Daily stressors may mediate the relation between exposure to disaster-related stressors and psychological and psychosocial distress among youth in disaster-affected countries. A sample of 427 Sri Lankan Sinhalese, Tamil, and Muslim youth (mean age = 14.5) completed a survey with measures of exposure to disaster-related stressors and daily stressors, psychological distress (posttraumatic stress, depression, and anxiety), and psychosocial distress. The results indicated that daily stressors significantly mediated relations between war- and tsunami-related stressors and psychological and psychosocial distress. Some daily stressors not directly related to disaster also predicted functioning. These results point to the need for policies and interventions that focus on reducing proximal daily stressors that are salient to Sri Lankan youth exposed to disasters.

The purpose of this study was to develop a measure of psychosocial status that could reliably and accurately assess psychosocial functioning in Sinhalese Sri Lankans impacted by traumatic events. A culturally grounded methodology using qualitative data was used to develop and validate the Sri Lankan Index of Psychosocial Status--Adult Version (SLIPSS-A). The SLIPPS-A is a 26-item measure assessing local indicators of distress, with items placed on a frequency scale from 0 (never) to 4 (6-7 days per week). The instrument was administered to 170 Sinhalese Sri Lankans (72% women) between the ages of 21 and 71 years with differing types of trauma exposure. The measure demonstrated excellent reliability (alpha = .92) and was significantly correlated with the Postraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist. Scores on the SLIPSS-A significantly predicted exposure to the tsunami. Factor analysis resulted in the extraction of five factors. The results suggest that the SLIPSS-A could be used as a general measure to assess psychosocial functioning in Sri Lankan rural Sinhalese adults impacted by trauma.

The global mental health (GMH) research agenda should include both culture-general and culture-specific perspectives to ensure ecological validity of findings. Despite its title, the current GMH research agenda appears to be using a monocultural model that is individualistic, illness-oriented, and focused on intrapsychic processes. Ironically, issues of culture are prominently absent in many discussions of global mental health. This paper highlights some issues and concerns considered key to conducting ecologically valid and socially responsible GMH research. The concerns are particularly directed at researchers from dominant cultures who are working in low-income countries. Central to these issues is the balance between etic and emic perspectives in assessment, diagnosis, and intervention, as well as language, engagement of stakeholders and their agendas, and evaluation of the benefit of interventions to the community. New terminology is proposed that identifies broad cultural groups, and recommendations provided for a research agenda to encourage both basic and applied research that mutually benefits all stakeholders in the GMH research endeavor.

Numerous scales currently exist that assess well-being, but research on measures of well-being is still advancing. Conceptualization and measurement of subjective well-being have emphasized intrapsychic over psychosocial domains of optimal functioning, and disparate research on hedonic, eudaimonic, and psychological well-being lacks a unifying theoretical model. Lack of systematic investigations on the impact of culture on subjective well-being has also limited advancement of this field. The goals of this investigation were to (1) develop and validate a self-report measure, the Well-Being Scale (WeBS), that simultaneously assesses overall well-being and physical, financial, social, hedonic, and eudaimonic domains of this construct; (2) evaluate factor structures that underlie subjective well-being; and (3) examine the measure's psychometric properties. Three empirical studies were conducted to develop and validate the 29-item scale. The WeBS demonstrated an adequate five-factor structure in an exploratory structural equation model in Study 1. Confirmatory factor analyses showed that a bifactor structure best fit the WeBS data in Study 2 and Study 3. Overall WeBS scores and five domain-specific subscale scores demonstrated adequate to excellent internal consistency reliability and construct validity. Mean differences in overall well-being and its five subdomains are presented for different ethnic groups. The WeBS is a reliable and valid measure of multiple aspects of well-being that are considered important to different ethnocultural groups.

This paper describes the use of a mixed methods design to develop the Sri Lankan Children' s Daily Stressor Scale (CDSS). It brie£y describes its use in a study assessing the relative contribution of daily stressors on the one hand, and war and disaster exposure on the other, to young people' s mental health and psychosocial wellbeing.The authors discuss the neglect of daily stressors; the stressful social and material conditions of everyday life in settings of armed con£ict and natural disaster and o¡er a rationale for the importance of assessing daily stressors when seeking to understand and address mental health and psychosocial needs of con£ict and disaster a¡ected youth. A central focus of the paper is on the unique value of a mixed methods approach to contextually sound measure development.