The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Family Psychology

James H. Bray, Mark Stanton, James H. Bray, Mark Stanton

• Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781118432600
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Psychotherapy
• Index: Psychology

The Handbook of Family Psychology provides a comprehensive overview of the theoretical underpinnings and established practices relating to family psychology.

• Provides a thorough orientation to the field of family psychology for clinicians
• Includes summaries of the most recent research literature and clinical interventions for specific areas of interest to family psychology clinicians
• Features essays by recognized experts in a variety of specialized fields
• Suitable as a required text for courses in family psychology, family therapy, theories of psychotherapy, couples therapy, systems theory, and systems therapy

Part I

Foundations of Family Psychology

Introduction

Any construction relies upon a solid foundation in order to build an enduring structure. This part of the Handbook describes the foundations of contemporary family psychology, including a focus on the epistemology and theory, history, demographics, diversity, research methods, competencies, and education that underlie the specialty. This part is placed first in the Handbook because we believe it is important to understand the foundations of the specialty before moving to treatment applications or particular areas of importance.

The specialty of family psychology is distinctive because it is founded on systems theory and a systemic epistemology is evident in the origins and evolution of the specialty. Chapter 1 describes the systemic epistemology of family psychology and the importance of systemic conceptualization for family psychology research design and clinical intervention.

The history of the evolution of systemic models of psychotherapeutic intervention is presented in Chapter 2. Many of these models originated with strong, charismatic individuals who championed particular ways of working with individuals, couples, and families, but the chapter describes a progression over time to more integrated and sophistic-ated models that rely on scientific evidence and outcomes more than individual personality.

Many theories may be understood to contribute to family psychology, and Chapter 3 provides an introduction to the meaning and purpose of theory and to several theories that are salient to a systemic perspective. Countering the rush to therapeutic intervention, the chapter stresses the importance of theory to provide adequate conceptualization to shape questions that result in beneficial applications and interventions.

The demographics of American family life have changed significantly in recent years, and Chapter 4 examines the sociodemographic trends that surround the practice of family psychology. For instance, the delay in marriage and the increase in cohabitation significantly impact society and psychotherapy, so the demographics provide a foundation for many chapters that follow in the Handbook. Chapter 5 continues this theme with a synopsis of diversity issues in family psychology, focusing especially on ethnic diversity to examine varying marriage and family patterns, as well as crucial sociocultural dimensions that may be considered for culturally appropriate psychotherapeutic intervention.

The relationship of research and research methods and the challenges to linking family psychology research and practice are addressed in Chapters 6 and 7. Family psychology emphasizes the science of psychology, and these chapters note the importance of solid research methodology and respect for research findings in the practice of family psychology. Both qualitative and quantitative methods are salient for understanding systemic dynamics.

The recent focus on the core competencies necessary for family psychology practice is underscored in Chapter 8 with delineation of the systemic elements of such compet-encies. Developmental markers are clarified and key aspects of competency are specified in the chapter.

Finally, Chapter 9 provides a review of contemporary graduate education in family psychology in the United States and the United Kingdom. Ultimately, education and training are the lifeblood of a specialty and this chapter details the contemporary trends and foci.

These topics constitute the foundation for the specialty and this Handbook. Students and clinicians may turn first to the clinical chapters or the chapters on specific dimensions of the specialty, but we hope that all will turn eventually to these chapters that address the foundations of the specialty.

1

The Systemic Epistemology of the Specialty of Family Psychology

Mark Stanton

Family psychology is a broad and general orientation to psychology that utilizes a systemic epistemology to provide an alternative to the individual focus of many psychological orientations (Nutt & Stanton, 2008). Although the specialty is sometimes confused with the practice of family therapy, family psychology is a broader term that recognizes that human behavior occurs within a contextual matrix of individual, interpersonal, and environ-mental or macrosystemic factors (Robbins, Mayorga, & Szapocznik, 2003; Stanton, 1999). A systemic epistemology includes systemic thinking (inculcation of systemic concepts and use of a systemic paradigm to organize thoughts) and application to clinical practice and research. A systemic epistemology provides a framework for the general conceptualization of human behavior and for psychological assessment, psychotherapeutic intervention, and family psychology research.

