Apply for Research Training in Intervention and Implementation Science at ASU

T32 Training Fellowship


The ProgramFunded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), our T32 training program prepares pre-doctoral and post-doctoral fellows to conduct research that reduces the gap between real-world practice and evidence-based interventions targeting drug abuse prevention or HIV risk reduction. The two-year fellowship is delivered through individually tailored programs of coursework and research apprenticeships. 


The TrainingFellows are trained to conduct prevention research with children and families. Through a combination of coursework and research apprenticeships with faculty from multiple disciplines, fellows receive training in drug abuse, HIV risk, and implementation science. Trainees gain hands-on experience with the design, implementation, and evaluation of preventive interventions in multiple service delivery settings.


FacultyTraining faculty have expertise in the design and implementation of preventive intervention, drug abuse research, research with ethnic minority families, and the development of innovative quantitative methods.


For more Information:


How to ApplyInterested applicants should contact Laurie Chassin, director of the program, via email at Applications must include:
1) a vita; 2) a statement of training goals and professional goals; and
3) three letters of recommendation.

Applications should be electronically sent to Dr. Chassin


This chapter reviews the historical context and challenges that have given rise to this field, the methods and models used to address these challenges, and exemplars of culturally adapted interventions for children and adolescents. Although interventions to address the needs of vulnerable youth exist on a continuum from those that seek primarily to promote health and positive development for whole populations to those targeted at individuals with severe disorders (Weisz, Sandler, Durlak, & Anton, 2005), our presentation of exemplars broadly encompasses the preventive end of the spectrum that addresses risk before it has evolved into debilitating forms of psychopathology, including universal prevention approaches that address risk factors in general populations, selective preventive interventions that target those segments of the population with greater than normal risk of developing a disorder, and indicated approaches that focus on subgroups exhibiting early signs or symptoms of developing a disorder (Mrazek & Haggerty, 1994). The specific goals of the chapter are to: (1) articulate the issues and challenges that have shaped current approaches to cultural adaptation of EBIs; (2) review approaches and models for designing cultural adaptations of EBIs, including frameworks for deciding when, what, and how adaptations should be made; (3) present exemplars of cultural adaptations of EBIs targeting a range of social, emotional, behavioral, and health outcomes; and (4) summarize strengths, limitations, and future directions for the field.





Read about the latest research published in #JClinicalChildAP #JCCAP

Evidence Base Update: 50 Years of Research on Treatment for Child and Adolescent Anxiety

Anxiety disorders are the most common mental health disorder among children and adolescents. We examined 111 treatment outcome studies testing 204 treatment conditions for child and adolescent anxiety published between 1967 and mid-2013. Studies were selected for inclusion in this review using the PracticeWise Evidence-Based Services database. Using guidelines identified by this journal (Southam-Gerow & Prinstein, 2014), studies were included if they were conducted with children and/or adolescents (ages 1–19) with anxiety and/or avoidance problems. In addition to reviewing the strength of the evidence, the review also examined indicators of effectiveness, common practices across treatment families, and mediators and moderators of treatment outcome. Six treatments reached well-established status for child and adolescent anxiety, 8 were identified as probably efficacious, 2 were identified as possibly efficacious, 6 treatments were deemed experimental, and 8 treatments of questionable efficacy emerged. Findings from this review suggest substantial support for cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) as an effective and appropriate first-line treatment for youth with anxiety disorders. Several other treatment approaches emerged as probably efficacious that are not primarily CBT based, suggesting that there are alternative evidence-based treatments that practitioners can turn to for children and adolescents who do not respond well to CBT. The review concludes with a discussion of treatments that improve functioning in addition to reducing symptoms, common practices derived from evidence-based treatments, mediators and moderators of treatment outcomes, recommendations for best practice, and suggestions for future research.



Charmaine K. Higa-McMillana*Sarah E. FrancisbLeslie Rith-Najarianc & Bruce F. Chorpitac

pages 91-113

me3 has the potential to be a game-changer in the realm of college readiness and access

ASU has developed a new online tool called me3 to help students prepare for college.  We want to share this with you so you might introduce high school students or others in your community to the tool. We also hope you will review it and offer your insights.   me3 harnesses technology, game concepts, and data analytics to prepare students for successful transitions from middle school to high school and to a postsecondary institution while maintaining interest and engagement. Students can start with their known interests and goals, or use the me3 game to explore options.

The me3 game pairs users with careers and college majors by having them play a short game based on Holland’s RIASEC (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising and Conventional) career theory.  The tool then helps students plan their high school courses so they can chart their pathway to higher education. 

Users review a series of sixty pairs of images, choosing the image they like best between each pair, which helps the program understand their interests.  Based on the user’s interests, me3 recommends several career paths for the student and the most applicable college major for a career.  me3 then suggests a list of high school courses a student should take and allows students to track their academic progress.

