Running head: Multicultural Guidelines

Archived by APA Council of Representatives in August 2017

Guidelines on Multicultural Education,

Training, Research, Practice, and

Organizational Change for Psychologists

American Psychological Association

Approved as APA Policy by the APA Council of Representatives, August, 2002

Archived by APA Council of Representatives in August 2017

Author Note: This document was approved as policy of the American Psychological Association

(APA) by the APA Council of Representatives in August, 2002. This document was drafted by a

joint Task Force of APA Divisions 17 (Counseling Psychology) and 45 (The Society for the

Psychological Study of Ethnic Minority Issues). These guidelines have been in the process of

development for 22 years, so many individuals and groups require acknowledgement. The

Divisions 17/45 writing team for the present document included Nadya Fouad, PhD, Co-Chair,

Patricia Arredondo, EdD, Co-Chair, Michael D’Andrea, EdD and Allen Ivey, EdD. These

guidelines build on work related to multicultural counseling competencies by Division 17 (Sue et

al., 1982) and the Association of Multicultural Counseling and Development (Arredondo et al.,

1996; Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992). The Task Force acknowledges Allen Ivey, EdD, Thomas

Parham, PhD, and Derald Wing Sue, PhD for their leadership related to the work on competencies.

The Divisions 17/45 writing team for these guidelines was assisted in reviewing the relevant

literature by Rod Goodyear, PhD, Jeffrey S. Mio, PhD, Ruperto (Toti) Perez, PhD, William Parham,

PhD, and Derald Wing Sue, PhD. Additional writing contributions came from

Gail Hackett, PhD, Jeanne Manese, PhD, Louise Douce, PhD, James Croteau, PhD, Janet Helms,

PhD, Sally Horwatt, PhD, Kathleen Boggs, PhD, Gerald Stone, PhD, and Kathleen Bieschke,

PhD. Editorial contributions were provided by Nancy Downing Hansen, PhD, Patricia Perez,

Tiffany Rice, and Dan Rosen. The Task Force is grateful for the active support and contributions

of a series of presidents of APA Divisions 17, 35, and 45, including Rosie Bingham, PhD, Jean

Carter, PhD, Lisa Porche Burke, PhD, Gerald Stone, PhD, Joseph Trimble, PhD, Melba Vasquez,

PhD, and Jan Yoder, PhD. Other individuals who contributed through their advocacy include

Guillermo Bernal, PhD, Robert Carter, PhD, J. Manuel Casas, PhD, Don Pope-Davis, PhD, Linda

Forrest, PhD, Margaret Jensen, PhD, Teresa LaFromboise, PhD, Joseph G. Ponterotto, PhD, and

Ena Vazquez Nuttall, EdD.

The final version of this document was strongly influenced by the contributions of a

working group jointly convened by the APA Board for the Advancement of Psychology in the

Public Interest (BAPPI) and the APA Board of Professional Affairs (BPA). In addition to Nadya

Fouad, PhD and Patricia Arredondo, EdD from the Divisions 17/45 Task Force, members of the

working group included Maria Root, PhD, BAPPI (Working Group Co-Chair), Sandra L. Shullman,

PhD, BPA (Working Group Co-Chair), Toy Caldwell-Colbert, PhD, APA Board of Educational

Affairs, Jessica Henderson Daniel, PhD, APA Committee for the Advancement of Professional

Practice, Janet Swim, PhD, representing the APA Board of Scientific Affairs, Kristin Hancock,

PhD, BPA Committee on Professional Practice and Standards, and Laura Barbanel, PhD, APA

Board of Directors. This working group was assisted in its efforts by APA staff members Shirlene

A. Archer, JD, Public Interest Directorate, and Geoffrey M. Reed, PhD, Practice Directorate, who

also jointly shepherded the document through the final approval process. The Task Force also

acknowledges APA staff members Paul Donnelly, Alberto Figueroa, Bertha Holliday, PhD, Sarah

Jordan, Joan White and Henry Tomes, PhD for their support.

Correspondence concerning this article should be directed to the Public Interest Directorate,

American Psychological Association, 750 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 200024242.

This document is scheduled to expire as APA policy by 2009. After this date, users are

encouraged to contact the APA Public Interest Directorate to confirm the status of the document.

Table of Contents

Preface………………………………………………………………………………….…….….001

Scope of Guidelines…………………………………………………………..….…………...…003

Racial/Ethnic Diversity in the United States and Psychology………..………………....……....004

Archived by APA Council of Representatives in August 2017

Definitions…………………………………………………………...……………………..……008

• Culture…..……………………………………………………………....………………008

• Race…………..………………………...……………….………………………………009

• Ethnicity……………………...…..…………….………..……………………………...009

• Multiculturalism and Diversity………………...……………………………..………...009

• Culture-centered……………..……………….………….……….……………………..011

Historical and Sociopolitical Developments for Guidelines…………………...………………..011

Introduction to the Guidelines: Assumptions and Principles…………………………...….……015

Guideline #1: Psychologists are encouraged to recognize that, as cultural beings, they may hold

attitudes and beliefs that can detrimentally influence their perceptions of and interactions with

individuals who are ethnically and racially different from themselves. ……………..…………017

Guideline #2: Psychologists are encouraged to recognize the importance of multicultural

sensitivity/responsiveness, knowledge, and understanding about ethnically and

racially different individuals………………….…………………………………………………025

Guideline #3: As educators, psychologists are encouraged to employ the constructs of

multiculturalism and diversity in psychological education. ……………………………...…….030

Guideline # 4: Culturally sensitive psychological researchers are encouraged to recognize the

importance of conducting culture-centered and ethical psychological research among persons

from ethnic, linguistic, and racial minority backgrounds. ………………...……………………036

• Research generation and design……………………………………..……………….…040

• Assessment………………………………………………………………..………….…041

• Analysis and interpretation……………………………………………………..……....042

Guideline #5: Psychologists strive to apply culturally-appropriate skills in clinical and other

applied psychological practices. …………………………..……………………………………043

• Client-in-context…………………………….……..……………...…………………....046

• Assessment………………………………….…….…….……………………...……….048

• Interventions…...………………………………....……………………………..……...049

Guideline #6: Psychologists are encouraged to use organizational change processes to

support culturally informed organizational (policy) development and practices.

…………..…………..050

• Changing Context for Psychologists…….………………………………..…………….051

• Psychologists in Transition………………………………………………..……………053

• Frameworks and Models for Multicultural Organizational

Development………………………………………………………………………...….055

• Examples of Multicultural Practices within Organizations………………..……….......057

• Psychologists as Change Agents and Policy Planners……………………………..…...059

Archived by APA Council of Representatives in August 2017

Conclusion…………………………………..………………………………………….……….061

References…………………………………..………………………………………….……….063

Preface

All individuals exist in social, political, historical, and economic contexts, and

psychologists are increasingly called upon to understand the influence of these contexts on

individuals’ behavior. The Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research,

Practice, and Organizational Change for Psychologists reflect the continuing evolution of

the study of psychology, changes in society-at-large, and emerging data about the different

needs for particular individuals and groups historically marginalized or disenfranchised

within and by psychology based on their ethnic/racial heritage and social group identity or

membership. These Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice,

and Organizational Change reflect knowledge and skills needed for the profession in the

midst of dramatic historic sociopolitical changes in U.S. society, as well as needs from new

constituencies, markets, and clients.

The specific goals of these Guidelines are to provide psychologists with: (a) the

rationale and needs for addressing multiculturalism and diversity in education, training,

research, practice, and organizational change; (b) basic information, relevant terminology,

current empirical research from psychology and related disciplines, and other data that

support the proposed guidelines and underscore their importance; (c) references to enhance

on-going education, training, research, practice, and organizational change methodologies;

and (d) paradigms that broaden the purview of psychology as a profession.

In these Guidelines, education refers to the psychological education of students in

all areas of psychology, while training refers more specifically to the application of that

education to the development of applied and research skills. We refer to research that

involves human participants, rather than research using animals or mathematical

simulations. Practice refers to interventions with children, adolescents, adults, families,

and organizations, typically conducted by clinical, consulting, counseling, organizational,

and school psychologists. Finally, we focus on the work of psychologists as administrators,

consultants, and in other organizational management roles positioned to promote

organizational change and policy development.

These Guidelines address U.S. ethnic and racial minority

groups as well as

individuals, children, and families from biracial, multiethnic, and multiracial backgrounds.

Thus, we are defining “multicultural” in these Guidelines narrowly, to refer to interactions

between individuals from minority ethnic and racial groups in the United States and the

dominant European-American culture. Ethnic and racial minority group membership

includes individuals of Asian and Pacific Islander, Sub-Saharan Black African,

Latino/Hispanic, and Native American/American Indian descent, although there is great

heterogeneity within each of these groups. The Guidelines also address psychologists’

work and interactions with individuals from other nations, including international students

and immigrants and temporary workers in this country.

The term "guidelines" refers to pronouncements, statements or declarations that

suggest or recommend specific professional behavior, endeavors or conduct for

psychologists (APA, 1992). Guidelines differ from standards in that standards are

mandatory and may be accompanied by an enforcement mechanism (APA, 2001). They

are intended to facilitate the continued systematic development of the profession and to

help assure a high level of professional practice by psychologists. Guidelines are not

intended to be mandatory or exhaustive and may not be applicable to every professional

and clinical situation. They are not definitive and they are not intended to take precedence

over the judgment of psychologists. In addition, federal or state laws may supercede these

Guidelines.

Scope of Guidelines

This document is comprehensive but not exhaustive. We intend to reflect the

context and rationale for these Guidelines in multiple settings and situations, but also

acknowledge that we expect the document to evolve over time with more illustrative

examples and references. In the current document we will initially provide evidence for

the need for multicultural guidelines with an overview of the most recent demographic data

on racial/ethnic diversity in the United States, and the representation of racial/ethnic

minorities in education and psychology. We then discuss the social and political

developments in the United States and the profession of psychology that provide a context

for the development of the Guidelines, and the fundamental principles on which we base

the Guidelines. Each Guideline is then presented, with the first two Guidelines designed

to apply to all psychologists from two primary perspectives: (a) knowledge of self with a

cultural heritage and varying social identities; and (b) knowledge of other cultures.

Guidelines # 3-6 address the application of multiculturalism in education, training,

research, practice, and organizational change.

While these Guidelines have attempted to incorporate empirical studies of

intergroup relations and ethnic identity, professional consensus, and other perceptions and

experiences of ethnic and racial minority groups, it is beyond the scope of this document

to provide a thorough and comprehensive review of all literature related to race, ethnicity,

intergroup processes, and organizational development strategies to address

multiculturalism in employment and professional education contexts. Rather, we have

attempted to provide examples of empirical and conceptual literature relevant to the

Guidelines where possible.

Racial/Ethnic Diversity in the United States and Psychology

Individuals of ethnic and racial minority and/or with a

biracial/multiethnic/multiracial heritage represent an increasingly large percentage of the

population in the United States (Judy & D’Amico, 1997; United States Census Bureau,

2001; Wehrly, Kenney, & Kenney, 1999). While these demographic trends have been

discussed since the previous census of 1990, educational institutions, employers,

government agencies, and professional and accrediting bodies are now beginning to engage

in systematic efforts to become more knowledgeable, proficient, and multiculturally

responsive. Census 2000 data clarify the changes in U.S. diversity (U.S. Census Bureau,

2001). Overall, about 67% of the population identify as White. Of the remaining 33%,

approximately 13% indicated they were African American, 1.5% American Indian or

Alaskan Native, 4.5% Asian/Pacific Islander, 13% Hispanic, and about 7% indicated some

other race. These categories overlap, since individuals were able to choose more than one

racial affiliation. Racial/ethnic diversity varies greatly by state. Summarized in a series

of maps by Brewer and Suchan from the Census 2000 data (2001), high diversity states

(those with 60-77% racial/ethnic minority groups) tend to be on the coast, or Mexican

border and include California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and Virginia. In addition to

these, however, medium-high diversity (49%-59% racial/ethnic minority groups) states are

found across the country, and include Maryland,

New York, Illinois, Washington State, Nevada, Colorado, Montana, Alaska, North Dakota,

South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, and North

and South Carolina.

In the past 10 years, percentage-wise, the greatest increases are reported for Asian

American/Pacific Islanders and Latinos/Hispanics, and in some parts of the country,

White European Americans are no longer a clear majority of the population. Brewer and

Suchan (2001) found that diversity increased in all states in the country, and in parts of

some states increased as much as 34%. States that had the most growth in diversity varied

geographically, including the Midwest (Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Eastern

Colorado), South (Georgia, Florida, Texas, and Oklahoma), and Northwest (Idaho,

Oregon). In addition, for the first time, Census 2000 allowed individuals to check more

than one racial/ethnic affiliation (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001). While only 2.4% of the U.S.

populations checked more than one racial affiliation, 42% of those who checked two or

more races were under 18, indicating an increase in the birthrate of biracial individuals.

Certainly, the United States is becoming more racially and ethnically diverse, increasing

the urgency for culturally responsive practices and services.

Ethnic, racial, and multiracial diversity in the population is reflected in higher

education. This is important to psychologists because it reflects changes in the ethnic

composition of students we teach and train. College enrollment increased 62% for students

of color between 1988 and 1998 (the latest data available), although college completion

rates differed among Whites and racial/ethnic minority students. College completion rates

in 2000 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001) for White individuals between 25-

29 years was 29.6%, compared to 17.8% for African Americans, 53.9% for Asian/Pacific

Islander Americans, and 9.7% for Hispanics. Corresponding statistics in 1991 vs. 1974,

were 24.6% vs. 22% for Whites, 11% vs. 7.9% for African Americans/Blacks, and 9.2%

vs. 5.7% for Hispanics. Data for Hispanics were first collected in 1974; data for

Asian/Pacific Islanders were not collected until the mid-90’s. Clearly these data indicate

that racial/ethnic minority students are graduating at a lower rate than White students, but

the data also show that they are making educational gains.

Completion of a psychology degree is particularly germane to these Guidelines,

since obtaining a college degree is the first step in the pipeline to becoming a psychologist.

The National Center on Educational Statistics collects information on degrees conferred by

area, reported by race/ethnicity. Their latest report (NCES, 2001) indicates that 74,060

bachelor’s degrees were awarded in psychology last year, 14,465 master’s degrees were

awarded in psychology, and 4310 doctoral degrees were awarded in psychology. Of those

degrees, the majority was awarded to Whites (72% of Bachelor’s and master’s degrees and

77% of doctoral degrees). African Americans received 10% of both bachelor’s and

master’s degrees and 5% of doctoral degrees, Hispanics received 10% of bachelor’s degrees

and 5% of both master’s and doctoral degrees, Asian/Pacific Islanders received 6% of

bachelor’s degrees, 3% of master’s, and 4% of doctoral degrees in psychology. American

Indians received less than 1% of all the degrees in psychology. Compared to the percent

of the population for each of these minority groups, noted above, racial/ethnic minority

students are underrepresented at all levels of psychology, but most particularly at the

doctoral level, the primary entry point to be a psychologist.

Thus, racial/ethnic minority students, either because of personal or because of

environmental reasons (e.g., discrimination and barriers due to external constraints),

progressively drop out of the pipeline to become psychologists. The racial representation

within the profession of psychology is similarly small. Kite et al., (2001) reported that the

numbers of ethnic minority psychologists were too small to break down by ethnicity.

Indeed, in 2002, APA membership data indicated that 0.3% of the membership is

American Indian, 1.7% is Asian, 2.1% is Hispanic, and 1.7% African American (APA

Research Office, 2002a), clearly delineating the serious under representation of

Psychologists of Color within the organization. Representation is slightly better within

APA governance in 2002–1.7% of those in APA governance are American Indian, 3.6%

are Asian, 5.1% are Black, and 4.8% are Hispanic (APA Research Office 2002b).

These Guidelines are based on the central premise that the population of the United

States is racially/ethnically diverse, and that students, research participants, clients and the

workforce will be increasingly likely to come from racially/ethnically diverse cultures.

Moreover, educators, trainers of psychologists, psychological researchers, providers of

service, and those psychologists implementing organizational change are encouraged to

gain skills to work effectively with individuals and groups of varying cultural backgrounds.

We base our premise on psychologists’ ethical principles to be competent to work with a

variety of populations (Principle A), to respect others’ rights (Principle D), to be concerned

to not harm others (Principle E), and to contribute to social justice (Principle F; APA, 1992).

We believe these Guidelines will assist psychologists in seeking and using appropriate

culturally centered education, training, research, practice and organizational change.

Also informing these Guidelines is research, professional consensus, and literature

addressing perceptions of ethnic minority groups and intergroup relationships (Dovidio &

Gaertner, 1998; Dovidio, Gaertner, & Validzic, 1998; Gaertner & Dovodio,

2000), experiences of ethnic and racial minority groups (Sue, 1999; Swim & Stagnor, 1998;

USHHS, 2000, 2001), multidisciplinary theoretical models about worldviews and identity

(Arredondo & Glauner, 1992; Helms, 1990; Hofstede, 1980; Kluckhohn & Strodbeck,

1961; Markus & Kitayama, 2001; Sue & Sue, 1977); and the work on cross cultural and

multicultural guidelines and competencies developed over the past 20 years (Arredondo et

al., 1996; Sue, Arredondo, & McDavis, 1992; Sue et al., 1982). Although the authors

acknowledge that the issues addressed in these Guidelines are increasingly important to

consider in a global context, the Guidelines focus on the context within the United States

and its commonwealths or territories such as Puerto Rico and Guam.

Definitions

There is considerable controversy and overlap in terms used to connote race,

culture, and ethnicity (Helms & Talleyrand, 1997; Phinney, 1996). In this section we define

the following terms that will be used throughout these Guidelines.

Culture. “Culture” is defined as the belief systems and value orientations that

influence customs, norms, practices, and social institutions, including psychological

processes (language, care taking practices, media, educational systems) and organizations

(media, educational systems; Fiske, Kitayama, Markus, & Nisbett, 1998). Inherent in this

definition is the acknowledgement that all individuals are cultural beings and have a

cultural, ethnic, and racial heritage. Culture has been described as the embodiment of a

worldview through learned and transmitted beliefs, values, and practices, including

religious and spiritual traditions. It also encompasses a way of living informed by the

historical, economic, ecological, and political forces on a group. These definitions suggest

that culture is fluid and dynamic, and that there are both cultural universal phenomena as

well as culturally specific or relative constructs.

