Mindfulness-based meditation interventions have become increasingly popular in contemporary psychology. Other closely related meditation practices include loving-kindness meditation (LKM) and compassion meditation (CM), exercises oriented toward enhancing unconditional, positive emotional states of kindness and compassion. This article provides a review of the background, the techniques, and the empirical contemporary literature of LKM and CM. The literature suggests that LKM and CM are associated with an increase in positive affect and a decrease in negative affect. Preliminary findings from neuroendocrine studies indicate that CM may reduce stress-induced subjective distress and immune response. Neuroimaging studies suggest that LKM and CM may enhance activation of brain areas that are involved in emotional processing and empathy. Finally, preliminary intervention studies support application of these strategies in clinical populations. It is concluded that, when combined with empirically supported treatments, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, LKM and CM may provide potentially useful strategies for targeting a variety of different psychological problems that involve interpersonal processes, such as social anxiety, marital conflict, anger, and coping with the strains of long-term caregiving.

The DSM-IV-TR PTSD category demonstrates various types of validity. Criteria modification and textual clarifications are suggested to further improve its cross-cultural applicability.

We examined the therapeutic efficacy of a culturally adapted cognitive-behavior therapy for Cambodian refugees with treatment-resistant posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and comordid panic attacks. We used a cross-over design, with 20 patients in the initial treatment (IT) condition and 20 in delayed treatment (DT). Repeated measures MANOVA, Group & times; Time ANOVAs, and planned contrasts indicated significantly greater improvement in the IT condition, with large effect sizes (Cohen's d) for all outcome measures: Anxiety Sensitivity Index (d = 3.78), Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (d = 2.17), and Symptom Checklist 90-R subscales (d = 2.77). Likewise, the severity of (culturally related) neck-focused and orthostasis-cued panic attacks, including flashbacks associated with these subtypes, improved across treatment.

To examine cultural aspects in social anxiety and social anxiety disorder (SAD), we reviewed the literature on the prevalence rates, expressions, and treatments of social anxiety/SAD as they relate to culture, race, and ethnicity. We further reviewed factors that contribute to the differences in social anxiety/SAD between different cultures, including individualism/collectivism, perception of social norms, self-construal, gender roles, and gender role identification. Our review suggests that the prevalence and expression of social anxiety/SAD depends on the particular culture. Asian cultures typically show the lowest rates, whereas Russian and US samples show the highest rates, of SAD. Taijin kyofusho is discussed as a possible culture-specific expression of social anxiety, although the empirical evidence concerning the validity of this syndrome has been mixed. It is concluded that the individual's social concerns need to be examined in the context of the person's cultural, racial, and ethnic background in order to adequately assess the degree and expression of social anxiety and social anxiety disorder. This has direct relevance for the upcoming DSM-V.The defining feature of social anxiety disorder (SAD) is the fear of negative evaluation by others. Therefore, SAD is directly linked to social standards and role expectations, which are culture dependent. Recognizing the intricate interplay between culture and social anxiety, some research has focused on psychopathologic manifestations of SAD across cultures [1], while in other studies the focus has been on comparing disorder-typical symptoms across cultures [2]. It should be noted that most of the studies on cultural differences in SAD have examined Eastern (especially Japanese, Korean, and Chinese) and Western (US American and European) samples.The following is a review of the evidence pertaining to the validity of the DSM-IV-TR criteria for social anxiety disorder (SAD) as it relates to culture, race, and ethnicity. We use the term "race" when we refer to broad differentiations based on physiognomy (e.g., White), "ethnicity" when we refer to "common descent" and affiliation with a historically continuous community (e.g., Latino), and "culture" when we refer to social groups with specific or homogenous attributes. We particularly concentrate on culture as a source for the nosological revisions to explore whether certain cognitive/ behavioral elements (e.g., interpretations of illness; patterned reactions to stressors) affect the development or expression of psychiatric syndromes.The search methods for the current review entailed a thorough computer search using the Pubmed and PsychInfo databases for articles published since the publication of the DSM-IV in 1994. Specifically, key words relevant to SAD (i.e., "social phobia" or "social anxiety disorder") were combined with the terms "culture", "ethnic*", and "race". This approach

Cultural concepts of distress are not inherently unamenable to epidemiological study. However, poor study quality impedes conceptual advancement and service application. With improved study design and reporting using guidelines such as the SAQOR-CPE, CCD research can enhance detection of mental health problems, reduce cultural biases in diagnostic criteria and increase cultural salience of intervention trial outcomes.

Idioms of distress communicate suffering via reference to shared ethnopsychologies, and better understanding of idioms of distress can contribute to effective clinical and public health communication. This systematic review is a qualitative synthesis of “thinking too much” idioms globally, to determine their applicability and variability across cultures. We searched eight databases and retained publications if they included empirical quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods research regarding a “thinking too much” idiom and were in English. In total, 138 publications from 1979–2014 met inclusion criteria. We examined the descriptive epidemiology, phenomenology, etiology, and course of “thinking too much” idioms and compared them to psychiatric constructs. “Thinking too much” idioms typically reference ruminative, intrusive, and anxious thoughts and result in a range of perceived complications, physical and mental illnesses, or even death. These idioms appear to have variable overlap with common psychiatric constructs, including depression, anxiety, and PTSD. However, “thinking too much” idioms reflect aspects of experience, distress, and social positioning not captured by psychiatric diagnoses and often show wide within-cultural variation, in addition to between-cultural differences. Taken together, these findings suggest that “thinking too much” should not be interpreted as a gloss for psychiatric disorder nor assumed to be a unitary symptom or syndrome within a culture. We suggest five key ways in which engagement with “thinking too much” idioms can improve global mental health research and interventions: it (1) incorporates a key idiom of distress into measurement and screening to improve validity of efforts at identifying those in need of services and tracking treatment outcomes; (2) facilitates exploration of ethnopsychology in order to bolster cultural appropriateness of interventions; (3) strengthens public health communication to encourage engagement in treatment; (4) reduces stigma by enhancing understanding, promoting treatment-seeking, and avoiding unintentionally contributing to stigmatization; and (5) identifies a key locally salient treatment target.

We examined the feasibility, acceptability, and therapeutic efficacy of a culturally adapted cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT) for twelve Vietnamese refugees with treatment-resistant posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and panic attacks. These patients were treated in two separate cohorts of six with staggered onset of treatment. Repeated measures Group x Time ANOVAs and between-group comparisons indicated significant improvements, with large effect sizes (Cohen's d) for all outcome measures: Harvard Trauma Questionnaire (HTQ; d = 2.5); Anxiety Sensitivity Index (ASI: d = 4.3); Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25), anxiety subscale (d = 2.2); and Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25, depression subscale (d = 2.0) scores. Likewise, the severity of (culturally related) headache-and orthostasis-cued panic attacks improved significantly across treatment

Prior literature emphasizes that Asian