Search

This study examines the acceptability and preliminary outcomes from an open trial of a depression prevention intervention for low-income African American adolescents and young adults in employment training programs. The sample (N=42) consisted of predominately African American adolescents and young adults (mean age=19.1) exhibiting subclinical depressive symptoms. A 9-week intervention incorporating cognitive-behavioral therapy and a focus on coping with stressful and traumatic events was delivered by young adult employment training program graduates. Data on attendance, participant ratings of intervention sessions, and fidelity of implementation indicated good intervention acceptability. Statistically significant differences were found when comparing changes in high- and low-intervention dosage participants' depressive symptoms and active coping strategies from pre- to post-intervention, although there were no significant differences for the other three coping domains. These findings suggest that depression prevention interventions in employment training programs should be further examined using more rigorous research designs. (Contains 2 tables.)

The current study examined patterns of coping strategies in a sample of 497 low-income urban African American adolescents (mean age = 12.61 years). Results of confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the 4-factor structure of the Children's Coping Strategies Checklist (T. S. Ayers, I. N. Sandler, S. G. West, & M. W. Roosa, 1996) was not replicated in the current sample. The final model was a 3-factor model that was invariant across gender. The Active Coping factor and Revised Avoidant Coping factor were highly correlated in the present sample. Results of cluster analyses identified 2 coping groups differing on the frequency of coping use and preferred coping methods. The 1st group was more likely to use avoidant coping and less likely to use social support-seeking coping than the 2nd group, which showed more consistent use across coping strategies. There were no significant differences in the association between stressors and symptoms across the 2 groups. The results highlight the importance of examining factor structures of coping measures with underrepresented groups.