This study investigated services received, length of treatment, and outcomes of thousands of Asian-American, African-American, Mexican-American, and White clients using outpatient services in the Los Angeles County mental health system. It tested the hypothesis that therapist-client matches in ethnicity and language are beneficial to clients. Results indicate that Asian Americans and Mexican Americans underutilized, whereas African Americans overutilized, services. African Americans also exhibited less positive treatment outcomes. Furthermore, ethnic match was related to length of treatment for all groups. It was associated with treatment outcomes for Mexican Americans. Among clients who did not speak English as a primary language, ethnic and language match was a predictor of length and outcome of treatment. Thus, the cultural responsiveness hypothesis was partially supported.
This paper provides a rationale and overview of procedures used to develop the National Latino and Asian American Study (NLAAS). The NLAAS is nationally representative community household survey that estimates the prevalence of mental disorders and rates of mental health service utilization of Latinos and Asian Americans in the United States. The central aims of the NLAAS are to: 1) describe the lifetime and 12-month prevalence of psychiatric disorders and the rates of mental health services use for Latino and Asian American populations using nationwide representative samples of Latinos and Asian Americans, 2) assess the associations among social position, environmental context, and psychosocial factors with the prevalence of psychiatric disorders and utilization rates of mental health services, and 3) compare the lifetime and 12-month prevalence of psychiatric disorders, and utilization of mental health services of Latinos and Asian Americans with national representative samples of non-Latino whites (from the National Comorbidity Study-Replication;
The quality, quantity, and funding of ethnic minority research have been inadequate. One factor that has contributed to this inadequacy is the practice of scientific psychology. Although principles of psychological science involve internal and external validity, in practice psychology emphasizes internal validity in research studies. Because many psychological principles and measures have not been cross-validated with different populations, those conducting ethnic minority research often have a more difficult time demonstrating rigorous internal validity. Thus, psychology's overemphasis of internal as opposed to external validity has differentially hindered the development of ethnic minority research. To develop stronger research knowledge on ethnic minority groups, it is important that (a) all research studies address external validity issues and explicitly specify the populations to which the findings are applicable; (b) different research approaches, including the use of qualitative and ethnographic methods, be appreciated; and (c) the psychological meaning of ethnicity or race be examined in ethnic comparisons.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.