Race. The biological basis of race has, at times, been the source of fairly heated

debates in psychology (Fish, 1995; Helms & Talleyrand, 1997; Jensen, 1995; Levin,

1995; Phinney, 1996; Rushton, 1995; Sun, 1995; Yee, Fairchild, Weizmann, & Wyatt,

1993). Helms and Cook (1999) note that “race” has no consensual definition, and that, in

fact, biological racial categories and phenotypic characteristics have more within group

variation than between group variation. In these Guidelines, the definition of race is

considered to be socially constructed, rather than biologically determined. Race, then, is

the category to which others assign individuals on the basis of physical characteristics, such

as skin color or hair type, and the generalizations and stereotypes made as a result. Thus,

“people are treated or studied as though they belong to biologically defined racial groups

on the basis of such characteristics” (Helms & Talleyrand, 1997).

Ethnicity. Similar to the concepts of race and culture, the term “ethnicity” does

not have a commonly agreed upon definition; in these Guidelines we will refer to ethnicity

as the acceptance of the group mores and practices of one’s culture of origin and the

concomitant sense of belonging. We also note that, consistent with Brewer (1999),

Sedikides and Brewer (2001), and Hornsey and Hogg (2000), individuals may have

multiple ethnic identities that operate with different salience at different times.

Multiculturalism and Diversity. The terms “multiculturalism” and “diversity”

have been used interchangeably to include aspects of identity stemming from gender,

sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or age. Multiculturalism, in an

absolute sense, recognizes the broad scope of dimensions of race, ethnicity, language,

sexual orientation, gender, age, disability, class status, education, religious/spiritual

orientation, and other cultural dimensions. All of these are critical aspects of an

individual’s ethnic/racial and personal identity, and psychologists are encouraged to be

cognizant of issues related to all of these dimensions of culture. In addition, each cultural

dimension has unique issues and concerns. As noted by the Guidelines for Psychotherapy

with Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Clients (APA, 2000), each individual belongs to/identifies

with a number of identities and some of those identities interact with each other. To

effectively help clients, to effectively train students, to be most effective as agents of

change and as scientists, psychologists are encouraged to be familiar with issues of these

multiple identities within and between individuals. However, as we noted earlier, in these

Guidelines, we will use the term multicultural rather narrowly, to connote interactions

between racial/ethnic groups in the U.S. and the implications for education, training,

research, practice, and organizational change.

The concept of diversity has been widely used in employment settings, with the

term given greater visibility through research by the Hudson Institute reported in

Workforce 2000 (Johnson & Packer, 1987) and Workforce 2020 (Judy & D’Amico, 1997).

The application of the term began with reference to women and Persons of Color,

underrepresented in the workplace, particularly in decision-making roles. It has since

evolved to be more encompassing in its intent and application by referring to individuals’

social identities including age, sexual orientation, physical disability, socioeconomic status,

race/ethnicity, workplace role/position, religious and spiritual orientation, and work/family

concerns (Loden, 1996).

Culture-centered. We use the term “culture-centered” throughout the Guidelines

to encourage psychologists to use a “cultural lens” as a central focus of professional

behavior. In culture-centered practices, psychologists recognize that all individuals

including themselves are influenced by different contexts, including the historical,

ecological, sociopolitical, and disciplinary. “If culture is part of the environment, and all

behavior is shaped by culture, then culture-centered counseling is responsive to all

culturally learned patterns” (Pedersen, 1997, p. 256). For example, a culture-centered focus

suggests to the psychologist the consideration that behavior may be shaped by culture, the

groups to which one belongs, and cultural stereotypes including those about stigmatized

group members (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000; Major, Quinton, & McCoy, in press; Markus

& Kitayama, 1991; Steele, 1997).

Historical and Sociopolitical Developments for Guidelines

There are a number of national events, APA-specific developments, and

initiatives of other related professional associations that provide an historical context for

the development of multicultural and culture-specific guidelines, with a focus on

racial/ethnic minority groups. Nationally, in 1954, the Supreme Court struck down the

“separate but equal” doctrine of segregated education. Benjamin and Crouse (2002) note

that in addition to setting the stage for greater social equity in education, Brown vs Board

of Education was an important turning point for psychology, because it was the “first time

that psychological research was cited in a Supreme Court decision” (p. 38). A decade

later, the 1964 passage of the Civil Rights Act set the stage for sociopolitical movements

and the development of additional legislation to protect individual and group rights at

national, state, and local levels. These movements and resulting legislation have

specifically addressed the rights of equity and access based on gender, age, disability,

national origin, religion, sexual orientation, and of course, ethnicity and race. However, it

is also important to note that movements to dismantle Affirmative Action in California,

Michigan, and Texas, are sociopolitical efforts that threaten the advancement of the rights

of individuals and groups historically marginalized.

National issues regarding healthcare and mental health disparities for ethnic/racial

minority groups culminated in psychologists playing a role in President Clinton’s dialogue

in the mid 1990’s about race and racism, and in the U.S. Surgeon General’s Reports in 2000

and 2001. The national debates also led to noteworthy organizational structural changes.

For example the National Institute of Mental Health established an office in Minority

Research in 1971, and reorganized to incorporate ethnic minority focused research in all

areas in 1985, including justifications for diversity of research populations. Findings from

this funded research have been instrumental in setting policies specific to racial/ethnic

minority groups.

Psychologists’ perspective of the role of race in education has been addressed for

nearly a century (a historical perspective is provided by Suzuki & Valencia, 1997). Indeed

the construct of race, culture, and intergroup relationships have been areas of research for

psychologists since nearly the beginning of psychology, including Clark & Clark (1940),

Allport (1954), and Lewin (1945) (see Duckitt, 1992, for a historical review).

Within the profession of psychology, attention to culture as a variable in clinical

practice was first mentioned at the Vail Conference of 1973 (Korman, 1974). One of the

recommendations from this conference was to include training in cultural diversity in all

doctoral programs and through continuing education workshops. Attention to appropriate

training based on multicultural and culture-specific constructs and contexts continued

through the next two decades. The APA Committee on Accreditation’s “Accreditation

Domains and Standards” included cultural diversity as a component of effective training in

1986 and continuing to the 2002 guidelines (APA, 2002). These efforts recognize the

importance of cultural and individual differences and diversity in the training of clinical,

counseling, and school psychologists. Subsequently, the training councils of these

disciplines began to incorporate cultural diversity into their model programs, including the

Council of Counseling Psychology’s model training program in counseling psychology

(Murdock, Alcorn, Heesacker, & Stoltenberg, 1998), and Standards of the

National Council of Schools and Programs of Professional Psychology (Peng & Nisbett,

1999).

Concomitantly, changes to reflect greater attention to cultural diversity were occurring

through structural and functional changes within the APA organization. The Office of

Ethnic Minority Affairs (OEMA) was established in 1979. A year later the Board of Ethnic

Minority Affairs (BEMA) was established. BEMA was charged with promoting the

scientific underpinning of the influence and impact of culture, race, and ethnicity on

individuals’ behavior, as well as advancing the participation of ethnic minority

psychologists within the organization. BEMA established a Task Force on Minority

Education and Training in 1981, and a second Task Force on Communication with

Minority Constituents was formed in 1984. In 1990, the Board for the Advancement of

Psychology in the Public Interest (BAPPI) was formed, as was the Committee on Ethnic

Minority Affairs (CEMA). These entities replaced BEMA within APA’s governance

structure. The Commission on Ethnic Minority Recruitment, Retention, and Training was

formed in 1994, and published a report and 5-year plan to increase the number of students

in psychology. These multiple efforts of APA and the Divisions began to culminate in the

production of policy. The General Guidelines for Providers of Psychological Services

were “developed with the understanding that psychological services must be planned and

implemented so that they are sensitive to factors related to life in a pluralistic society such

as age, gender, affectional orientation, culture and ethnicity” (APA, 1987).

In 1990, APA published the Guidelines for Providers of Psychological Services to

Ethnic, Linguistic, and Culturally Diverse Populations (APA, 1990). Following this, the

1992 revision of the Ethics code included Principle D: Respect of People’s Rights and

Dignity, which states in part, “Psychologists are aware of cultural, individual, and role

differences, including those related to age, gender, race, ethnicity, national origin, …” (p.

1598). The Ethics code also contains ethical standards related to cultural diversity related

to competence (1.08), assessment (2.04), and research (6.07 and 6.11).

The current Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice,

and Organizational Change have developed as a result of the sociopolitical environment

within the United States and the resulting work of psychologists within the professional

organization. While there have been a variety of organizational initiatives that have

focused on race and ethnicity, these Guidelines are the first to address the implications of

race and ethnicity in psychological education, training, research, practice and

organizational change. These Guidelines are the latest step in an on-going effort to provide

psychologists in the United States with a framework for services to an increasingly diverse

population and to assist psychologists in the provision of those services. In effect, there is

a societal and guild/organizational history steadily indicating a rationale for attending to a

multicultural and culture-specific agenda more formally.

Introduction to the Guidelines: Assumptions and Principles

These Guidelines, as noted earlier, pertain to the role of psychologists of both

racial/ethnic minority and non-minority status in education, training, research, practice, and

organizations, as well as to students, research participants, and clients of racial/ethnic

heritage minority heritage. In psychological education, training, research, and practice, all

transactions occur between members of two or more cultures. As identity constructs and

dynamic forces, race and ethnicity can impact psychological practice and interventions at

all levels. These tenets articulate respect and inclusiveness for the national heritage of all

cultural groups, recognition of cultural contexts as defining forces for individuals’ and

groups’ lived experiences, and the role of external forces such as historical, economic, and

socio-political events.

This philosophical grounding serves to influence the planning and implementation of

culturally and scientifically sound education, research, practice, and organizational change

and policy development in the larger society. To have a profession of psychology that is

culturally informed in theory and practice calls for psychologists, as primary transmitters

of the culture of the profession, to assume the responsibility for contributing to the

advancement of cultural knowledge, sensitivity, and understanding. In other words,

psychologists are in a position to provide leadership as agents of prosocial change,

advocacy, and social justice, thereby promoting societal understanding, affirmation, and

appreciation of multiculturalism against the damaging effects of individual, institutional,

and societal racism, prejudice, and all forms of oppression based on stereotyping and

discrimination.

The Guidelines for Multicultural Education and Training, Research, and

Practice in Psychology are founded upon the following principles:

1. Ethical conduct of psychologists is enhanced by knowledge of differences in beliefs

and practices that emerge from socialization through racial and ethnic group affiliation

and membership and how those beliefs and practices will necessarily affect the

education, training, research and practice of psychology (Principles D and F, APA Code

of Ethics, 1992; Council of National Associations for the Advancement of Ethnic

Minority Issues, 2000).

2. Understanding and recognizing the interface between individuals’ socialization

experiences based on ethnic and racial heritage can enhance the quality of education,

training, practice, and research in the field of psychology (American Council on

Education, 2000; American Council on Education and American Association of

University Professors, 2000; Biddle, Bank, & Slavings, 1990).

3. Recognition of the ways in which the intersection of racial and ethnic group

membership with other dimensions of identity (e.g., gender, age, sexual orientation,

disability, religion/spiritual orientation, educational attainment/experiences, and

socioeconomic status) enhances the understanding and treatment of all people

(Berberich, 1998; Greene, 2000; Jackson-Triche, Sullivan, Wells, Rogers, Camp, &

Mazel, 2000; Wu, 2000).

4. Knowledge of historically derived approaches that have viewed cultural differences as

deficits and have not valued certain social identities helps psychologists to understand

the under representation of ethnic minorities in the profession, and affirms and values

the role of ethnicity and race in developing personal identity (Coll,

Akerman, & Cicchetti, 2000; Medved, Morrison, Dearing, Larson, Cline, &

Brummans, 2001; Mosely-Howard & Burgan Evans, 2000; Sue, 1999; Witte &

Morrison, 1995).

5. Psychologists are uniquely able to promote racial equity and social justice. This is

aided by their awareness of their impact on others and the influence of their personal

and professional roles in society (Comas-Díaz, 2000).

6. Psychologists’ knowledge about the roles of organizations, including employers and

professional psychological associations are potential sources of behavioral practices

that encourage discourse, education and training, institutional change, and research and

policy development, that reflect rather than neglect, cultural differences. Psychologists

recognize that organizations can be gatekeepers or agents of the status quo rather than

leaders in a changing society with respect to multiculturalism.

Commitment to Cultural Awareness and Knowledge of Self and Others

Guideline #1: Psychologists are encouraged to recognize that, as cultural beings, they

may hold attitudes and beliefs that can detrimentally influence their perceptions of and

interactions with individuals who are ethnically and racially different from themselves.

Psychologists, like all people, are shaped and influenced by many factors. These

include, but are not limited to, their cultural heritage(s), various dimensions of identity

including ethnic and racial identity development, gender socialization, and socioeconomic

experiences, and other dimensions of identity that predispose individual psychologists to

certain biases and assumptions about themselves and others.

Psychologists approach interpersonal interactions with a set of attitudes, or worldview, that

helps shape their perceptions of others. This worldview is shaped in part by their cultural

experiences. Indeed, cross-cultural and multicultural literature consistently indicates that

all people are “multicultural beings,” that all interactions are cross-cultural, and that all of

our life experiences are perceived and shaped from within our own cultural perspectives

(Arredondo et al., 1996; Brewer & Brown, 1998; Fiske et al., 1998; Fouad & Brown, 2000;

Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Pedersen, 2000; Sue et al., 1992; Sue et al., 1982; Sue, Ivey, &

Pedersen, 1996).

Psychologists are encouraged to learn how cultures differ in basic premises that

shape worldview. For example, it may be important to understand that a cultural facet of

mainstream culture in the United States is a preference for individuals who are independent,

focused on achieving and success, who have determined (and are in control of) their own

personal goals, and who value rational decision-making (Fiske et al., 1998; Markus &

Kitayama, 1991; Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeir, 2002). By contrast, individuals with

origins in cultures of East Asia may prefer interdependence with others, orientation towards

harmony with others, conforming to social norms, and subordination of personal goals and

objectives to the will of the group (Fiske et al., 1998). A preference for an independent

orientation may shape attitudes towards those with preferences for same, or other

orientations. This preference is a concern when a different orientation is unconsciously

and automatically judged negatively (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995).

The perceiver in an interaction integrates not only the content of the interaction, but

also information about the target person, including personality traits, physical appearance,

age, sex, ascribed race, ability/disability, among other characteristics (Kunda & Thagard,

1996). All of these perceptions are shaped by the perceiver’s worldview, and organized in

some coherent whole to make sense of the other person’s behavior. The psychological

process that helps to organize the often-overwhelming amount of information in perceiving

others is to place people in categories, thereby reducing the information into manageable

chunks of information that go together (Fiske, 1998). This normal process leads to

associating various traits and behaviors with particular groups (e.g., all athletes are more

brawn than brain, all women like to shop) even if they are inaccurate for particular, many,

or even most individuals.

The most often used theoretical framework for understanding approaches that

emphasize attention to categories has been social categorization theory, originally

conceptualized by Allport (1954). In this framework, people make sense of their social

world by creating categories of the individuals around them, which includes separating the

categories into in-groups and out-groups (Brewer & Brown, 1998; Fiske, 1998;

Hornsey & Hogg, 2000; Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Turner, Brown & Tajfel, 1979).

Categorization has a number of uses, including speed of processing and efficiency in use

of cognitive resources, in part because it appears to happen fairly automatically (Fiske,

1998).

Relevant to these Guidelines are factors that influence categorization and its effect

on attitudes towards individuals who are racially or ethnically different from self. These

include a tendency to exaggerate differences between groups and similarities within one

group and a tendency to favor one’s in-group over the out-group; this, too, is done outside

conscious processing (Fiske, 1998). In-groups are more highly valued, more trusted, and

engender greater cooperation as opposed to competition (Brewer & Brown, 1998;

Hewstone, Rubin, & Willis, 2002), and those with strongest in-group affiliation also show

the most prejudice (Swim & Mallett, 2002). This becomes problematic when one group

holds much more power than the other group or when resources among ingroups are not

distributed equitably, as is currently the case in the United States.

Thus, it is quite common to have automatic biases and stereotypic attitudes about

people in the out-group, and for most psychologists, individuals in racial/ethnic minority

groups are in an out-group. The stereotype, or the traits associated with the category

become the predominant aspect of the category, even when disconfirming information is

provided (Kunda & Thagard, 1996) and particularly when there is some motivation to

confirm the stereotype (Kunda & Sinclair, 1999). These can influence interpretations of

behavior and influence people’s judgments about that behavior (Fiske, 1998; Kunda &

Thagard, 1996). Automatic biases and attitudes may also lead to miscommunication, since

normative behavior in one context may not necessarily be understood or valued in another.

For example, addressing peers, clients, students, or research participants by their first name

may be acceptable for some individuals, but may be considered a sign of disrespect for

many racial/ethnic minority individuals who are accustomed to more formal interpersonal

relations with individuals in an authority role.

Although the associations between particular stereotypic attitudes and resulting

behaviors have not been consistently found, group categorization has been illustrated to

influence intergroup behavior including behavioral confirmation (Stukas & Snyder,

2002), in-group favoritism (Hewstone et al., 2002), and subtle forms of behaviors (Crosby,

Bromely, & Saxe, 1980). Psychologists are urged to become more aware and sensitive to

their own attitudes towards others as these attitudes may be more biased and culturally

limiting then they think. It is sobering to note that, even those who consciously hold

egalitarian beliefs, have shown unconscious endorsement of negative attitudes toward and

stereotypes about groups (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995). Thus, psychologists who describe

themselves as holding egalitarian values and/or as professionals who promote social justice

may also unconsciously hold negative attitudes or stereotypes.

