Some religious or spiritual (R/S) clients seek psychotherapy that integrates R/S values, while others may be reticent to disclose R/S-related aspects of struggles in a presumably secular setting. We meta-analyzed 97 outcome studies (N = 7,181) examining the efficacy of tailoring treatment to patients' R/S beliefs and values. We compared the effectiveness of R/S-tailored psychotherapy with no-treatment controls, alternate secular treatments, and additive secular treatments. R/S-adapted psychotherapy resulted in greater improvement in clients' psychological (g = 0.74, p < 0.000) and spiritual (g = 0.74, p < 0.000) functioning compared with no treatment and non R/S psychotherapies (psychological: g = 0.33, p < 0.001; spiritual: g = 0.43, p < 0.001). In more rigorous additive studies, R/S-accommodated psychotherapies were equally effective to standard approaches in reducing psychological distress (g = 0.13, p = 0.258), but resulted in greater spiritual well-being (g = 0.34, p < 0.000). We feature several clinical examples and conclude with evidence-based therapeutic practices.

No abstract

Objectives: The current study examines how general racial discrimination, discrimination from family, and racial identity invalidation impact Multiracial 1 people's mental health. Methods: Multiracial participants (n = 464) completed online surveys that assessed their mental health and experiences of various dimensions of discrimination. Results: At the bivariate level, all dimensions of discrimination related to negative mental health outcomes. Results of path analysis with discrimination dimensions entered simultaneously as predictor variables indicated that discrimination from family, behavioral invalidation, and phenotype invalidation predicted maladjustment, whereas general racial discrimination did not. Latent classes were constructed to represent various profiles of discriminatory experiences. Low discrimination (n = 212), high discrimination (n = 49), racial identity invalidation (n = 154), and general-familial discrimination (n = 58) classes arose. The low discrimination class reported the best mental health outcomes, whereas the high discrimination class reported the worst mental health outcomes; the racial identity invalidation and general-familial discrimination classes reported similar mental health outcomes that fell in between the low and high discrimination classes. Conclusions: Findings highlight how the combination of racial discrimination dimensions influence Multiracial people's mental health and emphasize the need to address unique forms of discrimination specific to Multiracial people. Public Significance StatementFindings from the current study indicate that discrimination from family and identity invalidation play unique roles in negatively influencing Multiracial people's mental health. Multiracial individuals experiencing multiple types of racial discrimination and those experiencing multiple types of identity invalidation have similar health outcomes. These findings help explain the unique stressors Multiracial people face that make them vulnerable to poorer mental health outcomes.

Objective: This prospective longitudinal study examined whether coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to changes in psychological and spiritual outcomes among adults with chronic disease. Method: Participants (N = 302) were a stratified, nonrandom sample of adults (Mage = 64.46, SD = 10.86, 45.7% female). The sample was representative of the chronically ill, U.S. adult population in gender, race/ethnicity, region, and religious affiliation but older in age and higher in socioeconomic status. Participants completed online-administered measures 1 month before the March 11 pandemic declaration (T1) and then 1 and 3 months after it (T2 and T3). At T1 through T3, they completed measures of depression, anxiety, personal suffering, psychological well-being, trait resilience, optimism, hope, grit, spiritual struggles, spiritual fortitude, and positive religious coping. At T2 and T3, they also completed measures of social support, physical health, resource loss, perceived stress, and COVID-19 fears and exposure. Results: Overall, people did not change substantially in psychological or spiritual outcomes over time. However, trait resilience increased and personal suffering declined. People highest in prepandemic suffering increased in spiritual fortitude. Racial/ethnic minorities increased in religious importance. Roughly half (48.9%) of participants exhibited psychological resilience (no/minimal depression or anxiety symptoms) at both T2 and T3. Perceived stress and psychological resource loss were associated with adverse mental health outcomes, but social support and physical health were not. COVID-19 fears contributed more to mental health than COVID-19 exposure. Conclusions: Even among vulnerable populations such as adults with chronic disease, during pandemic conditions like COVID-19, many people may exhibit—or even increase slightly in—psychological and spiritual resilience.

In recent years, an upsurge of polarization has been a salient feature of political discourse in America. A small but growing body of research has examined the potential relevance of intellectual humility (IH) to political polarization. In the present investigation, we extend this work to political myside bias, testing the hypothesis that IH is associated with less bias in two community samples ( N1 = 498; N2 = 477). In line with our expectations, measures of IH were negatively correlated with political myside bias across paradigms, political topics, and samples. These relations were robust to controlling for humility. We also examined ideological asymmetries in the relations between IH and political myside bias, finding that IH–bias relations were statistically equivalent in members of the political left and right. Notwithstanding important limitations and caveats, these data establish IH as one of a small handful psychological features known to predict less political myside bias.