psychotherapy has become increasingly interested in achieving a consensus. The question is becoming what, not who is correct. We are now better able to identify stages of change that cut across different orientations, as well as underlying principles of change. Still, we are not “there yet,” and need to confront the limitations stemming from an overvaluation of what is “new,” and to develop a common language with which to communicate what we know. It is also suggested that a two-way bridge between research and practice can represent the future of psychotherapy integration.
Over the past 30 years, the topic of psychotherapy integration has moved from a latent theme to a clear movement, and the commentaries made in this issue of Applied and Preventive Psychology document these changes. More than ever before, the field of psychotherapy has become increasingly interested in achieving a consensus. The question is becoming what, not who is correct. We are now better able to identify stages of change that cut across different orientations, as well as underlying principles of change. Still, we are not “there yet,” and need to confront the limitations stemming from an overvaluation of what is “new,” and to develop a common language with which to communicate what we know. It is also suggested that a two-way bridge between research and practice can represent the future of psychotherapy integration.
Over the past 30 years, the topic of psychotherapy integration has moved from a latent theme to a clear movement, and the commentaries made in this issue of Applied and Preventive Psychology document these changes. More than ever before, the field of psychotherapy has become increasingly interested in achieving a consensus. The question is becoming what, not who is correct. We are now better able to identify stages of change that cut across different orientations, as well as underlying principles of change. Still, we are not “there yet,” and need to confront the limitations stemming from an overvaluation of what is “new,” and to develop a common language with which to communicate what we know. It is also suggested that a two-way bridge between research and practice can represent the future of psychotherapy integration.
Over the past 30 years, the topic of psychotherapy integration has moved from a latent theme to a clear movement, and the commentaries made in this issue of Applied and Preventive Psychology document these changes. More than ever before, the field of psychotherapy has become increasingly interested in achieving a consensus. The question is becoming what, not who is correct. We are now better able to identify stages of change that cut across different orientations, as well as underlying principles of change. Still, we are not “there yet,” and need to confront the limitations stemming from an overvaluation of what is “new,” and to develop a common language with which to communicate what we know. It is also suggested that a two-way bridge between research and practice can represent the future of psychotherapy integration.
There is a growing discontent among therapists of varying orientations. Psychoanalytic, behavioral, and humanistically oriented clinicians are starting to raise serious questions about the limits of their respective approaches and are becoming more open to contributions from other paradigms. This article documents this trend within the field, which resembles a Kuhnian-type crisis, noting some of the political, economic, and social forces apt to affect our likelihood of ever reaching a consensus within the field and presenting an approach to the delineation and study of commonalities across various orientations.