By guiding young learners to identify careers and majors of interest, me3 informs the conversation between students and their families, teachers and guidance counselors about attending college.  me3 empowers students to map an academic pathway through high school to help guide them to complete all requirements to gain admission to college. The me3 tool will be developed further to guide and support students across high school as they make progress toward college admission.

me3 has the potential to be a game-changer in the realm of college readiness and access.  Paired with eAdvisor, ASU is on the cutting edge of empowering students with the tools they need to realize the expectation set forth in our Charter: being defined by whom we include and how they succeed. 

me3 is already gaining traction in schools across the state of Arizona.  For Jennifer Anderson, the department chair of student advising at Westwood High School in Mesa, me3 is a valuable tool for her to help connect students to college.  “me3 provides students with insight about themselves that links them to career choices they might not consider otherwise,” said Anderson. “me3 is an immensely helpful tool for post-secondary readiness.”

me3 is in its first phase. As the tool unfolds, it will be used to integrate academic, career and financial planning, and promote academic mindsets that build confidence. The tool will also help guide students who may not otherwise have access to college-going information. 

Everyone is invited to interact with me3 and offer feedback and suggestions.  To learn more about me3, review this brief video .

Provost Mark Searle

Knowns and Unknowns about e-Cigarettes and Teens

The recent Monitoring the Future survey of students’ drug use and attitudes revealed that adolescents have taken to e-cigarettes in a big way. When asked in early 2014, 17.1 percent of high school seniors and 16.2 percent of 10th graders reported using e-cigarettes in the previous month (see infographic, bottom). We are still wrestling with whether or not e-cigarettes pose a danger, but their popularity among youth combined with society’s past experiences with tobacco and other addictive substances demands that we urge caution around these products.

E-cigarettes are being aggressively marketed as glamorous devices that empower users—such as by giving them the freedom to “vape” in public places where cigarette smoking is banned or taboo. And even though sellers are often careful not to make explicit health claims, another part of the “freedom” being sold is, implicitly, the freedom to enjoy the smoking experience without fear of long-term health consequences such as death from cancer or heart disease.

Those who know the history of cigarette marketing in America will experience a sense of déjà vu. Freedom was the concept used in the 1920s and 1930s to market cigarettes to women, a vast then-untapped market for what had previously been only a male pleasure. Cigarette smoking was sold to women as an image to help them feel liberated and empowered.

Although the vapor produced by e-cigarettes contains no tar—the main cause of lung cancer—it may contain other potentially harmful chemicals. There are currently no regulatory controls over these products, most are made in China, and testing of some products’ vapor has shown toxic metals, possibly produced by the vaporizing mechanism itself. And that is to say nothing of the risks of nicotine exposure. Whether or not e-cigarettes turn out to have fewer physical health harms than traditional cigarettes, it is still ridiculous to describe any product containing an addictive substance as “freeing.”

E-cigarette fluids vary widely in their nicotine concentrations, and the amount a user is exposed to probably depends on a range of factors (like how many puffs they take, how deeply they inhale, and how long they hold it), but there is clearly a potential for these products to promote addiction—especially when users start in their teens. Recent research in rodents suggests nicotine may even promote addictive behavior by altering gene expression: A 2011 study by Eric R. Kandel and colleagues at Columbia University found that nicotine exposure increased mice’s sensitivity to cocaine’s rewarding effects via an epigenetic pathway; if the same holds true in humans, nicotine could serve as a gateway to abuse of other substances.

Apart from the possible dangers of nicotine, e-cigarette use is normalizing and even glamorizing smoking behavior, which had been successfully stigmatized through public-health campaigns of the past decades. The MTF survey found that many kids who are using e-cigarettes are also smoking traditional cigarettes. It would be tragic if e-cigarettes re-opened the door to teen tobacco use, which has been slowly but surely declining since the late 1990s.

As scientists, we should be cautious and not sound alarm bells prematurely. It will be good if future research shows e-cigarettes are indeed helpful aids for smokers who have trouble quitting otherwise. But if vaping is hooking new users on nicotine—young people and those of any age who had never smoked before—then that could pose a serious problem. We should not allow e-cigarettes, with their promised “freedoms,” to rewind public health to the 1920s.

Past month use, 8th grade - Cigarettes: 4.0%, e-Cigarettes: 8.7%; 10th grade - Cigarettes: 7.2%, e-Cigarettes: 16.2%; 12th grade - Cigarettes: 13.6%, e-Cigarettes: 17.1% (Only 14.2% of 12th graders view e-cigarette use as harmful, which is less than 5 students in the average class)

Nora Volkow


back to top