In response to rapidly growing rates of comorbidity among psychiatric disorders, clinical scientists have become interested in identifying transdiagnostic processes that can help explain dysfunction across diagnostic categories (e.g., Kring & Sloan, 2009). One factor that has received a great deal of attention is that of emotion regulation, namely, the ability to modulate the intensity and/or duration of emotional states (e.g., Cicchetti, Ackerman, & Izard, 1995; Gross, 1998). Recent theoretical and empirical work has begun to emphasize the role that emotion regulation plays in the temporal comorbidity between internalizing and externalizing conditions (e.g., Aldao & De Los Reyes, 2015; De Los Reyes & Aldao, 2015; Drabick & Kendall, 2010; Jarrett & Ollendick, 2008; Patrick & Hajcak, 2016). However, close inspection of this work reveals two very pertinent areas of growth: (a) this literature is characterized by mixed findings that are likely explained, in part, by methodological heterogeneity; and (b) emotion regulation tends to be studied in relatively narrow terms. To address these issues, we provide a series of recommendations for facilitating cross-study comparisons and leveraging multifaceted approaches to studying emotion regulation processes within a developmental psychopathology framework. We hope that our perspective can enhance the organization and growth of this very important area of inquiry, and ultimately result in more effective prevention and treatment programs.

No abstract

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals report higher levels of problematic alcohol and substance use than their heterosexual peers. This disparity is linked to the experience of LGB-specific stressors, termed minority stress. Additionally, bisexual individuals show increased rates of psychopathology, including problematic alcohol and substance use, above and beyond lesbian and gay individuals. However, not everyone experiencing minority stress reports increased rates of alcohol and substance misuse. Emotion regulation (ER), which plays a critical role in psychopathology in general, is theorized to modulate the link between minority stress and psychopathology. However, it remains largely unknown whether ER plays a role in linking instances of minority stress with substance and alcohol use outcomes. To address the gap, the current study assessed 305 LGB individuals’ instances of minority stress, ER, and substance and alcohol use outcomes. We assessed the role of ER in problematic alcohol and substance use among LGB individuals using moderated mediation, where sexual minority status was entered as the moderator, and ER difficulties was entered as the mediator. The results indicated significant indirect effects of minority stress, through ER difficulties, on both problematic alcohol and substance use. However, there was no significant interaction with sexual orientation status, suggesting that ER may be important for all LGB individuals in predicting problematic alcohol and substance use. These results highlight the important role that ER plays between instances of minority stress and substance and alcohol use in LGB individuals, suggesting that ER skills may serve as a novel target for intervention.

Objectives: This randomized controlled trial examined whether an 11-week synchronous (i.e., real-time) online training in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual or gender diverse (LGBTQ)affirmative cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) could lead to increased uptake of this practice at LGBTQ community centers across 20 U.S. states and internationally. Method: A total of 121 mental health providers (M age = 37.74; 78.5% LGBTQ; 60.3% non-Hispanic/Latinx White) were randomized to receive the 11week training either immediately (n = 61) or after a 4-month wait (n = 60). At baseline and 4 and 8 months after baseline, participants self-reported their LGBTQ-affirmative competency, cultural humility, and knowledge of the minority stress theory and practice skills underlying LGBTQ-affirmative CBT. To objectively assess uptake of LGBTQ-affirmative CBT, participants demonstrated, through simulated practice, how they would respond to two video-based clinical vignettes. Results: Compared to waitlist, participants in the immediate training condition reported greater improvements in self-reported cultural competence (d = 1.24), minority stress knowledge (d = 0.78), LGBTQ-affirmative CBT knowledge (d = 0.78), and LGBTQ-affirmative CBT skills familiarity (d = 0.91) and use (d = 0.96); effects persisted 8 months postbaseline. Cultural humility showed no significant difference by condition (d = 0.07). In objectively coded assessments of simulated practice, participants in the training condition demonstrated greater uptake of LGBTQ-affirmative practice skills (d = 0.82). Conclusions: Findings preliminarily suggest that mental health providers can be trained to deliver LGBTQ-affirmative CBT using the low-cost, efficient reach of online training. This training can help disseminate evidence-based mental health care to LGBTQ individuals and support its implementation across practice settings.

Highlights Examined female friends' self-reported habitual interpersonal emotion regulation  Friend-reported brooding positively associated respondent psychopathology  Friend-reported reappraisal negatively associated with respondent psychopathology  Discrepancy in dyadic perception of suppression associated with worse well-being  Interpersonal ER shows incremental predictive power over intrapersonal ER