Behavioral Marriage Therapy. III. The Contents of Gurman et al. May Be Hazardous to Our Health

Abstract

This paper was written as a reply to a critique of behavioral marital therapy (BMT) by Gurman, Kniskern, and Knudson (6, 7). The reply is divided into four sections. First, the paper addresses the critics' comments on the conceptual model put forth by BMT, correcting and clarifying various misconceptions, and restating some of the basic ideological principles in the behavioral model. Second, the paper discusses behavioral change techniques and technology, along with extratechnological treatment considerations. Again, misrepresentations of BMT are corrected. Third, an analysis of the literature investigating the therapeutic efficacy of BMT is reviewed, and the conclusion is reached that BMT is demonstrably effective, at least for a substantial number of mildly to moderately distressed couples. Criticisms are made of the analysis of the same literature conducted by Gurman et al. We conclude that, contrary to the spirit of the paper by Gurman et al., BMT is a viable framework for conceptualizing and treating relationship problems and that the commitment of its adherents to experimental investigation promises continued evolution, refinement, and improvement.

The spouse observation checklist: Empirical analysis and critique

“…They argue that certain behaviors labeled as displeasing on the SOC, and thus, considered as something to be reduced or eliminated, can actually be important ways to express feelings, define relationships, and even communicate respect. It is outside the scope of the present discussion to elaborate on or respond to these criticisms (see Jacobson and Weiss, 1978). They simply illustrate the pivotal place the SOC plays in behavioral marriage therapy.…”

Objective ratings of relationship skills across multiple domains as predictors of marital satisfaction trajectories

“…For example, proponents of the behavioral and social-learning models have posited that the opportunities for trial-and-error learning, and the consequences of those efforts, shape dyadic behavioral patterns (e.g., Jacobson & Weiss, 1978). That is, the patterns of behavior over time are predictive of marital success or failure.…”

“…A social learning or behavioral model (e.g., Jacobson & Margolin, 1979; O'Leary & Turkewitz, 1978;Weiss, 1978) and various extensions of it (e.g., Bradbury & Fincham, 1987;Margolin, 1983) has guided much of the marital literature to date. Early social learning theorists adopted a rather broad concept of marital behaviors and their importance for marital success and failure: "Marriage produces an incredible array of mutual interdependencies that are controlled by ideological factors, the operational necessities of daily life, and the stage of the life cycle.…”

Behavioral marriage therapy in the 1980's: The challenge of integration

“…Only two years ago, my colleagues and I participated in a published debate over the sufficiency of a predominantly behaviorally oriented approach to marital therapy (Gurman and Kniskern, 1978c;Jacobson and Weiss, 1978). This debate has stimulated a good deal of discussion (e.g., Colapinto, 1979;Taggart, 1979), presumably because it focused attention on a number of issues which are fundamental to how clinicians conceive of marital conflict and treatment, which had not received enough of a public airing €or some time.…”