Given these findings, many have advocated that improvements in intergroup

relationships would occur if there was a de-emphasis on group membership. One way that

this has been done is that those who have desired to improve intergroup relationships have

taken a “color-blind” approach to interactions with individuals who are racially or

ethnically different from them. In this approach, racial or ethnic differences are minimized,

and emphasis is on the universal or “human” aspects of behavior. This has been the

traditional focus in the United States on assimilation, with its melting pot metaphor, that

this is a nation of immigrants that together make one whole, without a focus on any one

individual cultural group. Proponents of this approach suggest that alternative approaches

that attend to differences can result in inequity by promoting, for instance, categorical

thinking including preferences for in-groups and use of stereotypes when perceiving out

groups. In contrast, opponents to the color-blind approach have noted the differential

power among racial/ethnic groups in the United States, and have noted that ignoring group

differences can lead to the maintenance of the status quo and assumptions that racial/ethnic

minority groups share the same perspective as dominant group members (Schofield, 1986;

Sidanius & Pratto, 1999; Wolsko, Park, Judd, &

Wittenbrink, 2000).

While the color-blind approach is based in an attempt to reduce inequities, social

psychologists have provided evidence that a color-blind approach does not, in fact, lead to

equitable treatment across groups. Brewer and Brown (1998), in their review of the

literature, note “…ignoring group differences often means that, by default, existing

intergroup inequalities are perpetuated” (p. 583). For example, Schofield (1986) found that

disregarding cultural differences in a school led to reestablishing segregation by ethnicity.

Color-blind policies have also been documented as playing a role in differential

employment practices (Brewer & Brown). In these cases, the color-blind approach may

have the effect of maintaining a status quo in which Whites have more power than do

People of Color. There is also some evidence that a colorblind approach is less accurate

than a multicultural approach. Wolsko et al., (2000) for example, found that when White

students were instructed to adopt a color-blind or multicultural approach, those with a

multicultural approach had stronger stereotypes of other ethnic groups as well as more

positive regard for other groups. White students in a multicultural approach also had more

accurate perceptions of differences due to race/ethnicity and used category information

about both ethnicity and individual characteristics more than those in the color-blind

condition. Wolsko et al. concluded, “When operating under a colorblind set of

assumptions, social categories are viewed as negative information to be avoided, or

suppressed. … In contrast, when operating under a multicultural set of assumptions, social

categories are viewed as simply a consequence of cultural diversity. Failing to recognize

and appreciate group similarities and differences is considered to inhibit more harmonious

interactions between people from different backgrounds.” (p.

649)

Consistent with the multicultural approach used by Wolsko et al. (2000),

culturecentered training and interventions acknowledge cultural differences and that

worldviews differ among cultures, as do experiences of being stigmatized (Crocker, Major,

& Steele, 1998). This perspective is discussed more fully in Guideline #2. However,

knowing all there is to know about a person’s ethnic and racial background is not sufficient

to be effective unless psychologists are cognizant of their positions as individuals with a

worldview and that this worldview is brought to bear on interactions they have with others.

As noted earlier, the worldview of the client, student, or research participant, and

psychologist may be quite different, leading to communication problems or premature

relationship termination. This does not argue that psychologists should shape their world

view to be consistent with clients and students, but rather that they are able to be aware of

their own worldview to be able to understand others’ frame of cultural reference (Ibrahim,

1999; Sodowsky & Kuo, 2001; Triandis & Singelis, 1998).

The literature on social categorization places all human interaction within a cultural

context, and encourages an understanding of the various factors that influence our

perceptions of others. These premises suggest that the psychologist is a part of the

multicultural equation; therefore, on-going development of one’s personal and

crosscultural awareness, knowledge, and skills is recommended. Fiske (1998) notes that

automatic biases can be controlled with motivation, information, and appropriate mood.

Given the above research, psychologists are encouraged to explore their worldview—

beliefs, values, and attitudes – from a personal and professional perspective. They are

encouraged to examine their potential preferences for within group similarity, and realize

that, once impressions are formed, these impressions are often resistant to disconfirmation

(Gilbert, 1998). Moreover, psychologists are encouraged to understand their own

assumptions about ways to improve multicultural interactions and the potential issues

associated with different approaches. Psychologists’ self-awareness and appreciation of

cultural, ethnic, and racial heritage may serve as a bridge in cross-cultural interactions, not

necessarily highlighting but certainly not minimizing these factors as they attempt to build

understanding (Arredondo et al., 1996; Hofstede, 1980; Ibrahim, 1985; Jones, Lynch,

Tenglund, & Gaertner, 2000; Locke, 1992; Sue, 1978; Sue & Sue, D., 1999; Triandis &

Singelis, 1998).

The research on reducing stereotypic attitudes and biases suggest a number of

strategies (Hewstone et al., 2002) that psychologists may use. The first and most critical is

awareness of those attitudes and values (Devine, Plant, & Buswell, 2000; Gaertner &

Dovidio, 2000). The second and third strategies are effort and practice in changing the

automatically favorable perceptions of in-group and negative perceptions of out-group.

How this change occurs has been the subject of many years of empirical effort, with varying

degrees of support (Hewstone et al.,). It appears, though, that increased contact with other

groups (Pettigrew, 1998) is helpful, particularly if in this contact, the individuals are of

equal status and the psychologist is able to take the other’s perspective

(Galinsky & Moskowitz, 2000) and has empathy for him/her (Finlay & Stephan, 2000).

Some strategies to do this have included actively seeing individuals as individuals, rather

than as members of a group, in effect decategorizing (Brewer & Miller, 1988). Another

strategy is to change the perception of “us vs. them” to “we,” or recategorizing the outgroup

as members of the in-group (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000). Both of these models have been

shown to be effective, particularly under low-prejudice conditions and when the focus is

on interpersonal communication (Brewer & Brown, 1998; Hewstone et al.,

2002). In addition, psychologists may want to actively increase their tolerance (Greenberg,

Solomon, Pyszczynski, Rosenblatt, & et al. 1992) and trust of racial/ethnic groups (Kramer,

1999).

Thus, psychologists are encouraged to be aware of their attitudes and work to

increase their contact with members of other racial/ethnic groups, building trust in others

and increasing their tolerance for others. Since covert attempts to suppress automatic

associations can backfire, with attempts at suppression resulting in increased use of

stereotypes (Macrae & Bodenhausen, 2000), psychologists are urged to become overtly

aware of their attitudes towards others. It has been shown, though, that repeated attempts

at suppression have been found to lead to improvements in automatic biases (Plant &

Devine, 1998). Such findings suggest that psychologists’ efforts to change their attitudes

and biases help to prevent those attitudes from detrimentally affecting their relationships

with students, research subjects and clients who are racially/ethnically different from them.

Guideline #2: Psychologists are encouraged to recognize the importance of multicultural

sensitivity/responsiveness, knowledge, and understanding about

ethnically and racially different individuals.

As noted in Guideline #1, membership in one group helps to shape perceptions of

not only one’s own group, but also other groups. The link between those perceptions and

attitudes are loyalty to and valuing of one’s own group, and devaluing the other group. The

Minority Identity Development model (Atkinson, Morten, & Sue, 1998) is one such

example applying to ethnic/racial minority individuals but also to others who have

experienced historical oppression and marginalization. The devaluing of the other group

occurs in a variety of ways, including the “ultimate attributional error” (Pettigrew, 1979),

the tendency to attribute positive behaviors to internal traits within one’s own group, but

negative behaviors to the internal traits of the out group (although Gilbert, 1998, suggests

that the ultimate attribute error may be culturally specific to individually oriented cultures,

such as the United States). In the United States, then, the result may be positive, such as

ensuring greater cooperation within one’s group, or negative, such development of

prejudice and stereotyping of other groups. Decades of research and multiple theories have

been developed to reduce prejudice of other groups, most developing around the central

premise that greater knowledge of, and contact with, the other groups will result in greater

intercultural communication and less prejudice and stereotyping (Brewer & Miller, 1998;

Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000). Brewer and Miller delineate the factors that have been found

to be successful in facilitating prejudice reduction through contact among groups: social

and institutional support, sufficient frequency and duration for relationships to occur, equal

status among participants, and cooperation. It appears, as discussed in Guideline #1, that

attention to out-group stereotyping reduces prejudice

(Reynolds & Oakes, 2000), as does overt training to reduce stereotyping (Kawakami,

Dovidio, Moll, Hermsen, & Russin, 2000).

It is within this framework that psychologists are urged to gain a better

understanding and appreciation of the worldview and perspectives of those racially and

ethnically different from themselves. Psychologists are also encouraged to understand the

stigmatizing aspects of being a member of a culturally devalued “other group.”

(Crocker et al., 1998; Major et al., in press). This includes experience, sometimes daily,

with overt experiences of prejudice and discrimination, awareness of the negative value of

one’s own group in the cultural hierarchy, the threat of one’s behavior being found

consistent with a racial/ethnic stereotype (stereotype threat), and the uncertainty (e.g., due

to prejudice or individual behavior) of the attribution of the stigmatizing comments and

outcomes.

Understanding a client’s or student’s or research participant’s worldview, including

the effect of being in a stigmatized group, helps to understand his/her perspectives and

behaviors. Racial and ethnic heritage, worldview, and life experiences as a result of this

identity may affect such factors as the ways students present themselves in class, their

learning style, their willingness to seek, and trust the advice and consultation from faculty,

their ability and interest in working with others on class projects (Neville & Mobley, 2001).

In the clinical realm, worldview and life experiences may affect how clients present

symptoms to therapists, the meaning that illness has in their lives, motivation and

willingness to seek treatment, social support networks, and perseverance in treatment

(Anderson, 1995; USDHSS, 2000, 2001). People of Color are underrepresented in mental

health services, in large part, because they are less likely to seek services (Kessler et al.,

1996; Zhang, Snowden, & Sue, 1998). The Surgeon General’s report on culture and mental

health (2001) strongly suggests, “cultural misunderstanding or communication problems

between clients and therapists may prevent minority group members from using services

and receiving appropriate care” (p. 42). One way to address this problem is for

psychologists to gain greater knowledge and understanding of the cultural practices of

clients.

Psychologists are encouraged to increase their knowledge of the multicultural bases

of general psychological theories and information from a variety of cultures and

cultural/racial perspectives and theories, such as Mestizo psychology (Ramirez, 1998),

psychology of Nigrescence (Cross, 1978; Helms, 1990; Parham, 1989, 2001; Vandiver,

Fhagen-Smith, Cokley, Cross, & Worrell, 2001; Worrell, Cross, & Vandiver, 2001),

Latino/Hispanic frameworks (Padilla, 1995; Ruiz, 1990; Santiago-Rivera et al., 2002)

Native American models (Cameron, in press; LaFromboise & Jackson, 1996),

biracial/multiracial models (Wehrly et al., 1999; Root, 1992) specific to racial/ethnic

minority groups in the United States. In addition, psychologists are encouraged to become

knowledgeable about how history has been different for the major U.S. cultural groups.

Past experiences in relation to the dominant culture including slavery, Asian concentration

camps, the American Indian holocaust, and the colonization of the major Latino groups on

their previous Southwest homelands contribute to some of the sociopolitical dynamics,

influencing worldview. Psychologists may also become knowledgeable about the

psychological issues and gender related concerns related to immigration and refugee status

(Cienfuegos & Moneli, 1983; Comas-Díaz & Jansen, 1995; Espin, 1997, 1999; Fullilove,

1996).

As noted in Guideline #1, one of the premises underlying these Guidelines is that

all interpersonal interactions occur within a multicultural context. To enhance sensitivity

and understanding further, psychologists are encouraged to become knowledgeable about

federal legislation including the Civil Rights Act, Affirmative Action, and Equal

Employment Opportunity (EEO) that were enacted to protect groups marginalized due to

ethnicity, race, national origin, religion, age, and gender (Crosby & Cordova, 1996).

Concomitantly, psychologists are encouraged to understand the impact of the dismantling

of Affirmative Action and anti-bilingual education legislation on the lives of ethnic and

racial minority groups (Fine, Weis, Powell, & Wong, 1997; Glasser, 1988).

Built on variations of the social categorization models described in Guideline #1

ethnic and racial identity models such as the Minority Identity Model (Atkinson et al.,

1998) noted earlier have also been developed for specific racial/ethnic minority groups

(Cross, 1978; Helms, 1990; Parham, 1989, 2001; Ruiz, 1990; Vandiver et al., 2001; Worrell

et al., 2001). These models propose that members of racial/ethnic minority groups initially

value the other group (dominant culture) and devalue their own culture, move to valuing

their own group and devalue the dominant culture, and integrate a value for both groups in

a final stage. These models are key constructs in the cross cultural domain, and

psychologists are encouraged to understand how the individual’s ethnic and racial identity

status and development affects beliefs, emotions, behavior and interaction styles (Brewer

& Brown, 1998; Fiske et al., 1998; Hays, 1995; Helms & Cook, 1999). This information

will help psychologists to communicate more effectively with clients, peers, students,

research participants, and organizations and to understand their coping responses (Crocker

et al., 1998; Major et al., in press; Swim & Mallet, 2002). Psychologists are encouraged to

become knowledgeable about ethnic and racial identity research including research on

Asian, Black, White, Mexican, Mestizo, minority, Native

American, and biracial identity models (Atkinson et al., 1998; Cross, 1991; Fouad &

Brown, 2000; Helms, 1990; Hong & Ham, 2001; Phinney, 1991; Ramirez, 1998; Root,

1992; Ruiz, 1990; Sodowsky, Kuo-Jackson, & Loya, 1997; & Wehrly et al., 1999).

Additionally, psychologists may also learn about other theories of identity development

that are not stage models, as well as other models that demonstrate the

multidimensionality of individual identity across different historical contexts (Santiago-

Rivera et al., 2000; Oetting & Beauvais, 1990-1991; Oyserman, Gant, & Ager, 1995;

Robinson & Howard-Hamilton, 2000; Root, 1999; Sellers, Smith, Shelton, Rowley, &

Chavous, 1998; Thompson & Carter, 1997).

Education

Guideline #3: As educators, psychologists are encouraged to employ the constructs of

multiculturalism and diversity in psychological education.

Psychology has historically focused on biological determinants of behavior versus

historical and sociopolitical forces (Bronstein & Quiana, 1988). Some have expressed fear

of creating stereotypes by addressing cultural differences, discussed earlier as the color-

blind approach (Ridley, 1995), fear of categorization processes such as cognitive and

behavioral confirmation biases (Wolsko et al., 2000) and a discomfort with discussing

difficult and uncomfortable subjects (Abreu, 2001). Sue and Sue (1999) describe another

historical concern –ethnocentric monoculturalism – which is

characterized, in part, by a belief in the superiority of one’s own group and inferiority of

another’s group and the use of power to impose one’s values on the less-powerful group.

Finally, in part, the omission of culture in psychology has stemmed from a belief that

culture and multiculturalism are not legitimate areas of study (Bronstein & Quiana, 1988;

Betancourt & Lopez, 1993; Fowers & Richardson, 1996; Hall, 2001). This has been

manifested in preventing graduate students from conducting cross-cultural and

multicultural research; non-acceptance of manuscripts in this area due to studies with small

samples; lack of available measures to assess the effects of multicultural training; and the

emphasis on quantitative versus qualitative research (CNPAAEMI, 2000; Sue et al., 1998).

These concerns have extended to incorporating a culture-centered approach to education

as well. However, scholars and cross-cultural researchers began calling for a revision of

psychology education and training to incorporate a more culture-centered perspective in

the mid 1980’s. In this document, the context of education refers to teaching of psychology

at the undergraduate and graduate levels as well as in clinical and research supervision,

advisement and mentoring, and continuing post-graduate education.

In the past two decades, studies have documented an increase in programs that have

incorporated an emphasis on cultural diversity into the curriculum in graduate programs as

well as in internship settings (Constantine, Ladany, Inman, & Ponterotto,

1996; Lee et al., 1999; Ponterotto, 1997; Quintana & Bernal, 1995; Rogers, Hoffman, &

Wade, 1998). This infusion is based both on the premise that multicultural and

culturespecific knowledge in education is effective in producing more competent

researchers, educators, therapists, and other applied practitioners, as well as adhering to

accreditation guidelines to incorporate diversity into the curriculum.

As discussed in Guideline #1, all interactions are cross-cultural and, by extension,

all classroom interactions are multicultural. Thus, these Guidelines apply to teaching about

multiculturalism as well as to the practice of teaching in general. Multicultural education

has been found to promote student self-awareness and to increase their therapeutic

competence (Brown, Parham, & Yonker, 1996; D’Andrea, Daniels, & Heck, 1991; Pope-

Davis & Ottavi, 1994). Multicultural and culture-specific education may also help to

counteract stereotyping and automatic social processes leading to prejudice against ethnic

minority individuals (Abreu, 2001; Steele, 1997).

The benefits of diversity as well as the teaching from culture-centered perspectives

have been reported by a variety of researchers and organizations (American

Council on Education & American Association of University Professors, 2000; Chang,

Witt, Jones, & Hakuta, 2000). It has been found that individual, institutional, and societal

benefits result from a culture-centered perspective. At the individual level, benefits include

an enhanced commitment to work toward racial understanding. Institutional advantages

may be found for employers, who have a workforce with greater preparation in cross-

cultural understanding. Societal benefits may be located, for example, in institutions of

higher education, where scholars conduct research addressing issues of gender, race, and

ethnicity as well as research on affirmative action in the workplace

(American Council on Education & American Association of University Professors, 2000).

Other forces of change influencing attention to culture in education come from

accrediting bodies. For example, the California Postsecondary Education Commission

(1992, cited in Grieger & Toliver, 2001) mandated that all postsecondary institutions in

California bear responsibility for creating an equitable environment for all students, and

prepare them to function in a multicultural setting. As previously noted, the APA

Committee on Accreditation (COA), which accredits training programs in counseling,

clinical, and school psychology, now requires programs to document the ways that they

have both included education about diversity for students, and have attended to creating an

ethnically/racially diverse faculty and student body (APA, 2002).

During the past 10-15 years, more reports and perspectives about best practices and

guidelines for cross culture-centered education and training have emerged.

Psychologists in the role of educators in multicultural training have reported on the

excitement of teaching, conducting research, and providing supervision (Arredondo,

1985; Constantine, 1997; Grieger & Toliver, 2001; Kiselica, 1998; Rooney, Flores, &

Mercier, 1998; Stone, 1997). At the same time, they acknowledge that, by focusing on

ethnic/racial issues, approaches, literature, projects, and so forth, they often encounter

resistance from students and professional colleagues (Ponterotto, 1998; Sue et al., 1998).

