Rejoinder: Extending the Dialogue and the Original Study

Green, Robert G.; Kolevzon, Michael S.; Vosler, Nancy R.

doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1985.00405.x

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another issue which this study addressed only indirectly refers to the hypothesis of the Circumplex Model that cohesion and adaptability are related to family functioning in a curvilinear way. In contrast to most of the recent studies using the self-report instrument FACES I11 (Beavers & Voeller, 1983;Green et al, 1985aGreen et al, , 1985bPratt & Hansen, 1987;Fristad, 1989;Perosa & Perosa, 1990), this study found consistently that the observational instrument CRS operationalizes the Circumplex assumption of a curvilinear relationship between family functioning and cohesiodadaptability. Figure 2 and Figure 3 clearly show that the problem families were equally rated into the lower and upper extremes.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Problem Families and the Circumplex Model: Observational Assessment Using the Clinical Rating Scale (Crs)

Thomas

Olson

1993

J Marital Family Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The validity, reliability, and curvilinearity of the Clinical Rating Scale (CRS) from the Circumplex Model were evaluated and the ability of the scale to discriminate between proble/clinical families and nonclinical families was tested on family cohesion, family adaptability, and family communication. Two groups of problem families were compared with two control groups. The study tested the main curvilinear hypothesis of the Circumplex Model that nonclinical families will have more Balanced system types than problem/clinical families. Conversely, problem/clinical families will have more Extreme system types than nonclinical families. Using the CRS, this hypothesis was strongly supported. Family satisfaction was used as a measure to investigate group differences further. As hypothesized, the two control groups had high levels of satisfaction, and the two problem family groups had significantly lower levels of family satisfaction. Overall, the CRS discriminated well between problem families who had more Extreme types on cohesion and adaptability and lower on communication and satisfaction than control families. Investigating different family structures (single‐parent, blended, and traditional two‐parent families) confirmed these findings. The study provided strong support for the curvilinear hypothesis that problem families are more frequently Extreme on both ends of the family cohesion and adaptability dimensions. It also revealed that the CRS has excellent validity and reliability.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Problem Families and the Circumplex Model: Observational Assessment Using the Clinical Rating Scale (Crs)

Thomas

Olson

1993

J Marital Family Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It seems apparent that, in almost all cases, the linear cohesion and adaptability variables consistently predicted the significant portion of the variance in functioning variables for both husbands and wives. 19 6.56 * * significant at the .05 level; ** significant at the .01 level; *** significant at the .001 level y cliented-rated z therapist-rated 2.89 * significant at the .05 level; ** significant at the .01 level; *** significant at the .001 level y cliented-rated z therapist-rated Hypothesis Two: Married individuals in treatment will have extreme scores on one or both of the cohesion and adaptability dimensions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While all of the data results were not made available, a number of significant correlations was reported in support of a linear interpretation of adaptability as suggested by the Beavers model. In addition, the Green et al (19) rejoinder reports additional significant correlations between their self-report version of the BTFES and two additional measures, the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (42) and the Bienvenu Parent Adolescent Communication Inventory (9). Correlations between transformed FACES scores (to a linear distribution) and these two functioning measures were not significant, prompting the authors to support the Beavers linear model and to suggest psychometric problems with the original version of FACES that was used in their study.…”

Section: Qualifications and Refutations Of The Curvilinear Interpretamentioning

confidence: 99%

A Test of the Olson Circumplex Model: Examining Its Curvilinear Assumption and the Presence of Extreme Types

Anderson

Gavazzi

1990

Family Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The debate over the usefulness of different family models continues. Recent attention has been paid to comparisons between the Olson Circumplex Model and the Beavers Systems Model. The present study seeks to contribute evidence that bears directly upon one of the most fundamental points of controversy surrounding the Olson model--the linear versus curvilinear nature of the cohesion and adaptability dimensions. A further contribution is an examination of the actual occurrence of the Circumplex Model's extreme types in a clinical population.

show abstract

“…The central feature of the hypothesis is that healthy family functioning is associated with "balanced" scores on the "cohesion" and "adaptability" dimensions and dysfunctional family patterns are associated with either high or low scores on the dimensions. Previous research regarding the convergent validity of the FACES I and I1 with other measures of family functioning has not supported Olson's "curvilinear hypothesis" (Miller, Bishop, Epstein & Keitner, 1985;Green, Kolevzon & Vosler, 1985a;Green, Kolevzon & Vosler, 1985b;Beavers, Hampson & Hulgus, 1985). The results of these independent research efforts have consistently indicated that the FACES I and I1 have a linear relationship with healthy family functioning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

A Test of the Curvilinear Hypothesis With Faces Ii and Iii

Pratt

Hansen

1987

J Marital Family Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has not supported the validity of Olson's “curvilinear hypothesis.” Convergent validity studies of the FACES I and II have indicated that the “cohesion” and “adaptability” dimensions have a linear relation with healthy family functioning. It is not clear, however, whether these findings are due to the measurement of the FACES' constructs or to the curvilinear theory. This study tested the “curvilinear hypothesis” in terms of these theoretical and measurement issues. The results indicate that FACES II and III do not adequately operation‐alize the “curvilinear hyothesis.” However, an item consistent with the “curvilinear hypothesis” utilizing a bipolar item response format did adequately opera‐tionalize the theory. The use of a bipolar item response format is suggested in the measurement of “cohesion” and “adaptability.”

show abstract

Rejoinder: Extending the Dialogue and the Original Study

Cited by 11 publications

References 1 publication

Problem Families and the Circumplex Model: Observational Assessment Using the Clinical Rating Scale (Crs)

Problem Families and the Circumplex Model: Observational Assessment Using the Clinical Rating Scale (Crs)

A Test of the Olson Circumplex Model: Examining Its Curvilinear Assumption and the Presence of Extreme Types

A Test of the Curvilinear Hypothesis With Faces Ii and Iii

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About