In this paper, I propose a roadmap for the integration of culture in developmental psychopathology. This integration is pressing because culture continues to be somewhat disconnected from theory, research, training, and interventions in developmental psychopathology, thus limiting our understanding of the epigenesis of mental health. I argue that in order to successfully integrate culture into developmental psychopathology, it is crucial to (a) study cultural development, (b) consider both individual-level and social-level cultural processes, (c) examine the interplay between culture and biology, and (d) promote improved and direct cultural assessment. I provide evidence in support of each of these guidelines, present alternative conceptual frameworks, and suggest new lines of research. Hopefully, that these directions will contribute to the emerging field of cultural development and psychopathology, which focuses on the elucidation of the cultural processes that initiate, maintain, or derail trajectories of normal and abnormal behavior.

Although culture influences all human beings, there is an assumption in American psychology that culture matters more for members of certain groups. This article identifies and provides evidence of the cultural (mis)attribution bias: a tendency to overemphasize the role of culture in the behavior of racial/ethnic minorities, and to underemphasize it in the behavior of Whites. Two studies investigated the presence of this bias with an examination of a decade of peer reviewed research conducted in the United States (N = 434 articles), and an experiment and a survey with psychology professors in the United States (N = 361 psychologists). Archival analyses revealed differences in the composition of samples used in studies examining cultural or noncultural psychological phenomena. We also find evidence to suggest that psychologists in the United States favor cultural explanations over psychological explanations when considering the behavior and cognition of racial/ethnic minorities, whereas the opposite pattern emerged in reference to Whites. The scientific ramifications of this phenomenon, as well as alternatives to overcome it, are discussed in detail. (PsycINFO Database Record

No abstract

Familism is a key cultural value that emphasizes support and attachment, loyalty, honor, and obligation to the family and is hypothesized to be critical in shaping family dynamics and individual adjustment among Hispanic/Latino individuals. To advance the field, we drew from cultural-ecological and developmental models to examine familism as a cultural promotive and risk factor for individual adjustment and family relationship quality. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis via a search between 2017 and 2020 and identified 126 records (23% unpublished dissertations) from 73 independent studies (12% longitudinal) in PsycINFO/Proquest, PubMed, and ERIC databases between 1993 and 2019. The multilevel meta-analysis revealed significant effects: educational outcomes, r = .16, 95% CI [.08, .23]; family relationships, which included warmth/support, r = .24, 95% CI [.19, .29], and conflict/negativity, r = −.13, 95% CI [−.23, −.02]; internalizing symptoms, r = −.12, 95% CI [−.16, −.09]; and externalizing symptoms, r = −.10, 95% CI [−.18, −.03]. We tested conceptually driven moderators and found significant variation by sample (e.g., nativity, developmental period) and context characteristics (i.e., U.S. states characterized as “established” or “new/emerging” for Hispanic/Latino populations). Findings suggest that familism may function more as a promotive and less as a risk factor and that continued attention is needed to the conditions that strengthen or weaken these associations. Although conclusions are limited because most effect sizes were from cross-sectional designs with U.S. Mexican-origin participants and relied on self-reports, findings highlight the complex associations between familism and adjustment/relationship quality and can guide future research.

The field of developmental science was revolutionized, in part, by the publication of García Coll and colleagues' (1996) integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in minority children. Nevertheless, much work remains as changes within and beyond academia will require greater innovation in the way marginalization is conceptualized and studied. In this introduction to the Special Issue, "New Directions in Developmental Science with Youth Experiencing Marginalization," we situate the contribution of the integrative model within a sociohistorical context and discuss how recent changes push us to reconsider the models and theories that guide existing work with youth who experience marginalization. We also introduce a nuanced definition of the term marginalization for the field to consider in relation to research on youth development. We define marginalization as a multidimensional, dynamic, context-dependent, and diverse web of processes, rooted in power imbalance and systematically directed toward specific groups and individuals, with probabilistic implications for development. In the context of this discussion, we also highlight the important insights gleaned from the collection of articles included in this Special Issue and how they advance the field. (PsycINFO Database Record