Unlike other psychology coursework, multicultural coursework moves into what is viewed

as more personal domains beyond listening skills and personality theories. Culture-centered

faculty introduce material many students have never thought about, may not care about,

and may have reluctance to engage in, even if the course work is required (Jackson, 1999).

Thus the challenges for faculty, advisors, and supervisors require multiple skills to ensure

a safe learning environment, an ability to know the course content, and to manage emotions

that emerge (Abreu, 2001; American Council on

Education & American Association of University Professors, 2000; Chang et al., 2000;

Lenington-Lara, 1999).

Psychologists as educators strive to become knowledgeable about different learning

models and approaches to teaching from multiple cultural perspectives. In order to go

beyond a single multicultural counseling course or to mention in passing that the

racial/ethnic diversity is increasing in the United States, it is suggested that educators

include statements of philosophy and principles in course syllabi that guide the

multicultural educational focus (Leach & Carlton, 1997). Psychologists are encouraged to

review philosophical models that influence multicultural training. These include racebased

models (Carter, 1995; Helms, 1990); theories regarding oppression (Atkinson, Morten, &

Sue, 1998; Freire, 1970; Katz, 1985); Multicultural Counseling and Therapy (MCT) (Sue

et al., 1996); Multicultural Facets of Cultural Competence (Sue, 2001); common factors

within psychotherapy and healing (Fischer, Jome, & Atkinson, 1998;

Frank & Frank, 1998) and multicultural competency-based models (Arredondo &

Arciniega, 2001; Arredondo et al., 1996; Middleton, Rollins, & Harley, 1999). In addition,

the research on intergroup biases and categorization theories described in Guidelines #1

and #2 suggest that optimal intergroup contact is predicted by equal status among those

interacting (e.g., teacher and students), cooperation as opposed to competition, perspective

taking, and empathy (Finlay & Stephan, 2000; Gaertner &

Dovidio, 2000; Galinsky & Moskowitz, 2000; Hewstone et al., 2002; Pettigrew, 1998).

These models and approaches, then, may be used to encompass didactic courses across the

curriculum (e.g., learning about career theories and practices related to various cultural

groups) as well as assessment, organizational behavior, clinical practice and supervision,

and research approaches.

Literature based on tried and effective approaches is available to assist

psychologists in adapting and creating new curricula, infusing multicultural and

culturespecific concepts into research, assessment and clinical course work, and in

developing more culturally sensitive and inclusive learning environments for faculty, staff,

and students alike (Arredondo, 1999; Arredondo & Arciniega, 2001; Lee, 1999; Evans &

Larabee, 2002; Manese, Wu, & Nepomuceno, 2001; Pope-Davis & Coleman, 1997; Ridley

et al., 1997; Sue, 1997). Psychologists as educators are encouraged to consider these

approaches when designing culture-centered curriculum. Rather than attempt to cover

culture-specific and multicultural material in one course, psychologists are encouraged to

consider ways to make the multicultural focus thematic to the educational program.

It was previously noted that resistance to multicultural coursework and to the

assigned Faculty of Color, who are often charged with teaching a single course on

multicultural issues or practices, is not uncommon (Abreu, 2001; Jackson, 1999; Mio &

Awakuni, 2000). Several studies report on issues of emotions, including resistance, that

may be stirred up when a multicultural course is taught or when course content addresses

multicultural perspectives. These studies investigated variables such as racial prejudice,

individual and collective guilt, and other forms of emotional reactions (Jackson, 1999;

Reynolds, 1995; Shanbhag, 1999; Steward et al., 1998). Psychologists as educators may

need to anticipate a range of emotional reactions and be prepared to understand and

facilitate respectful discussion and disagreement. Accordingly, psychologists may also

want to examine a study in which students indicated that the professors’ amiability,

nonjudgmental demeanor, enthusiasm, self-disclosure, and overall leadership in the class

were sources of encouragement and positive modeling (Lenington-Lara, 1999). Findings

support the importance of this posture by faculty when teaching about multicultural issues.

While this is challenging to maintain, psychologists are encouraged to consider the

implications of this study.

Psychologists as educators are encouraged to continue to be knowledgeable about

research findings about the effects of multicultural counseling and psychology coursework

(Constantine & Yeh, 2001; Holcomb-McCoy & Myers, 1999; Kiselica, 1998;

Klausner, 1998; Koeltzow, 2000; Manese et al., 2001; Parker et al, 1998; Ponterotto,

1998; Pope-Davis, Breaux, & Lui, 1997; Salvador, 1998; Sevig & Etzkorn, 2001;

Sodowsky, Kuo-Jackson, Richardson, & Corey, 1998) and general undergraduate

education (American Council on Education & American Association of University

Professors, 2000; Chang et al., 2000).

Research

Guideline # 4: Culturally sensitive psychological researchers are encouraged to

recognize the importance of conducting culture-centered and ethical psychological

research among persons from ethnic, linguistic, and racial minority backgrounds.

Major demographic shifts in the United States (noted earlier) are underway. These

population shifts have resulted in different constituencies for which new and expanded

psychological research will be necessary. The aging baby boomers, new immigrants

particularly from China, India, Mexico, and the Philippines, younger individuals of Latino

heritage (Judy & D’Amico, 1997), and the growing biracial populations will likely require

new research agendas (Ory, Lipman, Barr, Harden, & Stahl, 2000). Additionally, according

to the U.S. Census Bureau (2001), a greater share of Americans speak a language other

than English at home (27 million speak Spanish, 1 million or more speak Chinese, French,

German, Tagalog, Vienamese, Korean, and Italian). Expanding age, cultural and linguistic

diversity, just as three examples, have implications for research in a wide variety of

psychological specialty areas, including, but not limited to, developmental, gender, health,

school, clinical, counseling, and organizational aspects of psychology.

The treatment of culture in psychological research has shifted in the past century

from ignoring cultural variables to treating culture as a nuisance variable. Thus, for

example, early research participants were White males, yet the results were assumed to

generalize to the entire population. Feminists began to call attention to this, and to decry

the bias inherent in this practice (Grady, 1981; Keller, 1982; Sherif, 1979) as did early

multicultural researchers (Katz, 1985; Korchin, 1980; Sue & Sue, 1977; Triandis & Brislin,

1984). Both groups questioned the practice of using White middle class males to define

normal behavior, and that all behavior that differed from White norms was either described

as deviant or less desirable. The result was a movement to incorporate gender and

ethnicity/race in research studies as a nuisance variable, rather than as a central contextual

variable that helps to explain human behavior. Compounding this practice was failure to

consider within-group differences of an ethnic minority group, such as regional differences,

socioeconomic status, education, and national origin, e.g., Blacks who may have come from

Africa, Haiti, or the United States, voluntary or involuntary. The fundamental problem

remained that when research does not adequately incorporate culture as a central and

specific contextual variable, behavior is misidentified, pathologized, and, in some cases,

psychologists are at risk of perpetuating harm (Hall, 2001; Rogler, 1999; Sue et al., 1998;

Sue & Sue, 1999). As an example, Kwan (1999) found in a study of the comparison of the

MMPI in China and the United States, that on some MMPI scales, Chinese subjects’ scores

were elevated relative to the norms in the United States. Not incorporating a culture-

centered perspective might lead a researcher to conclude a high level of psychopathology

in the Chinese sample. Kwan questioned, however, whether the elevated scales may have

been the result of cultural influences, which would lead to a different conclusion for this

study, and one presumes, in treatment based on the test scores. As another example, Reid

(2002) noted the decades of conclusions about women’s and racial/ethnic minority

students’ lack of educational attainment from research studies that focused on the students’

lack of individual achievement rather than in social disadvantage. Again, using a culture-

centered perspective would lead to different conclusions in these studies, as well as in the

application of this research in school systems and college admissions.

A number of scholars have voiced concerns about the cultural limitations of

psychological research in the United States. First, as noted above, when human behavior

is viewed as individualistically determined, culture is viewed as a nuisance variable –

something to be controlled and statistically manipulated rather than a central explanatory

variable (Perez, 1999; Quintana et al., 2001). Second, although scholars began to heed the

call for culturally diverse samples in research, many research samples continue to be

predominantly White and middle class with People of Color underrepresented in these

samples. When the samples are racially diverse, they are much more likely to be samples

of convenience, which may not be representative of the target group, such as samples of

college students representing all Asian Americans. This affects the external validity of a

study, or to whom the findings may be generalized (Fuertes, Bartolomeo, & Nichols, 2001;

Sue, 1999). Sue (1999) suggests that psychological science has ignored external validity

problems, and that we have erred in the direction of inaccurately generalizing from findings

based on small subsets of people to the population at large.

A third concern is that all People of Color are presumed to be similar, and, as

discussed in Guideline #1, large within-group differences are ignored (Fouad & Brown,

2000; Quintana et al., 2001). In fact, the CNPAAEMI (2001) Guidelines for Research in

Ethnic Minority Communities (2000) describes the great within-group heterogeneity of all

the major racial/ethnic groups in the United States, as does the Surgeon General’s Report

on race, culture and mental health (USDHHS, 2000; 2001). Indeed using only African

Americans from the southern United States and generalizing from this sample to all African

Americans would raise questions about the appropriateness of doing so. Similarly, there

are studies that make reference to Native Americans, overlooking the fact that there are

more than 550 tribes in the United States. Psychologists are encouraged to consider the

multidimensionality of ethnic, linguistic, and racial minority individuals and groups when

planning research studies.

Finally, some scholars have voiced concerns that racial/ethnic communities do not

directly benefit from studies in which their members participate. These concerns have led

to calls for research to be designed explicitly to be of benefit to the participants’

communities (CNPAAEMI, 2000; LaFromboise & Jackson, 1996; Marin & Marin, 1991;

Parham, 1993). To insure fidelity to the community that will be involved in the study,

psychologists are encouraged to develop relationships with leaders and/or cultural brokers

who may be essential brokers in the community. Even though researchers may have a

particular design and implementation plan in mind, through collaborations with members

of the community and potential participants, they are likely to develop credibility and trust.

They also are likely to develop a more beneficial study to the community.

Thus, psychological researchers are encouraged to be grounded in the empirical and

conceptual literature on the ways that culture influences the variables under investigation,

as well as psychological and social science research traditions and skills.

This may be divided into three areas, research design, assessment, and analysis.

Research generation and design. This first area begins with the research question

that is asked. Goodwin (1996) delineates this as three steps: generation of the research

question, suitability of the research question, and then piloting the research question. All

three steps are influenced by the researcher’s cultural milieu. For example, Fiske (1998)

notes that the perceptions of Whites by racial/ethnic minority individuals are rarely studied,

because most researchers are White, and they are more interested in the perceptions of their

own group towards others. This is consistent, as we noted in Guidelines #1 and #2, with

preferences for in-group vs. out-group in social categorization. Clearly, one’s cultural

worldview helps to shape the questions one has about behavioral phenomena. This is not

necessarily a problem unless the researcher believes that his or her worldview is universal

and objective. Davis, Nakayama, and Martin (2000) suggest that this is the fallacy of

objectivity, followed by the fallacy of homogeneity, the latter defined as the assumption that

all members of a group are similar. Psychological researchers are encouraged to be aware

of the cultural assumptions on which their research questions are based (Egharevba, 2001).

Related to the research question is choosing culturally appropriate theories and

models on which to inform theory-driven inquiry (Quintana et al., 2001). Psychological

researchers are encouraged to be aware of, and if appropriate, to apply indigenous theories

when conceptualizing research studies. They are encouraged to include members of

cultural communities when conceptualizing research, with particular concern for the

benefits of the research to the community (Fontes, 1998; LaFromboise, 1988). This may

include involving representatives from the population and the host communities in research

design, sampling, and inviting feedback from the community in the final written versions

of the report (Gil & Bob, 1999; Rogler, 1999). Culturally centered psychological

researchers are encouraged to consider the psychological (rather than demographic)

contextual factors of race, ethnicity, language, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic

status, and other social dimensions of personal experience in conceptualizing their research

design (Fouad & Brown, 2000; Quintana et al., 2001).

Culturally centered psychological researchers are encouraged to seek appropriate

grounding in various modes of inquiry and to understand both the strengths and limitations

of the research paradigms applied to culturally diverse populations (Atkinson,

1985; Costantino, Malgady, & Rogler, 1986, 1994; Highlen, 1994; LaFromboise &

Foster, 1992; Marin & Marin, 1991; Sue, S., 1999; Sue & Sue, 1999; Suzuki, PrendesLintel,

Wertlieb, & Stallings, 1999). They strive to recognize and incorporate research methods

that most effectively complement the worldview and lifestyles of persons who come from

a specific cultural and linguistic population; e.g., quantitative and qualitative research

strategies (Hoshmand, 1989; Marin & Marin, 1991; Ponterotto & Casas, 1991). This may

include being knowledgeable about the ways in which ethnic and racial life experiences

influence and shape participants’ responses to research questions (Clarke, 2000; Kim,

Atkinson, Umemoto, 2001; Westermeyer & Janca, 1997).

Assessment. The second area of research is assessment. Culturally sensitive

psychological researchers strive to be knowledgeable about a broad range of assessment

techniques, data generating procedures, and standardized instruments whose validity,

reliability, and measurement equivalence have been investigated across culturally diverse

sample groups (CNPAAEMI, 2000; Helms, 1992; Marin & Marin, 1991; Padilla, 1995;

Spengler, 1998). They are encouraged not to use instruments that have not been adapted

for the target population, and they are also encouraged to use both pilot tests and interviews

to determine the cultural validity of their instruments (Samuda, 1998; Sue, 1999). They

are encouraged to be knowledgeable not only about the linguistic equivalence of the

instrument (e.g., that it is appropriately translated into the target language), but also the

conceptual and functional equivalence of the constructs tested. In other words, they are

encouraged to ascertain whether the constructs assessed by their instruments have the same

meaning across cultures, as well as the same function across cultures (Rogler, 1999). In

this, psychological researchers are urged to consider culturally sensitive assessment

techniques, data-generating procedures, and standardized instruments whose validity,

reliability, and measurement equivalence have been tested across culturally diverse sample

groups, particularly the target research group(s). They are encouraged to present reliability,

validity, and cultural equivalence data for use of instruments across diverse populations.

Analysis and Interpretation. The final area of consideration in culturally sensitive

research is analysis and interpretation. In analyzing and interpreting their data, culturally

sensitive psychological researchers are encouraged to consider cultural hypotheses as

possible explanations for their findings, to examine moderator effects, and to use statistical

procedures to examine cultural variables (Quintana et al., 2001).

Finally, culture-centered psychological researchers are encouraged to report on the

sample group’s cultural, ethnic, and racial characteristics and to report on the cultural

limitations and generalizability of the research results as well. It is also recommended that

researchers design the study to be of benefit to participants, and to include participants in

the interpretation of results. They are encouraged to find ways for the results to be of

benefit to the community, and to represent the participants’ perspectives accurately and

authentically (CNPAAEMI, 2000).

Practice

Guideline #5: Psychologists strive to apply culturally-appropriate skills in clinical and

other applied psychological practices.

Consistent with previous discussions in Guidelines # 1 and # 2,

culturallyappropriate psychological applications assume awareness and knowledge about

one’s worldview as a cultural being and as a professional psychologist, and the worldview

of others’ particularly as influenced by ethnic/racial heritage. This Guideline refers to

applying that awareness and knowledge in psychological practice. It is not necessary to

develop an entirely new repertoire of psychological skills to practice in a culture-centered

manner. Rather, it is helpful for psychologists to realize that there will likely be situations

where culture-centered adaptations in interventions and practices will be more effective.

Psychological practice is defined here as the use of psychological skills in a variety of

settings and for a variety of purposes, encompassing counseling, clinical, school,

consulting, and organizational psychology. This Guideline further suggests that regardless

of our practice site and purview of practice, psychologists are responsive to the Ethics Code

(APA, 1992). In the Preamble to the Ethics Code is language that advocates behavior that

values human welfare and basic human rights.

Psychologists are likely to find themselves increasingly engaged with others

ethnically, linguistically, and racially different from and similar to themselves as human

resource specialists, school psychologists, consultants, agency administrators, and

clinicians. Moreover, visible group membership differences (Atkinson & Hackett, 1995;

Carter, 1995; Cross, 1991; Helms, 1990; Herring, 1999; Hong & Ham, 2001; Niemann,

2001; Padilla, 1995; Santiago-Rivera et al., 2002; Sue & Sue, 1999) may belie other

identity factors also at work and strong forces in individuals’ socialization process and life

experiences. These include language, gender, biracial/multiracial heritage,

spiritual/religious orientations, sexual orientation, age, disability, socioeconomic situation,

and historical life experience; e.g., immigration and refugee status (Arredondo & Glauner,

1992; Davenport & Yurich, 1991; Espin, 1997; Hong & Ham, 2001; Lowe & Mascher,

2001; Prendes-Lintel, 2001). Projections regarding the increasing numbers of individuals

categorized as ethnic and racial minorities have been discussed earlier in these Guidelines.

The result of these changes is that in urban, rural, and other contexts, psychologists will

interface regularly with culturally pluralistic populations (D’Andrea &

Daniels, 2001; Ellis, Arredondo, & D’Andrea, 2000; Lewis, Lewis, Daniels, & D’Andrea,

1998; Middleton, Arredondo, & D’Andrea, 2000).

However, while Census 2000 shows that the population of the United States is more

culturally and linguistically diverse than it has ever been (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001),

individuals seeking and utilizing psychological services continue to under represent those

populations. With respect to clinical/counseling services, Sue and Sue (1999) highlighted

some of the reasons for the underutilization of services, including lack of cultural sensitivity

of therapists, distrust of services by racial/ethnic clients, and the perspective that therapy

“can be used as an oppressive instrument by those in power to…mistreat large groups of

people” (p. 7). A number of authors (Arroyo, Westerberg, &

Tonigan, 1998; Dana, 1998; Flaskreud & Liu 1991; McGoldrick, Giordano, & Pearce,

1996; Ridley, 1995; Santiago-Rivera et al., 2002; Sue, et al., 1998; Sue, Bingham, Porche-

Burke, & Vasquez, 1999; Sue & Sue, 1999) have outlined the urgent need for clinicians to

develop multicultural sensitivity and understanding.

