Search

This paper reviews school-based (n = 212) and clinically-based (n = 68) positive psychological interventions (PPIs) for children and adolescents. A new 3 × 3 classification of PPIs was developed based on the processes and content of the PPI and the outcomes measured. This classification involves 9 different types of interventions depending on whether the intervention focuses on positive, remedial, or both positive and remedial processes and content, and whether the intervention aims to evade or address challenges, deficits, or disorders or improve or elicit positive outcomes. Positive content-balanced outcomes interventions were the most common type used in schools (38%) and clinical settings (63%). Mindfulness was the most common approach used (49% in schools and 71% in clinical settings). Surprisingly, relatively few studies focused on well-established positive psychological constructs, such as strengths, hope, and gratitude. Overall, the results suggest strong support for the use of PPIs in school and clinical contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social media are integral in the lives of adolescents. Practitioners need to be able to assess risk, and social media are potentially a new dimension to consider. Adolescent voices and practitioner perspectives are central to understanding the relationship between social media and mental health, yet there is limited work that highlights their views. Aims: This paper aims to illuminate the perspectives of adolescents and practitioners about social media and mental health. Method: Eight focus groups, six with adolescents aged 11–18 years and two with mental health practitioners, were conducted. Ethical approval was provided. Discussions allowed for expression of experiences, views and opinions of the relationship between social media and mental health. Results: Participants discussed what might be thought of as the "good", the "bad" and the "ugly" side of social media, navigating the benefits of social media to well-being against possible negative impacts on adolescents. They differentiated personal use from third party attributions whereby they extolled the risk to adolescents outside of their personal group. Much of the negative rhetoric of social media was repeated by mental health practitioners, although there was some acknowledgement of potential benefit. Conclusions: Practitioners need to consider social media and its role in practice. When risk-assessing adolescents, it is arguably useful to include a social media dimension, without presuming the relationship will be negative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]