Annual review of Asian American Psychology, 2009.

Abstract

This 2014 review of Asian American psychology is the sixth review in the series. It includes 316 articles that met the inclusion criteria established by the past five annual reviews. Featured articles were derived from three sources: 137 were generated via the search term "Asian American" in PyscINFO, 111 were generated via a search for specific Asian American ethnic groups, and 32 were generated via author searches of articles that met the inclusion criteria. The top primary topic was health and health-related behaviors, the most frequently employed study design was crosssectional, and the most studied Asian American ethnic group was Chinese. This year's review includes information on the target population of the primary topic, the age range and developmental period of participants, and whether the study design was cross-sectional or longitudinal. It also identifies top authors and journals contributing to the 2014 annual review. These new features reveal that the most common target population of the primary topic was youths; studies most commonly included emerging adults ages 18-25; cross-sectional study design was employed more often than longitudinal design; the top contributor to the 2014 review was Stephen Chen, who authored the highest number of papers included; and the Asian American Journal of Psychology generated the highest number of publications for this review. Keywords review; Asian Americans, 2014The annual review of Asian American psychology facilitates a comprehensive, year-to-year understanding of the field by summarizing the major research topics and methodology used in Asian American psychology. Comparison of multiple annual reviews reveals past, current, and emerging trends. Illuminating these trends can be informative for new and experienced scholars alike, who can utilize the reviews to synthesize past and current research. This will help them identify emerging trends in order to plan future research that will make a meaningful contribution to scholarship on Asian American psychology. The present annual review uses the format established by the past five annual reviews, with the addition of new features for future annual reviews to consider. Like past reviews, the current issue presents major trends by primary topic, methodological design, and participant characteristics (e.g., average age and ethnicity). This review contributes a developmental perspective by including age range and developmental period in our categorization of participants, and by considering cross-sectional versus longitudinal study designs. We are also the first to recognize the top authors and journal outlets in this year's review.The 2014 review of Asian American psychology includes 316 articles, more than were included in any of the past five annual reviews. A confluence of factors has contributed to the growth of scholarship on Asian American psychology. First, there is the size of the population: Asian Americans represent 5.6% of the United States population; of all racial groups in the United States, Asian American...

Annual review of Asian American Psychology, 2014.

“…Similar to previous annual reviews (Juan et al, 2012; B. S. K. Kim et al, 2010; Okazaki et al, 2011; Wei et al, 2014; Yeh et al, 2013), health and health-related behaviors was the most frequently studied topic in 2014.…”

“…A total of 85 articles focused primarily on this topic. As was the case with all of the previous reviews (Juan et al, 2012; B. S. K. Kim et al, 2010; Okazaki et al, 2011; Wei et al, 2014; Yeh et al, 2013), two subtopics continued to draw scholarly attention: cancer screening and management ( n = 15; e.g., K.…”

“…A. King, Vidourek, & Singh, 2014) included in three of the previous reviews (Juan et al, 2012; B. S. K. Kim et al, 2010; Okazaki et al, 2011).…”

“…This category was previously labeled dietary habits and obesity prevention (Juan et al, 2012; B. S. K. Kim et al, 2010; Okazaki et al, 2011) or dietary habits, obesity, and diabetes (Yeh et al, 2013).…”

“…We followed the search methods used by previous reviews (Juan et al, 2012; B. S. K. Kim et al, 2010; Okazaki, Kassem, & Tan, 2011; Wei et al, 2014; Yeh et al, 2013).…”