Essentially, the concern of the authors noted above is that the traditional,

Eurocentric therapeutic and interventions models in which most therapists have been

trained are based on and designed to meet the needs of a small proportion of the population

(White, male, and middle-class persons). Ironically, the typical dyad in psychotherapy

historically was a White middle-class woman treated by a White middleclass therapist.

These authors note that Eurocentric models may not be effective in working with other

populations as well, and indeed, may do harm by mislabeling or misdiagnosing problems

and treatments.

Psychologists are encouraged to develop cultural sensitivity and understanding to

be the most effective practitioners (therapists) for all clients. The discussion that follows,

however, will primarily relate to therapeutic settings where individual, family, and group

psychotherapy interventions are likely to take place. The discussion addresses three areas:

focusing on the client within his or her cultural context, using culturally appropriate

assessment tools, and having a broad repertoire of interventions (Arredondo, 1999, 1998;

Arredondo et al., 1996; Arredondo & Glauner, 1992; Costantino et al., 1994;

Dana, 1998; Duclos, Beals, Novins, Martin, Jewett, & Manson, 1998; Flores & Carey,

2000; Fouad & Brown, 2000; Hays, 1995; Ivey & Ivey, 1999; Kopelowicz, 1997; Lopez,

1989; Lukasiewicz & Harvey, 1991; Parham, White, & Ajamu, 1999; Pedersen, 1999;

Ponterotto & Pedersen, 1993; Prieto, McNeill, Walls, & Gomez, 2001; Rodriguez & Walls,

2000; Root, 1992; Santiago-Rivera et al., 2002; Seeley, 2000; Sue, 1998; Sue, Ivey, &

Pedersen, 1996).

Client-in-context. Clients might have socialization experiences, health and mental

health issues, and workplace concerns associated with discrimination and oppression (e.g.,

ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, ableism, and homophobia). Thus, psychologists are

encouraged to acquire an understanding of the ways in which these experiences relate to

presenting psychological concerns (Byars & McCubbin, 2001;

Fischer et al., 1998; Flores & Carey, 2000; Fuertes & Gretchen, 2001; Helms & Cook,

1999; Herring, 1999; Hong & Ham, 2001; Lowe & Mascher, 2001; Middleton, Rollins, &

Harley, 1999; Sanchez, 2001; Sue & Sue, 1999). This may include how the client’s

worldview and cultural background(s) interact with individual, family, or group concerns.

Thus, in client treatment situations, culturally and socio-politically relevant factors

in a client’s history may include: relevant generational history (e.g., number of generations

in the country, manner of coming to the country); citizenship or residency status (e.g.,

number of years in the country, parental history of migration, refugee flight, or

immigration); fluency in “standard” English (and other languages or dialects); extent of

family support or disintegration of family; availability of community resources; level of

education, change in social status as a result of coming to this country (for immigrant or

refugee); work history, and level of stress related to acculturation (Arredondo, 2002; Ruiz,

1990; Saldana, 1995; Smart & Smart, 1995). When the client is a group or organization in

an employment context, another set of factors may apply. Recognizing these factors,

culturally centered practitioners are encouraged to take into account how contextual factors

may affect the client worldview (behavior, thoughts, or feelings).

Historical experiences for various populations differ. This may be manifested in

the expression of different belief systems and value sets among clients and across age

cohorts. For example, therapists are strongly encouraged to be aware of the ways that

enslavement has shaped the worldviews of African Americans (Cross, 1991; Parham et al.,

1999). At the same time, the within-group differences among African Americans and

others of African descent also suggest the importance of not assuming that all persons of

African descent will share this perspective. Thus, knowledge about sociopolitical

viewpoints and ethnic/racial identity literature would be important and extremely helpful

when working with individuals of ethnic minority descent. Culturally centered

practitioners assist clients in determining whether a “problem” stems from institutional or

societal racism (or other prejudice) or individual bias in others so that the client does not

inappropriately personalize problems (Helms & Cook, 1999; Ridley, 1995; Sue et al.,

1992). Consistent with the discussion in Guideline #2 about the effects of stigmatizing,

psychologists are urged to help clients recognize the cognitive and affective motivational

processes involved in determining whether they are targets of prejudice (Crocker et al.,

1998). Psychologists are also encouraged to be aware of the environment (neighborhood,

building, and specific office) and how this may appear to clients or employees. For

example, bilingual phone service, receptionists, magazines in the waiting room, and other

signage can demonstrate cultural and linguistic sensitivity (Arredondo, 1996; Arredondo et

al., 1996; Grieger & Ponterotto, 1998).

Psychologists are also encouraged to be aware of the role that culture may play in

the establishment and maintenance of a relationship between the client and therapist.

Culture, ethnicity, race, and gender are among the factors that may play a role in the

perception of, and expectations of therapy and the role the therapist plays (American

Psychiatric Association, 1994; Carter, 1995; Comas-Díaz & Jacobsen, 1991; CooperPatrick

et al., 1999; Seely, 2001).

Assessment. Consistent with Standard 2.04 of the APA Ethics Code (American

Psychological Association, 1992), multiculturally sensitive practitioners are encouraged to

be aware of the limitations of assessment practices, from intakes to the use of standardized

assessment instruments (Constantine, 1998; Helms, 2002; Ridley, Hill, & Li, 1998),

diagnostic methods (Ivey & Ivey, 1998; Sue, 1998), and instruments used for employment

screening and personality assessments in work settings. Clients unfamiliar with mental

health services and who hold worldviews that value relationship over task may experience

disrespect if procedures are not fully explained. Thus, if such clients do not feel that the

therapist is valuing the relationship between the therapist and client enough, the client may

not adhere to the suggestions of the therapist. Psychologists are encouraged to know and

consider the validity of a given instrument or procedure. This includes interpreting

resulting data appropriately and keeping in mind the cultural and linguistic characteristics

of the person being assessed. Culture-centered psychologists are also encouraged to have

knowledge of a test’s reference population and possible limitations of the instrument with

other populations. When using standardized assessment tools and methods, multicultural

practitioners exercise critical judgment (Sandoval, Frisby, Geisinger, Scheuneman, &

Ramos-Grenier, 1998). Multiculturally sensitive practitioners are encouraged to attend to

the effects on the validity of measures of issues related to test bias, test fairness, and cultural

equivalence (APA, 1990, 1992;

Arredondo, 1999; Arredondo et al., 1996; Dana, 1998; Grieger & Ponterotto, 1995; Lopez,

1989; Paniagua, 1994, 1998; Ponterotto, Casas, Suzuki, & Alexander, 1995; Samuda,

1998).

Interventions. Cross-culturally sensitive practitioners are encouraged to develop

skills and practices that are attuned to the unique worldview and cultural backgrounds of

clients by striving to incorporate understanding of client’s ethnic, linguistic, racial, and

cultural background into therapy (American Psychiatric Association, 1994; Falicov,

1999; Flores & Carey, 2000; Fukuyama & Ferguson, 2000; Helms & Cook, 1999; Hong &

Ham, 2001; Langman, 1998; Middleton, Rollins, & Harley, 1999; Santiago-Rivera et al.,

2002). They are encouraged to become knowledgeable about the APA Guidelines for

Providers of Psychological Services to Ethnic, Linguistic, and Culturally Diverse

Populations (APA, 1990) and Guidelines for Research in Ethnic Minority Communities

(CNPAAEMI, 2000). They are encouraged to learn about helping practices used in

nonWestern cultures within as well as outside the North American and Northern European

context that may be appropriately included as part of psychological practice.

Multiculturally sensitive psychologists recognize that culture-specific therapy (individual,

family, and group) may require non-traditional interventions and strive to apply this

knowledge in practice (Alexander & Sussman, 1995; Fukuyama & Sevig, 1999; Ridley,

1995; Santiago-Rivera et al., 2002; Sciarra, 1999; Society for the Psychological Study of

Ethnic Minority Issues, Division 45 of the American Psychological Association &

Microtraining Associates, Inc., 2000; Sue et al., 1998; Sue & Sue, 1999). This may include

inviting recognized helpers to assist with assessment and intervention plans. Psychologists

are encouraged to participate in culturally diverse and culture-specific activities. They are

also encouraged to seek out community leaders, change agents, and influential individuals

(ministers, storeowners, non-traditional healers, natural helpers), when appropriate,

enlisting their assistance with clients as part of a total family or community-centered

(healing) approach (Arredondo et al. 1996; Grieger & Ponterotto, 1998; Lewis et al., 1998).

Multiculturally sensitive and effective therapists are encouraged to examine

traditional psychotherapy practice interventions for their cultural appropriateness, e.g.,

person-centered, cognitive-behavioral, psychodynamic forms of therapy (Bernal &

Scharoon-del-Rio, 2001). They are urged to expand these interventions to include

multicultural awareness and culture-specific strategies. This may include respecting the

language preference of the client and ensures that the accurate translations of documents

occur by providing informed consent about the language in which therapy, assessments, or

other procedures will be conducted. Psychologists are also encouraged to respect the

client’s boundaries by not using interpreters who are family members, authorities in the

community, or unskilled in the area of mental health practice.

Organizational Change and Policy Development

Guideline #6: Psychologists are encouraged to use organizational change processes to

support culturally informed organizational (policy) development and practices.

Psychology exists in relationship to other disciplines, organizations, and facets of

society. As a dynamic profession, our education prepares us to be change agents,

promulgators of new knowledge through research that informs policies in different sectors

of society, and as organizational leaders in the profession, the private sector, government

agencies, and other work environments. In the application of our skills in a wide range of

organizations and contexts, psychologists are encouraged to become knowledgeable about

the possible ways to facilitate culturally informed organizational development of policies

and practices.

This Guideline is designed to inform psychologists about the following: (1) the

contemporary and future contexts that provide motivators for psychologists’ proactive

behavior with organizational change processes; (2) perspectives about psychologists in

transition; (3) frameworks and models to facilitate multicultural organizational

development; and (4) examples of processes and practices reflective of psychologists’

leadership in the development of culture-centered organizations. Supporting this Guideline

are contextual data that provide a rationale for positioning multiculturalism as thematic to

structures, functions, and strategic planning within an organization as well as example of

changes in psychology policies and practices.

Changing Context for Psychologists

While the debate about multiculturalism continues within psychology with varying

and mutually exclusive perspectives (Betancourt & Lopez, 1993; Fowers & Richardson,

1996; Gergen, 2001; Sue, 2001) looking externally not just internally becomes increasingly

necessary. Psychology education, research, and practice today is driven by multiple

societal forces introduced by other disciplines and the consequences of world-wide events.

Cloning, global terrorism, genetic research breakthroughs, the efficacy of different

medications for both health and mental healthcare,world-wide migration, and

environmental climate change are but a few of the external forces influencing our work and

training. In addition, as noted earlier, continuing increases of ethnic minority and non-

English speaking populations in the U.S., the gap between the richest and the poorest in the

United States continues to accelerate; top 10 states for this gap have been identified (U.S.

Census Bureau, 2001), the aging and longer living baby boomers, and changing family

patterns have implications for psychology-at-large.

The demographic shifts and implications for education discussed earlier in the

introduction also have implications for employment projections, such as who works, where

they will work, and how their work may change. For example, the demographic changes

noted earlier include a growth in the population between 50-65, the so-called “aging baby

boomer.” Ethnic/racial minority elderly account for a significant proportion of the overall

increase in longevity in the United States and their rates of growth are expected to exceed

those of Whites over the next 50 years (Ory et al., 2000). There is a greater need for

psychologists working with the elderly overall, and a need for them to be able to work with

a racially/ethnically diverse population, as well as working with employers and

organizations as they cope with an aging work force.

In another demographic shift, it is projected that 50% of new entrants to the

workforce between 1994 and 2005 will be women of all ethnic groups (Judy & D’Amico,

1997); psychologists will be called upon to help women make work and family choices,

help employers cope with the transitions to the work force, and ideally, help communities

understand and develop resources as more families have both parents working (Haas,

Hwang, & Russell, 2000). As another example, Latinos are the youngest ethnic/racial

group and the fastest growing one as well (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001); they will be entering

schools in greater numbers, as well as representing a greater proportion of the workforce.

Psychologists will likely be called upon to help school systems, organizations, and

communities cope successfully with these transitions. In addition,

U.S. organizations are dealing with global and rapid technology evolution, more global

integration in to the U.S. economy, national and global deregulation, and quick economic

growth in heretofore-underdeveloped nations (Judy & D’Amico, 1997). All of these

examples have implications for psychology, as psychologists will be called upon to engage

with other disciplines and sectors of society, including government agencies, in attempting

to forge new policies and guidelines that promote human development, knowledge-

building, and societal improvement. While these forces will, of necessity, influence our

own work, we are also uniquely trained to help others cope with these changes. All of these

data and forces highlight the necessity of institutional change particularly for the delivery

of health and mental health services (Schlesinger & Gray, 1999) psychology education, and

employment practices.

Psychologists in Transition

The changing landscape of psychology is also apparent as we consider

psychologists who have entered political life, psychologists as administrators in healthcare

institutions and employee assistance programs (EAP), as deans and provosts in higher

education, in the CIA (Psychologists in the CIA, 2002), and as consultants to corporate

entities. All of these roles involve psychologists in different types of functions and systems

driven by forces cited in Workforce 2020 and of course involved with people of different

social identities and professions (Judy & D’Amico, 1997).

Examples of changes in policy and practices have also come from within the

profession. In 1993, the Massachusetts state licensing board approved a regulation change,

requiring doctoral coursework and internship experiences with multicultural and cross-

cultural foci (Daniel, 1994). Georgia passed a similar change in 2000. More recently, the

state of New Mexico passed legislation that now allows psychologists to prescribe

medication, recognition of our scientific roots. Part of the rationale for change in

prescription privileges was to provide greater access for rural patients and clients with

mental health concerns, which includes a large number of People of Color. When such

policies go into effect, there are challenges and opportunities that ensue for training

programs, internship sites, and institutions that hire psychologists.

Examples of change within APA were cited in the introductory section. In addition,

the organization has sponsored initiatives such as the development of guidelines to address

concerns of women (Fitzgerald & Nutt, 1986) and gay, lesbian, and transgendered

individuals (APA, 2001), creation of guidelines for conducting research with linguistic

minority populations (CPNAAEMI, 2000) and for providing health care and culture-

specific mental health services (APA, 1990; CPNAAEMI, 2002); and through

interdivisional efforts promoted by the Committee on Division/APA Relations (Arredondo,

2000). The establishment of a number of Divisions with a special interest focus in the last

15-20 years is also noteworthy. Divisions that have developed to address health

psychology, the study of peace, conflict, and violence, addictions, interests of men,

international psychology, and pediatric psychology are a few examples of psychologists’

organizational change behavior. These organizational outcomes are indicative of

psychologists’ responsiveness to societal changes. It is unlikely that new Divisions will be

established for all current and emerging issues. Psychologists are encouraged to continue

to apply learning organization principles. One of the primary principles is to scan the

environment and anticipate trends and changes allowing for a systemic proactive rather

than reactive response.

Frameworks and Models for Multicultural Organizational

Development

Psychologists play a variety of roles in a society that is undergoing rapid change,

and are therefore encouraged to familiarize themselves with methods, frameworks and

models for multicultural organizational development (Adler, 1986; Arredondo, 1996; Cox,

1993; Cox & Finley, 1995; Garcia-Caban, 2001; Sue, 2001). These models, among others,

provide blueprints for planning for organizational change that may lead to cultural

awareness and knowledge and result in a “best practices” approach for culture-centered

organizations. In addition, a culture-centered focus provides processes for weaving

together contextual forces, the mission of the organization, and development of people that

may lead to enhanced and culturally proficient and inclusive systems and practices. Most

of these models or frameworks describe attributes at particular phases or statuses, and

cognitive, affective, and behavioral processes that will promote multicultural

organizational change and growth. For example, Cross, Bazron, Dennis, and Issacs

(1989) have outlined a cultural competence continuum with stages and indicators from

“cultural destructiveness” to “cultural proficiency.” Underscoring work in global

businesses, Adler (1986) offers three models: parochial, ethnocentric, and synergistic. The

latter is described as a response to organizational cultural diversity, “In synergistic

organizations members believe that . . . the combination of our ways and their ways

produces the best ways to organize and work” (p. 87).

To assist organizations in clarifying their approach to multiculturalism and

diversity, Thomas and Ely (1996) conceptualize a continuum of philosophical positions

that range from fairness and equity to valuing diversity. Sue (2001) offers another

conceptualization through his multidimensional facets of cultural competence model. He

posits cultural competence at individual, professional, organizational, and societal levels.

By bringing in the societal foci, Sue is also addressing issues of social justice and

responsibility, and opportunities for psychologists’ change agency.

Based on empirical research, Cox (1993) proposes organizational transformation

based on the interplay of the climate for diversity, individual outcomes, and organizational

effectiveness. His model has three states: monolithic, pluralistic, and multicultural. Each

state is influenced by the interplay between the climate for diversity, individual (employee)

outcomes, and organizational effectiveness on a number of criteria. Another scientifically

informed model outlines a development process with various stages and tasks that lead to

a multicultural and diversity-centered organization (Arredondo, 1996). Unlike other

models, this is not a typology but rather a data-driven approach to promote organizational

change and development through a focus on

multiculturalism and diversity. Among the stages are planning for a diversity initiative, a

self-study, and an evaluation of measurable objectives. This developmental approach has

served as the basis for conducting applied research in more than 50 organizations such as

social and mental health agencies, colleges and universities, and the private sector.

One of the most comprehensive reviews of organizational cultural competence

models, instrumentation, research and focus was prepared by Garcia-Caban (2001). She

identified 19 instruments used to conduct organizational research in a variety of domains

including relational behavioral styles, cultural competence in service delivery, and

psychologists' knowledge, attitude and behavior skills.

Borrowing from the work of organizational change consultants, psychologists can

become knowledgeable about recommendations from learning organization models

(Morgan, 1997; Senge, 1990). These advocate for organizations to anticipate

environmental change, “developing an ability to question, challenge and change operating

norms and assumptions” (Morgan, 1997, p. 90), and engage in new planning. By so doing,

psychologists, prepared as change agents, have the opportunity to apply clinical and

research methodology to promote goal-oriented systems change with measurable

outcomes.

