Rendered invisible: Are Asian Americans a model or a marginalized minority?

In 1992, the United States government expanded a 1978 decision to observe Asian Pacific American Heritage Week to a month-long recognition of the contributions of Asian Americans to the country's history and ongoing cultural milieu. Since 2000, the Asian population in the United States has grown by 72%-the fastest rate of any racial/ethnic group in the country. Today, the Census reports that Asians comprise 22 million United States residents. Despite this unprecedented growth, Asian Americans remain largely invisible in the national dialogue and in scientific research. This special issue features theoretical, empirical, and policy articles that highlight Asian Americans in psychology. Asian Americans remain marginalized and invisible in scientific endeavors for several reasons. For example, consolidating many ethnic groups under an "Asian American" pan-ethnic umbrella masks meaningful cultural, linguistic, ethnic, migration, gender, sexual/gender identity/expression, and socioeconomic differences. These intersectional identities result in experiences that are multiply marginalized, contributing to invisibility. The model minority stereotype highlights high-achieving and successful individuals, rendering the segment of the Asian American population that is struggling irrelevant and unworthy of attention. This special issue directly interrogates sources of invisibility to synthesize theory, research, and policy focused on Asian Americans. The articles in this special issue focus on the intersectional spaces that Asian Americans occupy, unpacking the diversity behind the "Asian American" pan-ethnic label, experiences of identity and discrimination across a range of Asian American groups, and areas of theory/research/policy where Asian American experiences have been overlooked. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Reducing mental health disparities by increasing the personal relevance of interventions.

One of the most persistent health disparities is the underutilization of mental health services by people of color. Neither evidence-based treatments (universal focus) nor culturally adapted treatments (group focus) have reduced these disparities. We propose the personal relevance of psychotherapy (PROP) model, which integrates universal, group, and individual dimensions to determine the personal relevance of interventions. A cultural example of personal relevance among people of East Asian ancestry involves "face" (i.e., one's prestige and position in society), which may moderate treatment outcomes. Pragmatic intervention approaches focused on helping individuals cope with specific external problems, compared to managing a "personal" disease, can effectively "restore" face. Thus, social problem-solving interventions may be more personally relevant to many people of East Asian ancestry than are approaches that are internally focused. In addition, we posit that social neuroscience can offer unique opportunities above and beyond self-report measures when assessing the impact of PROP and the personal relevance of interventions for diverse populations. Our preliminary evidence upon testing this hypothesis indicated that among Asian Americans, exposure to problem-solving therapy content elicited significantly greater neural activity in brain areas associated with personal relevance compared to exposure to cognitive-behavioral therapy content. Identifying personally relevant interventions has the potential to reduce mental health disparities by increasing engagement with mental health services for diverse groups. The increased client engagement produced by personally relevant interventions also has the potential to make mental health services more effective for diverse groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Mental health and clinical psychological science in the time of COVID-19: Challenges, opportunities, and a call to action.

COVID-19 presents significant social, economic, and medical challenges. Because COVID-19 has already begun to precipitate huge increases in mental health problems, clinical psychological science must assert a leadership role in guiding a national response to this secondary crisis. In this article, COVID-19 is conceptualized as a unique, compounding, multidimensional stressor that will create a vast need for intervention and necessitate new paradigms for mental health service delivery and training. Urgent challenge areas across developmental periods are discussed, followed by a review of psychological symptoms that likely will increase in prevalence and require innovative solutions in both science and practice. Implications for new research directions, clinical approaches, and policy issues are discussed to highlight the opportunities for clinical psychological science to emerge as an updated, contemporary field capable of addressing the burden of mental illness and distress in the wake of COVID-19 and beyond. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Toward ethnocultural diversification of higher education.

Attitudes toward ethnocultural diversification in higher education mirror attitudes toward paying taxes. Dissenters are opposed to paying taxes or to ethnocultural diversification. Passive Supporters value the benefits of taxes or ethnocultural diversification, but pay taxes or engage in diversity efforts only when required to do so. Active Supporters pay taxes or support diversity efforts even if they are not required to do so. Mandatory approaches to decrease the resistance of Dissenters to ethnocultural diversification may be necessary, whereas compelling voluntary approaches may be useful to mobilize Passive Supporters. Solutions need to be tailored to the needs of European Americans and persons of color. This article offers a conceptual framework for future research and interventions.