Family-based prevention in youth's substance misuse in low- and middle-income countries: A review from Turkey and cultural adaptation of family based interventions

Family-based interventions have been recognized and practised more in high-income countries than in low- and middle-income countries. However, the threats posed by substance misuse to the youth do not change for the latter. The development of appropriate preventive programs is an area of interest for addiction prevention in low- and middle-income countries by recognizing the risk factors for substance misuse among young individuals. This study aims to present the risk factors primarily in family-based conditions for substance use among young people in low- and middle-income countries and to provide information on family-based interventions that can be developed in line with these factors. It is aimed to discuss how family-based studies can be adapted to samples such as Turkey in the light of three programs originating in the USA. Fifty-six publications gathered from the literature between 1989-2021 by using keywords were included in the study. Adolescence and young adulthood are the riskiest developmental periods for substance misuse worldwide. Economic, cultural and family-based factors involving the youth are of considerable importance. Families' consciousness of youth's substance use is worthful to prevent youth's addictions in the future. Studies show that family-based preventions are promising interventions in this regard.

Associations between coping and marijuana use in a nationally representative sample of adolescents in the United States

Maladaptive coping strategies have been linked with substance use. Little is known, however, about associations between coping and marijuana use in the general U.S. adolescents. We used nationally representative data to examine associations between coping and marijuana use among U.S. adolescents. We hypothesized that marijuana use would be positively associated with both avoidance and distraction coping and negatively associated with problem solving. We calculated adjusted prevalence ratios and odds ratios to assess associations of three coping styles (avoidance, distraction, problem solving) and six coping profiles based on combinations of the styles (adaptive, low on all styles, distracted, high on all styles, avoidant, maladaptive) with lifetime marijuana use and past 12-month frequency of use using data from the National Comorbidity Survey: Adolescent Supplement (n=8476, ages 14-18years). Avoidance and distraction coping were positively and problem solving was negatively associated with lifetime marijuana use. Avoidance coping was positively associated, and problem solving negatively associated, with past 12-month frequency of use. Compared to the adaptive coping profile (low avoidance and distraction, high problem solving), maladaptive profile (high avoidance and distraction, low problem solving) and avoidance profile (high avoidance, low distraction and problem solving) were each positively associated with lifetime marijuana use and past 12-month frequency of use. Avoidance coping, especially in combination with limited problem solving, was positively associated with lifetime marijuana use and past 12-month frequency of use. Our findings have potential to inform interventions for reducing adolescent marijuana use.

Comparing the Multicomponent Coping Power Program to Individualized Parent-Child Treatment for Improving the Parenting Efficacy and Satisfaction of Parents of Children with Conduct Problems

This study compared the multicomponent Coping Power (group) program to individualized parent-child treatment with respect to changing the parenting efficacy and satisfaction of parents of children with conduct problems. One hundred fourteen parents of 9-12-year-old children with conduct problems were randomized to Coping Power or individualized treatment at an urban children's mental health clinic. Parents reported their pre- and post-treatment parenting efficacy and parenting satisfaction (Parent Sense of Competence Scale). Mixed effect models revealed that parenting efficacy and satisfaction significantly increased from pre- to post-treatment, and there was no evidence that this effect is different between Coping Power and individualized treatment, even after controlling for initial severity of child symptomatology. Findings support the effectiveness of Coping Power as an intervention for parenting efficacy and satisfaction among parents of children aged 9-12 years with conduct problems.

Evaluation of Improvement in Externalizing Behaviors and Callous-Unemotional Traits in Children with Disruptive Behavior Disorder: A 1-Year Follow Up Clinic-Based Study

Multi-component interventions based on cognitive behavioral principles and practices have been found effective in reducing behavioral problems in children with disruptive behavior disorders (oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder). However, it is still unclear if these interventions can affect children's callous-unemotional traits, which are predictive of subsequent antisocial behavior. Furthermore, it could be important to identify empirically supported treatment protocols for specific disorders addressed by child mental health services. The present study aimed to test the following two hypotheses: first, the Coping Power (CP) treatment program is able to reduce externalizing behaviors in children with disruptive behavior disorders treated in a mental health care unit; second, the CP program can reduce children's callous unemotional traits. The sample included 98 Italian children, 33 treated with the CP program; 37 with a less focused multi-component intervention, and 28 with child psychotherapy. The results showed that the CP program was more effective than the other two treatments in reducing aggressive behaviors. Furthermore, only the CP program was associated with a decrease in children's callous unemotional traits. The CP program was also associated with lower rate of referrals to mental health services at one-year follow-up. These findings support the importance of disseminating manualized and focused intervention programs in mental health services.