Examples of Multicultural Practices within Organizations

Psychologists are encouraged to review examples of multicultural organizational

change that are reported in publications from a variety of sources within APA, as well as

from the American Counseling Association and management journals. These evolutionary

processes of change are both deliberate and systemic (e.g., Arredondo &

D’Andrea, 2000; D’Andrea, Daniels, & Arredondo, 1999; D’Andrea et al., 2001).

Examples from both APA and the American Counseling Association point to behaviors at

the professional organization level with implications for the practice of psychology.

Thematic to these examples is the role of leadership, sustained attention to diversityrelated

objectives, and changes in policy and practices that make the organization operationalize

its mission of inclusiveness and pluralism. Division 17, Counseling Psychology; Division

35, Society for the Psychology of Women; Division 44, Society for the Psychological Study

for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Issues; Division 51, Society for the Psychological Study of

Men and Masculinity; and Division 42, Psychologists in Independent Practice all have

dedicated slates or positions for an ethnic/racial minority psychologist on their executive

councils or as representatives to the Council of Representatives. Division 12, Society of

Clinical Psychology, has recently voted to have an ethnic minority slate for Council of

Representatives when two positions are vacant at the same time. Additional examples

come from Divisions 12, 17, and 35 that have subcommittees or sections to address

ethnic/racial minority objectives. Finally, Division

45, Society for the Psychological Study of Ethnic Minority Issues has added a “diversity”

Member-at-Large position, inviting representation from a member who is not a person of

color (all other positions have traditionally been Persons of Color). These are practices that

operationalize a given Division’s mission and objectives to promote multiculturalism and

diversity, and organizational change. By the same token, APA’s immediate response to

the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the work of individual psychologists within

their communities are ways that psychologists have responded quickly to a changing world.

The strategies applied by these Divisions and the organization parallel ones that

have taken place in the employment sector for more than 15 years, and that undoubtedly

will continue. Moreover, psychologists are well suited to be central to these structural

changes as well as likely candidates to implement these new developments. For example,

universities have begun to create positions for campus diversity directors and

ombudspersons. Both roles often require knowledge and skills that are psychological and

well-grounded in the understanding of diversity and multicultural issues. Accrediting

bodies, including the Joint Commission for Accreditation of Hospital Organizations

(JCAHO) and the National Council on Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE)

require that institutions demonstrate how they address diversity. Industries of all types,

from the government, media, sports, recreation, hospitality, hi-tech, and manufacturing

(e.g., aviation, consumer products) have diversity and multiculturalism in their business

plans. With the presence of psychologists from different specializations in nontraditional

and other disciplinary contexts (e.g., CIA) as noted previously, knowledge and

understanding of these Guidelines seems very timely.

Psychologists as Change Agents and Policy Planners

The focus on organizational change and policy development in these Guidelines

highlights the multiple opportunities for psychologists, regardless of our specialty domains,

to lead change and influence policy. The Surgeon General’s report on gaps in mental health

care for ethnic minorities in the United States is one example (USDHSS, 2000, 2001).

Psychologists representing different specializations were involved in the development of

this report, sharing their research and other data that have contributed to a compelling

document. Psychologists are often called upon to provide expert testimony to legislative

bodies, boards of directors, and the courts on issues that involve ethnic/racial minority

individuals and groups. Though it may appear that we are speaking from our informed

voices as psychologists, psychologists’ participation in these venues reflects the potential

for policy development and structural organizational change.

Psychologists are encouraged to become familiar with findings from specific

psychology training program self-studies and empirical studies (e.g., Rogers, Hoffman, &

Wade, 1998), that can provide information about how different constituencies (faculty,

students, staff, and community partners) experience psychology training programs. These

experiences may be evaluated on organizational climate criteria: interpersonal respect and

valuing, curriculum, policies and practices, advisement and mentoring, research

methodology flexibility, resource availability and support, rewards and recognition,

community relations, and professional development for faculty and staff.

Practices such as mentoring, promoting cross-racial dialogues, reducing in-group

and out-group behavior, recruitment and selection processes, and the infusion of

multicultural and diversity concepts in traditional psychology education (undergraduate

through continuing education) have been demonstrated to be effective mechanisms for

systems change (Fiske, 1993; Major et al., 1993; Schmader et al., 2001; Thomas & Gabarro,

1999). The expanding literature from social psychology on stereotype threat (Steele, 1997),

tokenism (Wright & Taylor, 1998), social stigma (Crocker et al., 1998), the social identity

approach (Haslam, 2001), and social cognition (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002) as these relate to

organizational diversity can inform objectives and processes of change. Psychologists are

encouraged to become familiar with practices that can be replicated to different

organizational settings thereby leading to multicultural organizational enhancement and

policy development.

Promoting organizational change through multiculturalism and diversity offers

psychologists opportunities to learn about best practices and also view the domain of

multicultural development as an opportunity for personal and professional growth.

Psychological interventions in organizations are not new, but there are various approaches

that can be examined and integrated in to one’s leadership within an educational

department, agency, or business.

Traditional and evolutionary perspectives in applied psychology (Colarelli, 1998),

and models of organizational change (Hofstede, 1986; Lewin, 1951; Morgan, 1997) can

guide behavior that allows psychology to bridge with the multiple communities with which

it interacts. Psychologists are encouraged to become familiar with leadership literature

(Greenleaf, 1998; Nanus, 1992) as this offers constructs and descriptions of roles relevant

to psychologists in policy planning. In effect, policy development is a change management

process, one that can be informed by the vision, research, and experiences of psychologists.

Conclusion

Psychology has been traditionally defined by and based upon Western, Eurocentric,

and biological perspectives and assumptions. These traditional premises in psychological

education, research, practice, and organizational change, and have not always considered

the influence and impact of racial and cultural socialization. They also have not considered

that the effects of related biases have, at times, been detrimental to the increasingly complex

needs of clients and the public interest. These Guidelines were designed to aid

psychologists as they increase their knowledge and skills in multicultural education,

training, research, practice and organizational change.

Readers will note that these Guidelines are scheduled to expire in 2009. This

document was intended as a living document. The empirical research on which the

rationale for the various guidelines are based will continue to expand, as will legislation

and practices related to an increasingly diverse population. The integration of the

psychological constructs of racial and ethnic identity into psychological theory, research,

and therapy has only just begun. Psychologists are starting to investigate the differential

impact of historical, economic, and sociopolitical forces on individuals’ behavior and

perceptions. Psychology will continue to develop a deeper knowledge and awareness of

race and ethnicity in psychological constructs, and to actively respond by integrating the

psychological aspects of race and ethnicity into the various areas of application in

psychology. It is anticipated that, with this increased knowledge base and effectiveness of

applications, the Guidelines will continue to evolve over the next seven years.

References

Abreu, J. M. (2001). Theory and research on stereotypes and perceptual bias: A resource

guide for multicultural counseling trainers. The Counseling Psychologist, 29, 487–

512.

Adler, N. J. (1986). International dimensions of organizational behavior. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth.

Alexander, C. M., & Sussman, L. (1995). Creative approaches to multicultural counseling.

In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander

(Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 375–384). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.

American Council on Education. (2001). 18th Annual Status Report on Minorities in

Higher Education. Washington, DC: Author.

American Council on Education and American Association of University Professionals.

(2000). Does diversity make a difference? Three research studies on diversity in

college classrooms. Washington, DC: Authors.

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental

disorders (4

ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

American Psychological Association. (1987). General guidelines for providers of

psychological services. American Psychologist, 42(7), 1-12.

American Psychological Association. (1990). Guidelines for providers of psychological

services to ethnic, linguistic, and culturally diverse populations. Washington,

DC: Author.

American Psychological Association. (1992). Ethical principles and code of conduct.

American Psychologist, 48, 1597–1611.

American Psychological Association. (2000). Professional practice guidelines for

psychotherapy with lesbian, gay and bisexual clients. American Psychologist, 55,

1440–1451.

American Psychological Association. (2001). Criteria for practice guideline development

and evaluation. Washington, DC: Author.

American Psychological Association. (2002). Guidelines and principles for accreditation.

Washington, DC: Author.

Anderson, N. B. (1995). Behavioral and sociological perspectives on ethnicity and health:

Introduction to the special issue. Health Psychology, 14, 589–591.

Arredondo, P. (1985). Cross cultural counselor education and training. In P. Pedersen

(Ed.). Handbook of Cross Cultural Counseling and Therapy (pp. 281–289).

Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Arredondo, P. (1996). Successful diversity management initiatives: A blueprint for

planning and implementation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Arredondo, P. (1998). Integrating multicultural counseling competencies and universal

helping conditions in culture-specific contexts. The Counseling Psychologist, 26,

592–601.

Arredondo, P. (1999). Multicultural counseling competencies as tools to address

oppression and racism. Journal of Counseling and Development, 77, 102–108.

Arredondo, P. (2000, November/December). Suggested “best practices” for increasing

diversity in APA divisions. The APA/Division Dialogue, pp. 1–3.

Arredondo, P. (2002). Counseling individuals from specialized, marginalized and

underserved groups. In P. Pedersen, J. G. Draguns, W. J. Lonner, & J. E. Trimble

(Eds.), Counseling across cultures (5

ed., pp. 241–250). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Arredondo, P., & Arciniega, G. M. (2001). Strategies and techniques for counselor training

based on the multicultural counseling competencies. Journal of Multicultural

Counseling and Development, 29, 263–273.

Arredondo, P., & Glauner, T. (1992). Personal dimensions of identity model. Boston:

Empowerment Workshops, Inc.

Arredondo, P., Toporek, R., Brown, S. P., Jones, J., Locke, D. C., Sanchez, J., & Stadler,

H. (1996). Operationalization of the multicultural counseling competencies.

Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 24, 42–78.

Arroyo, J. A., Westerberg, V. S., & Tonigan, J. S. (1998). Comparison of treatment

utilization and outcome for Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites. Journal of

Studies on Alcohol, 59, 286–291.

Atkinson, D. R. (1985). A meta-review of research on multicultural counseling and

psychotherapy. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 13, 138–

153.

Atkinson, D. R., & Hackett, G. (1995). Counseling diverse populations (2

ed.).

Boston: McGraw Hill.

Atkinson, D. R., Morten, G., & Sue, D. W. (1998). Counseling American minorities. (5

ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Benjamin, L. T., Jr., & Crouse, E. M. ( 2002 ). The American Psychological

Association’s response to Brown v. Board of Education: The case of Kenneth B.

Clark. American Psychologist, 57, 38–50.

Berberich, D. A. (1998). Posttraumatic stress disorder: Gender and cross-cultural clinical

issues. Psychotherapy in Private Practice, 17, 29–41.

Bernal, G., & Scharro-del-Rio, M. R. (2001). Are empirically supported treatments valid

for ethnic minorities? Toward an alternative approach for treatment research.

Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7, 328–342.

Betancourt, H., & Lopez, S. R. (1993). The study of culture, ethnicity, and race in

American psychology. American Psychologist, 48, 629–637.

Biddle, B. J., Bank, B. J., & Slavings, R. L. (1990). Modality of thought, campus

experiences, and the development of values. Journal of Educational Psychology,

82, 671-682.

Brewer, C. A., & Suchan, T. A. (2001). Mapping Census 2000: The geography of U.S.

diversity. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Brewer, M. B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate?

Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429–444.

Brewer, M. B., & Brown, R. J. (1998). Intergroup relations. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T.

Fiske (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol. 2 (4th ed., pp. 554–594).

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Brewer, M. B., & Miller, N. (1988). Contact and cooperation: When do they work? In

P. A. Katz & D. A. Taylor (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy.

(pp. 315–326). New York: Plenum.

Bronstein, P. A., & Quina, K. (1988). Teaching a psychology of people. Washington,

DC: American Psychological Association.

Brown, S. P., Parham, T. A., & Yonker, R. (1996). Influence of a cross-cultural training

on racial identity attitudes of White women and men. Journal of Counseling and

Development, 74, 510–516.

Byars, A. M., & McCubbin, L. D. (2001). Trends in career development research with

racial/ethnic minorities: Prospects and challenges. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M.

Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of Multicultural

Counseling (2

ed., pp.633–654). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cameron, S. (in press). American Indian Mental Health: An examination of resiliency in

the face of overwhelming odds. In F. D. Harper & J. McFadden (Eds.), Culture and

counseling: New approaches (in press). Boston: Allyn/Bacon.

Carter, R. T. (1995). The influence of race and racial identity in psychotherapy. New

York: John Wiley.

Carter, R. T. (Ed.). (2000). Addressing cultural issues in organizations: Beyond the

corporate context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chang, M., Witt, D., Jones, J., & Hakuta, K. (Eds.). (2000). Compelling interest:

Examining the evidence on racial dynamics in higher education. Palo Alto, CA:

Stanford University Press.

Cinfuegos, A. J., & Monelli, C. (1983). The testimony of political repression as a

therapeutic instrument. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 53, 43–51.

Clark, K. B., & Clark, M. K. (1940). Skin color as a factor in racial identification of

Negro preschool children. Journal of Social Psychology, 11, 159–169.

Clarke, I, III. (2000). Extreme response style in multicultural research: An empirical

investigation. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 15, 137–152.

Colarelli, S. M. (1998). Psychological interventions in organizations: An evolutionary

perspective. American Psychologist, 53, 1044–1056.

Coll, C. G., Akerman, A., & Cicchetti, D. (2000). Cultural influences on developmental

processes and outcomes: Implications for the study of development and

psychopathology. Development & Psychopathology, 12, 333–356.

Comas-Diaz, L. (2000). An ethnopolitical approach to working with People of Color.

American Psychologist, 55, 1319–1325.

Comas-Diaz, L., & Jacobsen, F. M. (1991). Ethnocultural transference and

countertransference in the therapeutic dyad. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,

61, 392–402.

Comas-Daiz, L., & Jansen, M. A. (1995). Global conflict and violence against women.

Peace and conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 1, 315–331.

Constantine, M. G. (1997). Facilitating multicultural competency in counseling

supervision: Operationalizing a practical framework. In D. B. Pope-Davis & H.

L. K. Coleman (Eds.), Multicultural counseling competencies: Assessment,

Education and training, and supervision. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Constantine, M. (1998). Developing competence in multicultural assessment:

Implications for counseling psychology training and practice. The Counseling

Psychologist, 6, 922–929.

Constantine, M. G., Ladany, N., Inman, A. G., & Ponterotto, J.G. (1996). Students’

perceptions of multicultural training in counseling psychology programs. Journal of

Multicultural Counseling and Development, 24, 155–164.

Constantine, M. G., & Yeh, C. (2001). Multicultural training, self-construals, and

multicultural competence of school counselors. Professional School Counseling,

4, 202–207.

Cooper-Patrick, L., Gallo, J. J., Gonzales, J. J., Vu, H. T., Powe, N. R., Nelson C., & Ford,

D. E. (1999). Race, gender, and partnership in the patient-physician relationship.

Journal of the American Medical Association, 282, 583–589.

Costantino, G., Malgady, R. G., & Rogler, L. H. (1986). Cuento therapy: A culturally

sensitive modality for Puerto Rican children. Journal of Consulting & Clinical

Psychology, 54, 639–645.

Costantino, G., Malgady, R. G., & Rogler, L. H. (1994). Storytelling through pictures:

Culturally sensitive psychotherapy for Hispanic children and adolescents.

Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 23, 13–20.

Council of National Associations for the Advancement of Ethnic Minority Issues.

(2000). Guidelines for research in ethnic minority communities. Washington,

DC: American Psychological Association.

Cox, T. H., Jr. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations. San Francisco: Berrett-

Koehler.

Cox, T. H., Jr., & Finley, J. A. (1995). An analysis of work specialization and

organizational level as a dimension of workforce diversity. In M. M. Chemers and

S. Oskamp (Eds.), Diversity in organizations: New perspectives for a changing

workplace (pp. 62–88). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Crocker, J., Major, B., & Steele, C. (1998). Social stigma. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T.

Fiske, (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol. 2 (4th ed., pp. 504–553).

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Crosby, F., Bromley, S., & Saxe, L. ( 1980 ). Recent unobtrusive studies of Black and

White discrimination and prejudice: A literature review. Psychological Bulletin,

87, 546–563.

Crosby, F. J., & Cordova, D. I. (1996). Words worth of wisdom: Toward an

understanding of affirmative action. Journal of Social Issues, 52, 33–49.

Cross, W. E., Jr. (1978). The Thomas and Cross models of psychological nigrescence: A

review. Journal of Black Psychologist, 5, 15–31.

Cross, W. E., Jr. (1991). Shades of Black: Diversity in African American identity.

Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Cros Cross, T., Bazron, B., Dennis, K., & Issacs, M. (1989). Toward a culturally competent

system of care. Vol. 1: Monograph on effective services for minority children who

are severely emotionally disturbed. Washington, DC: CASSP Technical

Assistance Center. Georgetown University Child Development Center.

D’Andrea, M., & Daniels, J. (1997). Multicultural counseling supervision: Central issues,

theoretical considerations, and practical strategies. In D. B. Pope-Davis & H. L. K.

Coleman (Eds.), Multicultural counseling competencies: Assessment education and

training, and supervision. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

D’Andrea, M., & Daniels, J. (2001, in press). Respectful counseling. Pacific Grove,

CA: Brooks/Cole.

D’Andrea, M., & Daniels, J., & Arredondo, P. (1999, August). Using cultural audits as

tools for change. Counseling Today, p. 14.

D’Andrea, M., Daniels, J., & Heck, R. (1992). Evaluating the impact of multicultural

counseling training. Journal of Counseling and Development, 70, 143–150.

D’Andrea, M., Daniels, J., Arredondo, P., Ivey, A. E., Ivey, M. B., Locke, D. C., O’Bryant,

B., Parham, T. A., & Sue. D. W. (2001). Fostering organizational changes to

realize the revolutionary potential of the multicultural movement: An updated case

study. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M.

Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 222–254).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dana, R. H. (1998). Understanding cultural identity in intervention and assessment.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Daniel, J. H. (1994). Leadership and legacy in Psychology. FOCUS: Notes from the

Society for the Psychological Study of Ethnic Minority Issues, 8, 2.

