Emotion regulation therapy (ERT) for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and accompanying major depressive disorder (MDD) is a theoretically derived, evidence-based treatment that integrates principles from traditional and contemporary cognitive-behavioral and experiential approaches with basic and translational findings from affect science to offer a blueprint for improving intervention by focusing on the motivational responses and corresponding self-referential regulatory characteristics. Preliminary evidence supports the efficacy of a 20-session version of ERT. However, previous trials of ERT and other traditional and contemporary cognitive-behavioral therapies have often utilized relatively homogeneous samples. Various contextual and demographic factors may be associated with challenges that increase risk for negative mental and social outcomes for young adults ages 18-29, particularly for individuals from diverse backgrounds. The aim of this pilot study was to examine the effectiveness of a briefer 16-session version of ERT in a racially and ethnically diverse sample of young adults. Participants (N = 31) were enrolled at an urban-based, commuter college who consented to treatment for anxiety, worry, or depression at an on-campus counseling center. Open-trial results demonstrate strong ameliorative changes in worry, rumination, self-reported and clinician-rated GAD and MDD severity, social disability, quality of life, attentional flexibility, decentering/distancing, reappraisal, trait mindfulness, and negative emotionality from pre- to posttreatment. These gains were maintained throughout a 3- and 9-month follow-up. These findings provide preliminary evidence for the efficacy of ERT in treating a racially and ethnically heterogeneous population. Further, this study highlights comparable effectiveness of a briefer 16-session version of ERT.

This article investigates the politicisation of immigration in Switzerland during two major socioeconomic crises: the oil crisis of the 1970s and the financial crisis of the late 2000s. Based on 2,853 newspaper claims from 1970 to 1976 and 1995 to 2018, we measure and compare differences in salience, polarisation, actor diversity and frame use between crisis and noncrisis periods. We find that while claims-making on immigration was indeed more salient, polarised, and diversified during the oil crisis, the empirical data for the financial crisis are inconclusive or show a slight decrease. Nonetheless, we still find a noteworthy increase in the use of identity frames during both periods. We conclude that while crises may influence claims-making about immigration and thus affect the politicisation of the matter, their contextual links to particular immigrant groups appear to be of importance as well. Crises do not increase politicisation automatically but may provide important opportunity structures that foster it.

The social relationship that devalues and freezes in an inferior otherness those people whose abilities do not conform to the standards produces a consensus on the help to be given to people considered as disabled. A second social relationship, based on territorial belonging, justifies unequal treatment of natives and people of foreign nationality. But how are these two criteria articulated when the disability concerns a person of foreign nationality? This is the question that is the focus of this article.