This chapter provides an introduction to the systemic epistemology of family psychology, including a definition of epistemology, the importance of an epistemological transforma-tion to shift from an individualistic approach to a systemic approach to psychology, the delineation of a family psychology paradigm, and a description of important systemic factors. Finally, this systemic epistemology is applied to psychotherapeutic intervention and family psychology research.

Definition of Epistemology

We use the term epistemology here in a manner consistent with the work of Auerswald and Bateson (Auerswald, 1990; Bateson, 1972): a set of pervasive rules used in thought by large groups of people to define reality. Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that focuses on knowledge and the justification of knowledge by examining the origins, nature, and methods of knowledge. Understood more broadly, epistemology has “to do with the creation and dissemination of knowledge in particular areas of inquiry” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, n.d.). More simply stated it is “how we know what we know.” Epistemology often involves creation and use of a paradigm to organize information and knowledge.

The crucial issue for family psychologists is the role of one's epistemology in determining the sources and organization of knowledge, as these constitute what we know and believe to be true. In that sense, “reality” is a construct, based on what our rules say is real or not real. For instance, is the sound of a dog whistle “real”? Most humans cannot hear the sound, so if our rules limit reality to those things that can be directly experienced by human senses (i.e., sight, hearing, touch, feel) in an anthropocentric manner, the sound of the dog whistle is not real. This is problematic, because we can observe that when we blow the whistle all the dogs in the area respond, and we have learned that there are high-frequency sounds beyond our auditory range, so our rules may be challenged by other experiences or knowledge. If so, do we change our rules, or do we hold to them stubbornly because we “know” they are right? Rules may preclude consideration of novel ideas or exclude options without deliberation because they do not fit our “reality.”

Many people have given little thought to the rules they follow in thinking. Most do not face an ambiguous situation, stop, determine the rules we intend to use to conceptualize that situation, and then address it. Instead, we automatically follow the rules into which we have been socialized. Family psychology challenges us to understand how we have been socialized and educated to think, and to consider new methods.

The Cartesian Method

Many people educated in the United States and Europe have inculcated the scientific method espoused by Rene Descartes in 1637 (Capra, 2002; Nutt & Stanton, 2008). The Cartesian method of critical thinking is so intrinsic to western thought that most of us use it automatically when we think, with little or no awareness that our methodology influences our thoughts and interpretations (see Nisbett, 2007, for a detailed depiction of the differences between eastern and western thought processes). There may be an implicit assumption in western psychology that this is the only way to think about issues and problems.

Elements of Descartes' Model

Essential elements of the Cartesian model to be used in solving problems, drawn from Descartes' Discourse on Method (Descartes, 1999), include: (a) Cartesian doubt (i.e., seeking convincing evidence for every thought; never accepting anything as true without manifest knowledge that it is true); (b) dividing the whole into parts (i.e., breaking any problem down into as many parts as needed in order to solve it); (c) creating an orderly thought process by beginning with those aspects of the problem easiest to understand and ascending in steps to understand the most complex parts, without trying to follow any natural relationship between the parts; and (d) being thorough to ensure that nothing was left out.

In practice, these rules led to substantial scientific accomplishments (e.g., advances in medicine and other disciplines that enhance human experience) and the development of modern society. They also prove helpful in tackling problems. For instance, the challenge of writing a graduate term paper may be so daunting that students feel overwhelmed and unable to proceed. However, if they are encouraged to “break it down into sections,” “create an outline,” and “start with the section you know the most about,” they are often able to accomplish the task.

Errors of Cartesian Extremism

Extreme individualism.