Davenport, D. S., & Yurich, J. M. (1991). Multicultural gender issues. Journal of

Counseling and Development, 70, 64–71.

Davis, O. I., Nakayama, T. K., & Martin, J. N. (2000). Current and future directions in

ethnicity and methodology. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24,

525-539.

Devine, P. G., Plant, E. A., & Buswell, B. N. (2000). Breaking the prejudice habit:

Progress and obstacles. In S. Oskamp (Ed), Reducing prejudice and discrimination

(pp. 185-208). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (1998). On the nature of contemporary prejudice: The

causes, consequences, and challenges of aversive racism. In J. L. Eberhardt, & S.

T. Fiske (Eds), Confronting racism: The problem and the response (pp. 3–32).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Validzic, A. (1998). Intergroup bias: Status,

differentiation, and a common in-group identity. Journal of Personality & Social

Psychology, 75, 109–120.

Duckitt, J. H. (1992). Psychology and prejudice: A historical analysis and integrative

framework. American Psychologist, 47, 1182–1193.

Duclos, C. W., Beals, J., Novins, D. K., Martin, C., Jewett, C. S., & Manson, S. M. (1998).

Prevalence of common psychiatric disorders among American Indian adolescent

detainees. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,

37, 866–873.

Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual

Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.

Egharevba, I. (2001). Researching an-‘other’ minority ethnic community: Reflections of

a Black female researcher on the intersections of race, gender and other power

positions in the research process. International Journal of Social Research

Methodology: Theory & Practice, 4, 225-241.

Ellis, C., Arredondo, P., & D’Andrea, M. (2000, November). How cultural diversity

affects predominantly white towns. Counseling Today, p. 25.

Espin, O. M. (1997). Latina realities. Essays on healing, migration, and sexuality.

Boulder, CO: Westview.

Espin, O. M. (1999). Women crossing boundaries: A psychology of immigration and

transformation of sexuality. New York: Routledge.

Evans, K. M., & Larabee, M. J. (2002). Teaching the multicultural counseling

competencies and revised career counseling competencies simultaneously. Journal

of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 30, 21–39.

Falicov, C. J. (1998). Latino families in therapy: A guide to multicultural practice. New

York: Guilford Press.

Fine, M., Weis, L. Powell, L. C., & Wong, L. M. (Eds.). (1997). Off white: Readings on

race, power, and society. Florence, KY: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.

Finlay, K. A., & Stephan, W. G. (2000). Improving intergroup relations: The effects of

empathy on racial attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1720– 1737. Fish,

J. M. (1995). Why psychologists should learn some anthropoloy. American

Psychologist, 50, 44–45.

Fischer, A. R., Jome, L. M., & Atkinson, D. R. (1998). Reconceptualizing multicultural

counseling: Universal healing conditions in a culturally specific context. The

Counseling Psychologist, 26, 525–588.

Fiske, A. P., Kitayama, S., Markus, H. R., & Nisbett, R. E. (1998). The cultural matrix

of social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), The handbook of social

psychology, Vol. 2 (4th ed., pp. 915–981). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping.

American Psychologist, 48, 621–628.

Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T.

Fiske (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol. 2 (4th ed., pp. 357–411).

New York: McGraw-Hill.

Fitzgerald, L. F., & Nutt, R. (1986). The Division 17 principles concerning the

counseling/psychotherapy of women: Rationale and implementation. Counseling

Psychologist, 14, 180–216.

Flaskerud, J. H., & Liu, P. Y. (1991). Effects of an Asian client-therapist language,

ethnicity, and gender match on utilization and outcome of therapy. Community

Mental Health Journal, 27, 31–41.

Flores, M. T., & Carey, G. (Eds.). (2000). Family therapy with Hispanics. Needham

Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Fontes, L. A. (1998). Ethics in family violence research: Multicultural issues. Family

Relations. Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 47, 53–61.

Fouad, N. A., & Brown, M. (2000). Race, ethnicity, culture, class and human development.

In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of Counseling Psychology, (3rd.

ed., pp. 379–410). New York: Wiley.

Fowers, B. J., & Richardson, F. C. (1996). Why is multiculturalism good?

American Psychologist, 51, 609–621.

Frank, J. D., & Frank, J. B. (1998). Comments on “Reconceptualizing multicultural

counseling: Universal healing conditions.” The Counseling Psychologist, 26,

589–591.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

Fuertes, J. N., Bartolomeo, M., & Nichols, C. M. (2001). Future research directions in the

study of counselor multicultural competency. Journal of Multicultural Counseling

and Development, 29, 3–12.

Fuertes, J. N., & Gretchen, D. (2001). Emerging theories of multicultural counseling. In

J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook

of multicultural counseling (2

ed, pp. 509–541). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fukuyama, M. A., & Ferguson, A. D. (2000). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual People of Color:

Understanding cultural complexity and managing multiple oppressions. In R. M.

Perez, K. A. DeBord, & K. J. Bieschke (Eds.), Handbook of counseling and

psychotherapy with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients (pp. 81–106). Washington,

DC: American Psychological Association.

Fukuyama, M. A., & Sevig, T. D. (1999). Integrating spirituality into multicultural

counseling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fullilove, M. T. (1996). Psychiatric implications of displacement: Contributions from the

psychology of place. American Journal of Psychiatry, 153, 1516–1523.

Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup

identity model. Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel.

Galinsky, A. D., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2000). Perspective-taking: Decreasing stereotype

expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism. Journal of

Personality & Social Psychology, 78, 708–724.

Garcia-Caban, I. (2001). Improving systems of care for racial and ethnic minority

consumers: Measuring cultural competence in Massachusetts acute care hospital

settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA.

Gergen, K. (2001). Psychological science in a post-modern context. American

Psychologist, 56, 203–213.

Gil, E. F., & Bob, S. (1999). Culturally competent research: An ethical perspective.

Clinical Psychology Review, 19, 45–55.

Gilbert, D. T. (1998). Ordinary personalogy. In. D. T. Gilbert & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), The

handbook of social psychology, Vol. 2 (4th ed., pp. 89–150). New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Glaser, I. (1988). Affirmative action and the legacy of racial injustice. In P. A. Katz &

D. A. Taylor (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy (pp. 341–357).

New York: Plenum.

Goodwin, R. (1996). A brief guide to cross-cultural psychological research. In J.

Haworth (Ed.), Psychological research: Innovative methods and strategies (pp. 78–

91). Florence, KY: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.

Grady, K. E. (1981). Sex bias in research design. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5,

628–636.

Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Pyszczynski, T., Rosenblatt, A., & et al. (1992). Why do

people need self-esteem? Converging evidence that self-esteem serves an anxiety-

buffering function. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 63, 913– 922.

Greene, B. (2000). African American lesbian and bisexual women. Journal of Social

Issues, 56, 239–249.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1998). The power of servant-leadership: Essays. San Francisco: Berrett-

Koehler.

Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, selfesteem,

and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27.

Grieger, I., & Ponterotto, J. G. (1995). A framework for assessment in multicultural

counseling. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander

(Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 357–374). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Grieger, I., & Ponterotto, J. G. (1998). Challenging intolerance. In C. L. Lee & G.R.

Walz (Eds.), Social Action A Mandate for Counselors (pp. 17–50). Alexandria,

VA: American Counseling Association and Greensboro, NC: ERIC Counseling &

Student Services Clearinghouse.

Grieger, I., & Tolliver, S. (2001). Multiculturalism on predominantly White campuses:

Multiple roles and functions for the counselor. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L.

A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (2

ed., pp. 825–848). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Haas, L. L., Hwang, P., & Russell, G. (2000). Organizational change and gender equity:

International perspectives on fathers and mothers in the workplace. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hall, G. C. N. (2001). Psychotherapy research with ethnic minorities: Empirical, ethical,

and conceptual issues. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 69, 502–

510.

Haslam, S. A. (2001). Psychology in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hays, P. A. (1995). Multicultural applications of cognitive-behavior therapy.

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26, 309–315.

Helms, J. (1990). Black and White racial identity: Theory, research, and practice.

Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Helms, J. E. (1992). Why is there no study of cultural equivalence in standardized

cognitive ability testing? American Psychologist, 47, 1083–1101.

Helms, J. E. (2002). A remedy for the Black-White test-score disparity. American

Psychologist, 57, 303–304.

Helms, J. E., & Cook, D. A. (1999). Using race and culture in counseling and

psychotherapy: Theory and process. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Helms, J. E., & Talleyrand, R. M. (1997). Race is not ethnicity. American Psychologist,

52, 1246–1247.

Herring, R. D. (1999). Counseling with Native American Indians and Alaska Natives:

Strategies for helping professionals. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias. Annual Review of

Psychology, 53, 575–604.

Highlen, P. S. (1994). Racial/ethnic diversity in doctoral programs of psychology:

Challenges for the twenty-first century. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 3,

91–108.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences. London: Sage.

Holcomb-McCoy, C., & Myers, J. E. (1999). Multicultural competence and counselor

training: A national survey. Journal of Counseling & Development, 77, 294–302.

Hong, G. K., & Ham, M. D. C. (2001). Psychotherapy and counseling with Asian

American clients. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model

of subgroup relations. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 4, 143–

156.

Hoshmand, L. S. T. (1989). Alternate research paradigms: A review and teaching

proposal. The Counseling Psychologist, 17, 3–79.

Ibrahim, F. A. (1985). Effective cross cultural counseling and psychotherapy: A

framework. The Counseling Psychologist, 13, 625–638.

Ibrahim, F. A. (1999). Transcultural counseling: Existential worldview theory and cultural

identity. In J. McFadden (Ed.), Transcultural counseling (2

ed., pp. 23– 58).

Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Ivey, A., & Ivey, M. (1998). Reframing DSM-IV: Positive strategies from developmental

counseling and therapy. Journal of Counseling and Development,

76, 334–350.

Ivey, A., & Ivey, M. (1999). Intentional interviewing and counseling: Facilitating

multicultural development. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Jackson, L. C. (1999). Ethnocultural resistance to multicultural training: Students and

faculty. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 5, 27–36.

Jackson-Triche, M. E., Sullivan, J. G., Wells, K. B., Rogers, W., Camp, P., & Mazel, R.

(2000). Depression and health-related quality of life in ethnic minorities seeking

care in general medical settings. Journal of Affective Disorders, 58, 89–97.

Jensen, A. R. (1995). Psychological research on race differences. American

Psychologist, 50, 41–42.

Johnson, W. B., & Packer, A. H. (1987). Workforce 2000. Indianapolis, IN: Hudson

Institute.

Jones, J. M., Lynch, P. D., Tenglund, A. A. & Gaertner, S. L. (2000). Toward a diversity

hypothesis multidimensional effects of intergroup contact. Applied &

Preventive Psychology, 9, 53–62.

Judy, R. W., & D’Amico, C. (1997). Workforce 2020. Indianapolis, IN: Hudson

Institute.

Katz, J. H. (1985). The sociopolitical nature of counseling. Counseling Psychologist,

13, 615–624.

Kawakami, K., Dovidio, J. F., Moll, J., Hermsen, S., & Russin, A. (2000). Just say no (to

stereotyping): Effects of training in the negation of stereotypic associations on

stereotype activation. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 78, 871–888.

Keller, E. F. (1982). Feminism and science. Signs, 7, 589–602.

Kessler, R. C., Berglund, P. A., Zhao, S., Leaf, P. I., Kouzis, A. C., Bruce, M. L. et al.

(1996). The 12-month prevalence and correlates of serious mental illness. In R.

W. Manderscheid & M. A. Sonnenschein (Eds.), Mental health, United States

(Pub. No. [SMA] 96-3098). Rockville, MD: Center for Mental Health Services.

Kim, B. S. K., Atkinson, D. R., Umemoto, D. (2001). Asian cultural values and the

counseling process: Current knowledge and directions for future research. The

Counseling Psychologist, 29, 570–603.

Kiselica, M. S. (1998). Preparing Anglos for the challenges and joys of

multiculturalism. The Counseling Psychologist, 26, 5–21.

Kite, M. E., Russo, N. F., Brehm, S. S., Fouad, N. A., Hall, C. C., Hyde, J. S., & Keita, G.

P. (2001). Women psychologists in academe: Mixed progress, unwarranted

complacency. American Psychologist, 56, 1080-1098.

Klausner, M. B. (1998). Multicultural training in graduate psychology programs:

Impacts and implications. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58 (9-B), 5124.

Kluckhohn, F. R., & Strodbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in value orientations.

Evanston, IL: Row, Patterson & Co.

Koeltzow, D. A. (2000). Research into the relationships among multicultural training,

racial and gender identity attitudes and multicultural competencies for counselors.

Dissertation Abstracts International: The Sciences and Engineering, 61, 1672.

Kopelowicz, A. (1997). Social skills training: The moderating influence of culture in the

treatment of Latinos with schizophrenia. Journal of Psychopathology and

Behavioral Assessment, 19, 101–108.

Korchin, S. J. (1980). Clinical psychology and minority problems. American

Psychologist, 35, 262–269.

Korman, M. (1974). National conference on levels and patterns of professional training in

psychology. American Psychologist, 29, 441–449.

Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives,

enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569–598.

Kunda, Z., & Sinclair, L. (1999). Motivated reasoning with stereotypes: Activation,

application, and inhibition. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 12–22.

Kunda, Z., & Thagard, P. (1996). Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and

behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory. Psychological Review, 103,

284–308.

Kwan, K.-L. K. (1999). MMPI and MMPI-2 performance of the Chinese cross-cultural

applicability. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 30, 260–268.

LaFramboise, T. (1988). American Indian mental health policy. American Psychologist,

43, 388–397.

LaFromboise, T. D., & Foster, S. L. (1992). Multicultural training: Scientist-practitioner

model and methods. Counseling Psychologist, 20, 472–489.

LaFromboise, T. D., & Jackson, M. (1996). MCT theory and Native-American

populations. In D. W. Sue, A. E. Ivey & P. B. Pedersen (Eds.), A theory of

multicultural counseling & therapy (pp. 192–203). Pacific Grove, CA:

Brooks/Cole.

Langman, P. F. (1998). Jewish issues in multiculturalism: A handbook for educators and

clinicians. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, Inc.

Leach, M. M., & Carlton, M. A. (1997). Toward defining a multicultural training

philosophy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lee, W. M. L. (1999). An introduction to multicultural counseling. Philadelphia:

Accelerated Development.

Lee, R. M., Chalk, L. Conner, S. E., Kawasaki, N., Janetti, A, LaRue, T., & Rodolfa, E.

(1999). The status of multicultural training at counseling center internship sites.

Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 27, 58–74.

Lenington-Lara, M. (1999). Exploring the subjective experience of participants in

multicultural awareness training course. Dissertation Abstracts Internation, 60,

(2-B): 085.

Levin, M. (1995). Does race matter? American Psychologist, 50, 45–46.

Lewin, K. (1945). The Research Center for Group Dynamics at Massachusetts Institute of

Technology. Sociometry, 8, 126–136.

Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. New

York: Harpers.

Lewis, J. A., Lewis, M. D., Daniels, J. A., & D’Andrea, M. J. (1998). Community

counseling: Empowerment strategies for a diverse society. San Francisco:

Brooks/Cole.

Locke, D. C. (1992). Increasing multicultural understanding. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Loden, M. (1996). Implementing Diversity. Chicago: Irwin.

López, S. R. (1989). Patient variable biases in clinical judgment: Conceptual overview

and methodological consideration. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 184–203.

Lowe, S. M., & Mascher, J. (2001). The role of sexual orientation in multicultural

counseling: Integrating bodies of knowledge. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L.

A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (2

ed., pp. 755–778). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lukasiewicz, M., & Harvey, E. (Producers). (1991, September 26). True Colors on

20/20: Primetime Live. New York: ABC.

Macrae, C. N., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically

about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 93–120.

Major, B., Quinton, W. J., & McCoy, S. K. (in press). Antecedents and Consequences of

Attributions to Discrimination: Theoretical and Empirical Advances. In M. P.

Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 34. New York:

Academic Press.

Major, B., Sciaccitano, A. M., & Crocker, J. (1993). In-group versus out-group

comparisons and self-esteem. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19,

711–721.

Manese, J. E., Wu, J. T., & Nepomuceno, C. A. (2001). The effect of training on

multicultural competencies: An exploratory study over a ten-year period. Journal

of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29, 31–40.

Marin, G., & Marin, B. V. (1991). Research with Hispanic populations. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (2001). The cultural construction of self and emotion:

Implications for social behavior. In W. G. Perrod (Ed.), Emotions in social

psychology: Essential reading (pp 119–137). Philadelphia: Brunner-Routledge.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition,

emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.

McGoldrick, M., Giordano, J., & Pearce, J. K. (Eds.). (1996). Ethnicity & family therapy

(2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.

Medved, C. E., Morrison, K., Dearing, J. E., Larson, R. S., Cline, G., & Brummans, B. H.

(2001). Tensions in community health improvement initiatives: Communication

and collaboration in a managed care environment. Journal of Applied

Communication Research, 29, 137–151.

Middleton, R. A., Rollins, C. W., & Harley, D. A. (1999). The historical and political

context of the civil rights of persons with disabilities: A multicultural perspective

for counselors. Journal of Multicultural Counseling & Development, 27, 105–

120.

Middleton, R., Arredondo, P., & D’Andrea, M. (2000). The impact of

Spanish-speaking newcomers in Alabama towns. Counseling Today, p. 24.

Mio, J. S., & Awakuni, G. I. (2000). Resistance to multiculturalism: Issues and

interventions. Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel.

Mio, J. S., & Morris, D. R. (1990). Cross-cultural issues in psychology training programs:

An invitation for discussion. Professional Psychology: Research and

Practice, 21, 434–441.

Morgan, G. (1997). Images in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mosley-Howard, G. S., & Burgan Evans, C. (2000). Relationships and contemporary

experiences of the African American family: An ethnographic case study.

Journal of Black Studies, 30, 428–452.

Murdock, N. L., Alcorn, J., Heesacker, M., & Stoltenberg, C. (1998). Model training

program in counseling psychology. Counseling Psychologist, 26, 658–672.

