In trauma theory, research, and practice, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a syndrome of psychobiological reactions to events perceived as cataclysmic or life threatening, often has been the focus of mental health interventions and research. Yet virtually missing from contemporary trauma literature is consideration of racism and ethnoviolence as catalysts for PTSD and related symptoms. The stress inducing effects of obviously life threatening racist or ethnoviolent events may be readily apparent to service providers and researchers although they have not been treated or investigated. However, observers seem not to view other types of racism and ethnoviolence as life-threatening (e.g., vicarious experiences, exposure to microaggressions) because the historical roots of the trauma are invisible. Such events may arouse immediate or delayed PTSD and related symptoms in the experiencing person if the event(s) serves as a catalyst for recalling previous personal memories or identity-group histories of threats to life or psychological integrity. Current PTSD assessment schedules are critiqued for their inappropriateness for assessing stress reactions to racism and ethnoviolence specifically; quantitative scales are criticized because of developers' thoughtless application of traditional psychometric principles of scale development, such as maximizing the magnitude of internal consistency reliability coefficients. We recommend that researchers and practitioners conduct culturally responsive and racially informed assessment and interventions with African Americans, Latina/Latino Americans, Asian/Pacific Islander Americans, Native Americans, and related immigrant groups when they present with symptoms of trauma, particularly when their trauma responses are atypical or the precipitating stressor is ambiguous.

In trauma theory, research, and practice, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a syndrome of psychobiological reactions to events perceived as cataclysmic or life threatening, often has been the focus of mental health interventions and research. Yet virtually missing from contemporary trauma literature is consideration of racism and ethnoviolence as catalysts for PTSD and related symptoms. The stress inducing effects of obviously life threatening racist or ethnoviolent events may be readily apparent to service providers and researchers although they have not been treated or investigated. However, observers seem not to view other types of racism and ethnoviolence as life-threatening (e.g., vicarious experiences, exposure to microaggressions) because the historical roots of the trauma are invisible. Such events may arouse immediate or delayed PTSD and related symptoms in the experiencing person if the experienced event(s) serves as a catalyst for recalling previous personal memories or identity-group histories of extreme threat. Current PTSD assessment schedules are critiqued for their inappropriateness for assessing stress reactions to racism and ethnoviolence specifically; quantitative scales are criticized because of developers' thoughtless application of traditional psychometric principles of scale development, such as maximizing the magnitude of internal consistency reliability coefficients. We recommend that researchers and practitioners conduct culturally responsive and racially informed assessment and interventions with African Americans, Latina/Latino Americans, Asian/Pacific Islander Americans, Native Americans, and related immigrant groups when they present with symptoms of trauma, particularly when their trauma responses are atypical or the precipitating stressor is ambiguous.

Considering the growing racial and ethnic diversity among supervisees, the number of clinical supervision dyads comprised of supervisees and supervisors of Color is likely to increase dramatically. Although extant research has focused on supervision that involves White supervisors paired with racial, ethnic, and linguistic minority supervisees, few authors have explored the supervisory dynamics between clinicians of color and supervisees of Color. This study used a qualitative analysis of structured survey responses provided by supervisees of Color to argue that racial identity (i.e., supervisors' and supervisees' psychological experiences of race), more than race is essential for managing the racial dynamics of supervisory dyads involving two people of Color. Using Helms Racial Identity Social Interaction Model (Helms, 1990(Helms, , 1995, we use a directed content analysis of participants' responses to demonstrate common themes that emerge when race is introduced into the supervision relationship. Based on supervisees' reported experiences, implications for the practice of supervision involving people of Color are offered.

Discrimination is related to depression and poor self-esteem among Black men. Poorer self-esteem is also associated with depression. However, there is limited research identifying how self-esteem may mediate the associations between discrimination and depressive symptoms for disparate ethnic groups of Black men. The purpose of this study was to examine ethnic groups as a moderator of the mediating effects of self-esteem on the relationship between discrimination and depressive symptoms among a nationally representative sample of African American (n=1,201) and Afro-Caribbean American men (n=545) in the National Survey of American Life. Due to cultural socialization differences, we hypothesized that self-esteem would mediate the associations between discrimination and depressive symptoms only for African American men, but not Afro-Caribbean American men. Moderated-mediation regression analyses indicated that the conditional indirect effects of discrimination on depressive symptoms through self-esteem were significant for African American men, but not for Afro-Caribbean men. Our results highlight important ethnic differences among Black men.

Helms, Henze, Sass, and Mifsud (2006) defined good practices for internal consistency reporting, interpretation, and analysis consistent with an alpha-as-data perspective. Their viewpoint (a) expands on previous arguments that reliability coefficients are group-level summary statistics of samples' responses rather than stable properties of scales or measures and (b) encourages researchers to investigate characteristics of reliability data for their own samples and subgroups within their samples. In Study 1, we reviewed past and current reliability reporting practices in a sample of Psychological Assessment articles published across 3 decades (i.e., from the years 1989, 1996, and 2006). Results suggested that contemporary and past researchers' reliability reporting practices have not improved over time and generally were not consistent with good practices. In Study 2, we analyzed an archival data set to illustrate the real-life repercussions of researchers' ongoing misconstrual and misuse of reliability data. Our analyses suggested that researchers should conduct preliminary analyses of their data to determine whether their data fit the assumptions of their reliability analyses. Also, the results indicated that reliability coefficients varied across racial or ethnic and gender subgroups, and these variations had implications for whether the same depression measure should be used across groups. We concluded that the alpha-as-data perspective has implications for one's choice of psychological measures and interpretation of results, which subsequently affect conclusions and recommendations. We encourage researchers to recognize the people behind their data by adopting better practices in internal consistency reporting, analysis, and interpretation.