Life stress, adjustment, and religious support in African Americans.

The paper sought to extend the work on religious coping in African Americans by exploring the religious moderators of the relationship between stress and adjustment between cultures. Specifically, the goal of the present investigation was to identify whether the buffering effects of religious moderators (i.e., religious coping and religious support) on the relationship between stress and adjustment varied by race. Many studies on African Americans supports that social and individualistic coping styles are respectively predictors of positive and negative adjustment. Results partially supported that religious support in African Americans was a better predictor of adjustment than religious coping. Overall, this was true for alcoholrelated variables, but not for well-being variables. Results provided much stronger support for the predicted moderating effect of religious support on the relationship between stress and adjustment in African Americans. Religious coping failed to moderate this relationship, and no significant buffering effects were found for religious coping or religious support in Whites. This is one of the study's strongest findings. Overall, results were consistent with Agnew's (1992) general strain theory. Alternative explanations for why hypothesis were, or were not supported are offered.Jemour A MadduxJohnson, ThomasAnderson, VeanneBolinskey, KevinDoctor of PsychologyDepartment of PsychologyCunningham Memorial library, Terre Haute,Indiana State UniversityILL-ETD-041DoctoralTitle from document title page. Document formatted into pages: contains 147 p.: ill. Includes abstract and appendix

The American Psychological Association’s Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings: Implications for the Courts

Whether they directly preside over such matters or not, all judges are aware that child custody cases are among the most contentious, nerve-wracking, and costly proceedings in our entire legal system. The most aggrieved and well-heeled of litigants are likely to up the ante by enlisting psychologists as expert witnesses—even when the Court has already found it necessary to do so on its own. American Psychological Association (APA) Guidelines exist to encourage best practices for these witnesses, and to help them to avoid commonly encountered pitfalls. This article addresses how the Court can best access, interpret, and reinforce the latest revision of these Guidelines for the benefit of parties, counsel, and judges alike