Nanus, B. (1992). Visionary Leadership. Creating a compelling sense of direction for

your organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). The condition of education.

Washington, DC: US Department of Education.

Neville, H. A., & Mobley, M. (2001). Social identities in contexts: An ecological model

of multicultural counseling psychology processes. Counseling Psychologist, 29,

471–486.

Niemann, Y. F. (2001). Stereotypes about Chicanas and Chicanos: Implications for

counseling. The Counseling Psychologist, 29, 55–90.

Oetting, G. R., & Beauvais, F. (1990–1991). Orthogonal cultural identification theory:

The cultural identification of minority adolescents. International Journal of the

Addictions, 25, 655–685.

Ory, M. G., Lipman, P. D., Barr, R., Harden, J. T., & Stahl, S. M. (2000). A national

program to enhance research on minority aging and health promotion. Journal of

Mental Health & Aging, 6, 9–18.

Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and

collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses.

Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3–72.

Oyserman, D., Gant, L., & Ager, J. (1995). A socially contextualized model of African

American identity: Possible selves and school persistence. Journal of Personality

& Social Psychology, 69, 1216–1232.

Padilla, A. M. (1995). (Ed.). Hispanic psychology: Critical issues in theory and research.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Paniagua, F. (1994). Assessing and treating culturally different clients. Newbury Park,

CA: Sage.

Paniagua, F. (1998). Assessing and treating culturally diverse clients (2

ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Parham, T. A. (1989). Cycles of psychological nigrescence. Counseling Psychologist,

17, 187–226.

Parham, T. A. (1993). White researchers conducting multicultural counseling research:

Can their efforts be “mo betta”? The Counseling Psychologist, 21, 250–256.

Parham, T. A. (2001). Psychological nigrescence revisited: A foreword. Journal of

Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29, 162–164.

Parham, T. A., White, J. L., & Ajamu, A. (1999). The psychology of Blacks: An African

centered perspective (3

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Parker, W. A., Moore, M. A., & Neimeyer, G. J. (1998). Altering White racial identity

and interracial comfort through multicultural training. Journal of Counseling and

Development, 76, 302–310.

Pedersen, P. (1997). Culture-centered counseling interventions: Striving for accuracy.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pedersen, P. (1999). Multiculturalism as a fourth force. Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel.

Pedersen, P. (2000). Hidden messages in culture-centered counseling: A triad training

model. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction:

National Council of Schools and Programs of Professional Psychology. In R. L.

Peterson, D. R. Peterson, & J. C. Abrams (Eds.), Standards for education in

professional psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association

and National Council of Schools of Professional Psychology.

Perez, J. E. (1999). Clients deserve empirically supported treatments, not romanticism.

American Psychologist, 54, 205–206.

Pettigrew, T. F. (1979). The ultimate attribution error: Extending Allport's cognitive

analysis of prejudice. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 461–476.

Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Applying social psychology to international social issues.

Journal of Social Issues, 54, 663–675.

Phinney, J. S. (1991). Ethnic identity and self-esteem: A review and integration.

Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 13, 193–208.

Phinney, J. S. (1996). When we talk about American ethnic groups, what do we mean?

American Psychologist, 51, 918–927.

Plant, E. A., & Devine, P. G. (1998). Internal and external motivation to respond without

prejudice. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 75, 811–832.

Ponterotto, J. G. (1997). Multicultural counseling training: A competency model and

national survey. In D. B. Pope-Davis & H. L. K. Coleman (Eds.), Multicultural

counseling competencies: Assessment, education and training, and supervision

(pp. 111–130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ponterotto, J. G. (1998). Charting a course for research in multicultural counseling

training. Counseling Psychologist, 26, 43–68.

Ponterotto, J. G., & Casas, J. M. (1991). Handbook of racial/ethnic minority counseling

research. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Ponterotto, J. G., Casas, J. M., Suzuki, L. A., & Alexander, C. M. (Eds.). (1995).

Handbook of multicultural counseling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ponterotto, J. G., & Pedersen, P. B. (1993). Preventing prejudice: A guide for counselors

and educators. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Pope-Davis, D. B., Breaux, C., & Lui, W. M. (1997). A multicultural immersion

experience: Filling a void in multicultural training. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pope-Davis, D. B., & Coleman, H. L. K. (1997). Multicultural counseling competencies:

Assessment, education and training, and supervision. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pope-Davis, D. B., & Ottavi, T. M. (1994). Examining the association between

selfexpressed multicultural counseling competencies and demographic variables

among counselors. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72, 651–660.

Prendes-Lintel, M. (2001). A working model in counseling recent refugees. In J. G.

Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of

multicultural counseling (2

ed., pp. 729–752). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Prieto, L. R., McNeill, B. W., Walls, R. G., & Gomez, S. P. (2001). Chicanas/os and

mental health services: An overview of utilization, counselor preference and

assessment issues. The Counseling Psychologist, 29, 18–54.

Psychologists in the CIA. (2002, April). Monitor on Psychology, 33.

Quintana, S. M., & Bernal, M. E. (1995). Ethnic minority training in counseling

psychology: Comparisons with clinical psychology and proposed standards. The

Counseling Psychologist, 23, 102–121.

Quintana, S. M., Troyano, N., & Taylor, G. (2001). Cultural validity and inherent

challenges in quantitative methods for multicultural research. In J. G. Ponterotto,

J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural

counseling, (2

ed., pp. 604–630). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ramirez, M. (1998). Multicultural/multiracial psychology: Mestizo perspectives in

personality and mental health. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.

Reid, P. T. (2002). Multicultural psychology: Bringing together gender and ethnicity.

Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 8, 103–114.

Research Office. (2002a). Demographic characteristics of APA members by

race/ethnicity, analyses of APA directory survey: 2000. Washington DC: American

Psychological Association.

Research Office. (2002b). Race/ethnicity of APA members and APA governance members:

Analyses of APA governance survey. Washington DC: American Psychological

Association.

Reynolds, A. L. (1995). Challenges and strategies for teaching multicultural counseling

courses. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.),

Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 312–330). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Reynolds, K. J., & Oakes, P. J. (2000). Variability in impression formation:

Investigating the role of motivation, capacity, and the categorization process.

Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 355–373.

Ridley, C. (1995). Overcoming unintentional racism in counseling and therapy: A

Practitioner’s guide to intentional intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ridley, C. R., Espelage, D. L., & Rubinstein, K. J. (1997). Course development in

multicultural counseling. In D. B. Pope-Davis & H. L. K. Coleman (Eds.).

Multicultural counseling competencies: Assessment, education and training, and

supervision (pp. 131–158). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ridley, C., Hill, C., & Li, L. (1998). Revisiting and refining the multicultural assessment

procedure. Counseling Psychologist, 6, 939–947.

Robinson, T. L., & Howard-Hamilton, M. (2000). The convergence of race, ethnicity, and

gender. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Rodriquez, R., & Walls, N. (2000). Culturally educated questioning: Toward a skillbased

approach in multicultural counselor training. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 2, 89–99.

Rogers, M. R., Hoffman, M. A., & Wade, J. (1998). Notable multicultural training in

APA-approved counseling psychology and school psychology programs.

Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 4, 212–226.

Rogler, L. H. (1999). Methodological sources of cultural insensitivity in mental health

research. American Psychologist, 54, 424–433.

Rooney, S. C., Flores, L. Y., & Mercier, C. A. (1998). Making multicultural education

effective for everyone. The Counseling Psychologist, 26, 22–32.

Root, M. P. P. (Ed). (1992). Racially mixed people in America. Newbury Park, CA

Sage.

Root, M. P. P. (1999). The biracial baby boom: Understanding ecological constructions

of racial identity in the 21st century. In R. H. Sheets & E. R. Hollins (Eds.),

Racial and ethnic identity in school practices: Aspects of human development (pp.

67–89). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Ruiz, A. S. (1990). Ethnic identity: Crisis and resolution. Journal of Multicultural

Counseling and Development, 18, 29–40.

Rushton, J. P. (1995). Construct validity, censorship, and the genetics of race. American

Psychologist, 50, 40–41.

Saldana, D. (1995). Acculturative stress: Minority status and distress. In A. M. Padilla

(Ed.), Hispanic psychology (pp. 43–56). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Salvador, C. M. (1998). Effects of the intercultural awareness development courses on

first year students’ multicultural competency. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58

(11-B), 5874.

Samuda, R. J. (1998). Psychological testing of American minorities. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Sanchez, A. R. (2001). Multicultural family counseling: Toward cultural sensibility. In J.

G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of

multicultural counseling (2

ed., pp. 672–700). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sandoval, J., Frisby, C. L., Geisinger, K. F., Scheuneman, J. D., & Grenier, J. R. (Eds.).

(1998). Test interpretation and diversity: Achieving equity in assessment.

Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Santiago-Rivera, A., Arredondo, P., & Gallardo-Cooper, M. (2002). Counseling Latinos

and la familia: A practitioner’s guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Schlesinger, M., & Gray, B. (1999). Institutional change and its consequences for the

delivery of mental health services. In A. Horwitz & T. Scheid (Eds.), A

Handbook for the study of mental health: Social contexts, theories, and systems (pp.

427–448). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Schmader, T., Major, B., & Gramzow, R. H. (2001). Coping with ethnic stereotypes in

the academic domain: Perceived injustice and psychological disengagement.

Journal of Social Issues, 57, 93–111.

Schofield, J. W. (1986). Causes and consequences of the colorblind perspective. J. F.

Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 231–

253). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Sciarra, D. T. (1999). Multiculturalism in counseling. Itasca, IL: Peacock.

Sedikides, C., & Brewer, M. B. (2001). Individual self, relational self, collective self.

Philadelphia: Brunner-Routledge.

Seeley, K. M. (2000). Cultural psychotherapy. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.

Sellers, R. M., Smith, M. A., Shelton, J. N., Rowley, S. A., & Chavous, T. M. (1998).

Multidimensional model of racial identity: A reconceptualization of African

American racial identity. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 2, 18–39.

Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday.

Sevig, T., & Etzkorn, J. (2001). Transformative training: A year-long multicultural

counseling seminar for graduate students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and

Development, 29, 57–72.

Shanbhag, M. G. (1999). The role of covert racial prejudice, attitudinal ambivalence, and

guilt in receptivity to multicultural training. Dissertation Abstracts International,

59(9-B): 5111.

Sherif, C. W. (1979). Social values, attitudes, and involvement of the self. Nebraska

Symposium on Motivation, 27, 1–64.

Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social

hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Smart, J., & Smart, D. W. (1995). Acculturative stress of Hispanics: Loss and challenge.

Journal of Counseling & Development, 73, 390–396.

Society for the Psychological Study of Ethnic Minority Issues, Division 45 of the American

Psychological Association & Microtraining Associates, Inc. (Sponsors and

producers). (2000). Culturally-competent counseling and therapy: Live

demonstrations of innovative approaches. [Films]. (Available from Microtraining

Associates, Inc., P.O. Box 9641, North Amherst, MA 01059-9641).

Sodowsky, G. R., & Kuo, P. Y. (2001). Determining cultural validity of personality

assessment: Some guidelines. In D. B. Pope-Davis & H. L. K. Coleman (Eds.), The

intersection of race, class, and gender: Implications for multicultural counseling

(pp. 213–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sodowsky, G. R., Kuo-Jackson, P., & Loya, G. (1997). Outcome of training in the

philosophy of assessment: Multicultural counseling competencies. In D. B. Pope-

Davis & H. L. K. Coleman (Eds.), Multicultural counseling competencies:

Assessment education and training, and supervision. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sodowsky, G. R., Kuo-Jackson, P.Y., Richardson, M. F., & Corey, A.T. (1998). Correlates

of self-reported multicultural competencies: Counselor multicultural social

desirability, race, social inadequacy, locus of control racial ideology, and

multicultural training. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 256–264.

Spengler, P. M. (1998). Multicultural assessment and a scientist-practitioner model of

psychological assessment. Counseling Psychologist, 6, 930–938.

Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and

performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.

Steward, R. J., Wright, D. J., Jackson, J. D., & Jo, H. (1998). The relationship between

multicultural counseling training and the evaluation of culturally sensitive and

culturally insensitive counselors. Journal of Multicultural Counseling &

Development, 3, 205–217.

Stone, G. L. (1997). Multiculturalism as a context for supervision: Perspectives,

limitations, and implications. In D. B. Pope-Davis & H. L. K. Coleman (Eds.),

Multicultural counseling competencies: Assessment, education and anecdotal training (pp.

263–289). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Stukas, A. A., Jr., & Snyder, M. (2002). Targets’ awareness of expectations and behavioral

confirmation in ongoing interactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,

38, 31–40.

Sue, D. (1978). Eliminating cultural oppression in counseling: Toward a general theory.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 25, 419–428.

Sue, D. (1997). Multicultural training. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,

21, 175–193.

Sue, D. W. (2001). Multidimensional facets of cultural competence. The Counseling

Psychologist, 29, 790–821.

Sue, D. W., Arredondo, P., & McDavis, R. J. (1992). Multicultural counseling

competencies and standards: A call to the profession. Journal of Counseling and

Development, 70, 477–483.

Sue, D. W., Bernier, J., Durran, M., Feinberg, L., Pedersen, P., Smith, E., &

VasquezNuttall, E. (1982). Position paper: Multicultural counseling competencies.

The

Counseling Psychologist, 10, 45–52.

Sue, D. W., Bingham, R. P., Porche-Burke, L., & Vasquez, M. (1999). The diversification

of psychology: A multicultural revolution. American Psychologist,

54, 1061–1069.

Sue, D. W., Carter, R. T., Casas, J. M., Fouad, N. A., Ivey, A. E., Jensen, M.,

LaFromboise, T., Manese, J. E., Ponterotto, J. G., & Vazquez-Nutall, E. (1998).

Multicultural counseling competencies: Individual and organizational development.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sue, D. W., Ivey, A. E., & Pedersen, P. B. (1996). A theory of multicultural counseling

and therapy. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Sue, D.W., & Sue, D. (1977). Ethnic minorities: Failures and responsibilities of the social

sciences. Journal of Non-White Concerns in Personnel and Guidance, 5, 99–106.

Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (1999). Counseling the culturally different: Theory and practice

ed.). New York: Wiley.

Sue, S. (1998). In search of cultural competence in psychotherapy and counseling.

American Psychologist, 53, 440–448.

Sue, S. (1999). Science, ethnicity, and bias: Where have we gone wrong? American

Psychologist, 54, 1070–1077.

Sun, K. (1995). The definition of race. American Psychologist, 50, 43–44.

Suzuki, L. A., Prendes-Lintel, M., Wertlieb, L., & Stallings, A. (1999). Exploring

multicultural issues using qualitative methods. In M. Kopala & L. A. Suzuki

(Eds.), Using qualitative methods in psychology (pp. 123–133). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Suzuki, L. A., & Valencia, R. R. (1997). Race-ethnicity and measured intelligence:

Educational implications. American Psychologist, 52, 1103–1114.

Swim, J., & Mallett, R. (2002). Pride and prejudice: A multi-group model of identity and

its association with intergroup and intragroup attitudes. Manuscript submitted for

publication.

Swim, J., & Stangor, C. (1998). Prejudice: The target's perspective. San Diego, CA:

Academic Press.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In

S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24).

Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

Thomas, D. A., & Ely, R. J. (1996). Making differences matter: A new paradigm for

managing diversity. Harvard Business Review, 74, 79–90.

100

Thomas, D. A., & Gabarro, J. (1999). Breaking through: The making of minority

executives in corporate America. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Thompson, C. E., & Carter, R. T. (1997). Racial identity theory: Applications to

individual, group, and organizational interventions. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Triandis, H. C., & Brislin, R. W. (1984). Multicultural psychology. American

Psychologist, 39, 1006–1016.

Triandis, H. C., & Singelis, T. M. (1998). Training to recognize individual differences in

collectivism and individualism within culture. International Journal of

Intercultural Relations, 22, 35–47.

Turner, J. C., Brown, R. J., & Tajfel, H. (1979). Social comparison and group interest in

ingroup favouritism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 187–204.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). U.S. Census 2000, Summary Files 1 and 2. Available from

U.S. Census Bureau web site, http://www.census.gov.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000; 2001). Mental health: Culture,

race and ethnicity—A supplement to Mental Health: A report of the Surgeon

General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public

Health Office, Office of the Surgeon General.

Vandiver, B. J., Fhagen-Smith, P. E., Cokley, K. O., Cross, W. E., Jr., & Worrell, F. C.

(2001). Cross’ nigrescence model: From theory to scale to theory. Journal of

Multicultural Counseling and Development, 29, 174–200.

Wehrly, B., Kenney, K. R., & Kenney, M. E. (1999). Counseling multiracial families.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Westermeyer, J., & Janca, A. (1997). Language, culture and psychopathology:

101

Conceptual and methodological issues. Transcultural Psychiatry, 34, 291–311.

Witte, K., & Morrison, K. (1995). Intercultural and cross-cultural health communication:

Understanding people and motivating healthy behaviors. In R.

L. Wiseman (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (pp. 216–246). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wolsko, C., Park, B., Judd, C. M., & Wittenbrink, B. (2000). Framing interethnic

ideology: Effects of multicultural and color-blind perspectives on judgments of

groups and individuals. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 78, 635– 654.

Worrell, F. C., Cross, W. E., Jr., Vandiver, B. J. (2001). Nigrescence theory: Current status

and challenges for the future. Journal of Counseling and Development, 29,

201–213.

Wright, S. C., & Taylor, D. M. (1998). Responding to tokenism: Individual action in the

face of collective justice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 647–667.

Wu, A. W. (2000). Quality-of-life assessment in clinical research: Application in diverse

populations. Medical Care, 38, II130–II135.

Yee, A. H., Fairchild, H. H., Weizmann, F., & Wyatt, G. E. (1993). Addressing

psychology’s problem with race. American Psychologist, 48, 1132–1140.

Zhang, A. Y., Snowden, L. R., & Sue, S. (1998). Differences between Asian and

WhiteAmericans’ help-seeking and utilization patterns for the Los Angeles area.

Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 317–326.

Footnote:

102

1. **The term Person/s of Color is preferred by some instead of minority because of the

technical definition the latter term connotes.