Missed Programs (You Can't TiVo This One): Why Psychologists Should Study Media

Media psychology involves the scientific examination of the cognitive processes and behavior involved in the selection, use, interpretation, and effects of communication across a variety of media (e.g., via the Internet, television, telephone, film). Media are central to people's lives, with projections indicating that an average person spent over 3,515 hours using media in 2012. New technologies are increasing the importance of media. Data from two content analyses demonstrate the underrepresentation of media psychology in mainstream psychological literature and in undergraduate and graduate psychology course offerings. We argue for the importance of a psychological approach to the study of media because of its presence in people's lives and because psychologists use it in their research and their choices may affect the external validity of their findings. We provide a useful framework from which psychologists can approach the study of media, and we conclude with recommendations for further areas of scientific inquiry relevant to psychological science.

Children's responses to hypothetical provocation by peers: coordination of assertive and aggressive strategies

Children often respond to aggression by peers with assertive bids or aggressive retaliation. Little is known, however, about whether and how children coordinate these strategies across different types of provocation. The present study examined endorsement of aggressive and assertive responses to hypothetical physical, relational, and verbal provocation in a sample of lower-income children (N = 402, M age = 10.21, SD = 1.46). Latent-profile analysis revealed 3-class models for both aggression and assertion, each reflecting low, moderate, and high levels of endorsement. There was no association between children's reported use of aggression and assertion. For example, children who endorsed high levels of aggression were equally likely to be classified as low, moderate, or high on assertive responding. For both assertion and aggression, parental ratings of children's externalizing behavior and social skills differed across the low and high groups. No such differences were found between the low and moderate groups, despite the latter groups endorsing markedly higher levels of assertive and aggressive responses. This pattern of findings may be due, in part, to the situation specificity of children's responding. Our findings hint at the complexity of children's behavioral repertoires and contribute to a growing literature that suggests the need for intervention models that consider both social skills and social situations.

A translational model of research-practice integration

We propose a four-level, recursive Research-Practice Integration framework as a heuristic to (a) integrate and reflect on the articles in this Special Section as contributing to a bidirectional bridge between research and practice, and (b) consider additional opportunities to address the research-practice gap. Level 1 addresses Treatment Validation studies and includes an article by Lochman and colleagues concerning the programmatic adaptation, implementation, and dissemination of the empirically supported Coping Power treatment program for youth aggression. Level 2 translation, Training in Evidence-Based Practice, includes a paper by Hershenberg, Drabick, and Vivian, which focuses on the critical role that predoctoral training plays in bridging the research-practice gap. Level 3 addresses the Assessment of Clinical Utility and Feedback to Research aspects of translation. The articles by Lambert and Youn, Kraus, and Castonguay illustrate the use of commercial outcome packages that enable psychotherapists to integrate ongoing client assessment, thus enhancing the effectiveness of treatment implementation and providing data that can be fed back to researchers. Lastly, Level 4 translation, the Cross-Level Integrative Research and Communication, concerns research efforts that integrate data from clinical practice and all other levels of translation, as well as communication efforts among all stakeholders, such as researchers, psychotherapists, and clients. Using a two-chair technique as a framework for his discussion, Wolfe's article depicts the struggle inherent in research-practice integration efforts and proposes a rapprochement that highlights advancements in the field.

Bridging the gap between clinical research and clinical practice: introduction to the special section

This Special Section, developed by the American Psychology Association's Division 12 (Clinical) 2011 Committee on Science and Practice, highlights different ideas to help bridge the gap between clinical research and clinical practice, and notes recent innovations that help make research-practice integration feasible. The articles consider how to break down the barriers to enhance researcher-practitioner dialogue, as well as how to make ongoing outcome assessment feasible for clinicians. Moreover, the articles address how to promote training in evidence-based practice, and how to translate efficacy research into clinical practice and clinical insight into empirical study to better establish a two-way bridge between research and practice. Ultimately, we hope this series can speak to many different types of psychologists, whether they work mainly as researchers or practitioners, so they can see new ways to integrate and learn from both research and practice.