Was the 2020 Presidential Election Nerve-Wracking?: Changes in Mental Health Among College Dreamers.

U.S. presidential elections can be stressful for many Americans; however, there is little research as to how elections might influence mental health of undocumented immigrants specifically. The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election had the potential to dramatically influence immigration policies with the Democratic candidate promising a pathway toward citizenship for undocumented immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as minors (i.e., dreamers), and the incumbent Republican candidate threatening to terminate the DACA program. Using an online survey method, this exploratory longitudinal study examined whether dreamers' mental health changed following the U.S. presidential election, while also examining risk factors associated with their mental health. We employed GAD-7 and PHQ-9 questionnaires as preclinical screens for anxiety and depression. We found that the mean anxiety and depression scores decreased significantly following the election, i.e., when the democratic candidate was declared the winner. Risk factors for mental health problems also differed before and after the election. Risk factors for depression before the election included being female, Hispanic white, having a low self-reported status on the subjective social ladder, and having high perceived discrimination; risk factors for depression after the election included coming to the U.S. at an older age and high perceived discrimination. Risk factors for anxiety before the election included being female, having more siblings, both parents working, and high perceived discrimination. Risk factors for anxiety after the election included low self-reported status on the subjective social ladder, being a freshman, and high perceived discrimination. Preliminary results suggest that mental health of dreamers improved after the election. In addition, while risk factors differed before and after the election, perceived everyday discrimination remained a consistent risk factor for mental health issues.

Assessing barriers to providing tobacco use disorder treatment in community mental health settings with a revised version of the Smoking Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (S-KAP) instrument.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use disorder (TUD) rates are 2-3 times higher among people with serious mental illness (SMI) than the general population. Clinicians working in outpatient community mental health clinics are well positioned to provide TUD treatment to this group, but rates of treatment provision are very low. Understanding factors associated with the provision of TUD treatment by mental health clinicians is a priority. METHODS: This study used baseline data from an ongoing cluster-randomized clinical trial evaluating two approaches to training clinicians to increase TUD treatment. Following a psychometric assessment of our assessment tool, the Smoking Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (S-KAP) instrument, a new factor structure was evaluated utilizing confirmatory factor analysis. Structural equation modeling was then used to examine the associations between TUD treatment practices and clinician, setting, and patient characteristics in a sample of 182 mental health clinicians across 10 mental health clinics. RESULTS: Clinician but not setting or patient characteristics emerged as significant correlates of providing TUD treatment. Specifically, clinicians' general ethical commitment to providing TUD services and perceptions of their skills in providing this type of care were associated with providing TUD treatment. In contrast, clinician perceptions of patient motivation, anticipated quit rates, or available setting resources were not significantly associated with providing TUD treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Enhancing community mental health clinician TUD treatment skills and commitment to providing such services may reduce TUD rates among people with SMI. Future studies should evaluate interventions that target these factors.

Intimacy as an interpersonal process: the importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges.

H. T. Reis and P. Shaver's (1988) interpersonal process model of intimacy suggests that both self-disclosure and partner responsiveness contribute to the experience of intimacy in interactions. Two studies tested this model using an event-contingent diary methodology in which participants provided information immediately after their social interactions over 1 (Study 1) or 2 (Study 2) weeks. For each interaction, participants reported on their self-disclosures, partner disclosures, perceived partner responsiveness, and degree of intimacy experienced in the interaction. Overall, the findings strongly supported the conceptualization of intimacy as a combination of self-disclosure and partner disclosure at the level of individual interactions with partner responsiveness as a partial mediator in this process. Additionally, in Study 2, self-disclosure of emotion emerged as a more important predictor of intimacy than did self-disclosure of facts and information.

Dispositional optimism and the mechanisms by which it predicts slower disease progression in HIV: proactive behavior, avoidant coping, and depression.

The issue of whether optimism may prospectively protect against disease progression is one that has generated much interest, with mixed results in the literature. The purpose of this study was to determine whether dispositional optimism predicts slower disease progression in HIV. Two indicators of disease progression, CD4 counts and viral load, were assessed over 2 years in a diverse group (men, women, White, African American, Hispanic) of 177 people with HIV in the midrange of disease at entry to the study. Optimism predicted slower disease progression (less decrease in CD4 and less increase in viral load) controlling for baseline CD4 and viral load, antiretroviral treatment, gender, race, education, and drug use. Those low on optimism (25th percentile) lost CD4 cells at a rate 1.55 times faster than those high on optimism (75th percentile). Optimists had higher proactive behavior, less avoidant coping, and less depression: These variables mediated the linear optimism-disease progression relationship. Thus, optimists may reap health benefits partly through behavioral (proactive behavior), cognitive (avoidant coping), and affective (depression) pathways. Implications, limitations, and interpretations are discussed.