Alternatively, when taken to an extreme, these rules have fragmented the whole to the extent that the natural connection between parts of the whole is lost. In practice, Cartesian methods have resulted in extreme individualism (the tendency to frame reality through the lens of the individual rather than the collective whole). We see this in western psychology, where many theories and approaches to psychological intervention are focused on the individual as if she or he were entirely independent of any social system. These models of psychology minimize the attention provided to interpersonal and environmental factors in human behavior, focusing almost exclusively on the intrapsychic or individual psychological factors. These approaches tend “to study the individual by removing the person from the context of his or her life” (Cervone, Shoda, & Downey, 2007, p. 4).

Reductionism.

Cartesian rules have also promoted reductionism (the idea that a complex system is only the sum of its parts, so it is possible to break any system down to its elementary levels for analysis, understanding, and problem solving) in a manner that limits our ability to understand the complexity of the whole. For instance, reduction-istic thinking in psychology may result in a fragmented understanding of human behavior as particular psychologists focus only on the part of that behavior in which they specialize (e.g., some cognitive psychologists focus solely on mental representations, dismissing or discounting other factors, such as affect). The insight gained from such sole focus may be helpful, on the one hand, but ultimately misleading because it suggests that other factors are unrelated or unimportant. When reductionistic solutions are applied to complex phenomena, the solutions ultimately fail to address the complexity of the behavior. For example, there was a campaign some time ago to reduce the number and severity of automobile accidents. The thrust of the campaign was a slogan that encouraged drivers to leave one car length between them and the car ahead for every 10 mph of their driving speed. At initial glance, the simple logic of this suggestion makes sense; six car lengths at 60 mph allow plenty of room to stop or avoid an accident. In fact, this solution may make sense on a single-lane road. However, the solution is reductionistic when applied to the real world of multiple-lane highways traveled by most suburban and urban drivers. In that case, if one leaves significant space between cars it often results in other cars “cutting in front” of your car, increasing the potential for an accident. Reductionism may appear to solve a problem, but miss the complexity of an interactive system around the problem. This is similar to what occurs when a complex issue like substance abuse is understood as entirely an individual issue and the addict is treated on an inpatient unit until sobriety is achieved, then returned to the home and social environment in which the problem originated, only to relapse because the treatment did not address the complexity of the problem.

Linear thinking.

In addition, Cartesian logic often leads to linear thinking (the idea that there is a simple cause-and-effect mechanism that may explain most acts as one explores them using logical, rational analysis). Such thinking typically excludes synergistic thinking (the understanding that combined effects are greater than the sum of individual effects) and integrative processes (the ability to join parts into a larger whole) that recognize the creative, complex, and unexpected pathways surrounding human acts. Linear thinking alone may be inadequate to understand and address life issues and circumstances.

Extreme objectivism.

Similarly, Descartes' focus on objectivity is misleading, when taken to an extreme. When Descartes conceptually divided mind and matter he argued that a human scientist could observe the world objectively. Many contemporary scientists agree with him; they eschew any form of subjectivity in research. Only that which can be known through the scientific method, narrowly interpreted, is reliable knowledge. However, Capra (2002) argues that discoveries in quantum physics and theories of cognition overrule such an extreme focus on objectivity to recognize that science may be rigorous and disciplined without excluding the subjective dimension. A systems epistemology avoids the error of extreme objectivity, noting that all forms of knowledge may contribute to healthy functioning. This has important ramifications for psychotherapy and psychological research (e.g., the legitimacy of qualitative methods).

The legacy of Descartes is substantial and we would not easily discard his rules. When taken to an extreme, the Cartesian method lacks balance and requires reconsideration. There are systemic ways to conceptualize human behavior that are amenable to complexity and context; these may complement Cartesian methods.

Epistemological Transformation

Because many people have never considered the rules they observe automatically in their thought processes, it is difficult to change those rules. Mary Catherine Bateson (Gregory Bateson's anthropologist daughter and collaborator until his death) suggests that we need an “epistemological shock” to challenge our world...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Praise for The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Family Psychology
• Title Page
• Copyright
• List of Contributors
• Preface
• Part I: Foundations of Family Psychology
• Part II: Clinical Family Psychology
• Part III: Dimensions of Family Psychology
• Subject Index
• Author Index