Culture counts: Examinations of recent applications of the Penn Resiliency Program or, toward a rubric for examining cultural appropriateness of prevention programming.

Abstract

Abstract : It is imperative that researchers pay close attention to the influences of culture on mental health, and acknowledge a cultural context of illness and change when designing prevention programming. Researchers E. V. Cardemil, K. J. Reivich, and M. E. P. Seligman (2002) and D. L. Yu and M. E. P. Seligman (2002) have made attempts at adapting the existing Penn Resiliency Program (PRP) for culturally appropriate use cross-culturally and interculturally. The success of these modifications is discussed within a framework of guidelines designed to remind scientists how much culture counts. Finally, informative resources and a rubric are shared with prevention scientists for use in future development of culturally appropriate prevention programming. Historically, prevention scientists have done a poor job of including members of ethnic minority groups in trials of prevention programming. Furthermore, intercultural examinations of effectiveness regarding prevention strategies are seldom attempted. The complexity of cultural influences on mental health is central to developing effective services for members of our diverse U.S. population and for groups abroad. Indeed, we must acknowledge that culture counts (Department of Health and Human Services [DHHS], 2001) and address the nuances of cultural influences in our research plans, service delivery, and evaluation research. The work of Cardemil, Reivich, and Seligman (2002) and that of Yu and Seligman (2002) demonstrates how prevention scientists can develop culturally appropriate prevention programming by testing a priori hypotheses about the role of culture in the manifestation and prevention of depression. They do so by modifying the existing Penn Resiliency Program (PRP) (to make it culturally appropriate for specific groups) and by carefully examining data to determine cultural influences on change. In this commentary we examine the extent to which the Penn research teams were successful in accounting for the role cultural factors play in mental health. In addition, we refer prevention scientists to resources designed to facilitate the development of more culturally competent intervention research. To these ends, we first summarize important guidelines provided in resources addressing cultural factors in research