O znaczeniu modeli teoretycznych w badaniach rodziny

Bogusława Halina Lachowska

Opublikowane: 2019-04-25

Tom 3 (2013)

O znaczeniu modeli teoretycznych w badaniach rodziny

Bogusława Halina Lachowska

Abstrakt

The aim of the article is to show the positive significance of family theories in examining family relations and family functioning and to present the most significant models in the area. Discussing the benefits resulting from using theoretical models in family researches it has been noted that they allow to identify factors essential to understand family relations and family functioning, they provide the supposed causal relationships between variables, they also equip researchers with the common academic language and allow for comparing results of different researches. They are also the basis of working out reliable and accurate research tools which can be used in clinical jobs and counselling.
Family theories have been discussed as being grouped according to Skelton and cooperators (2012) into three main categories: family as a system, family stress and resilience and families in time and space.

Pobierz pliki

PDF

Zasady cytowania

Lachowska, B. H. (2019). O znaczeniu modeli teoretycznych w badaniach rodziny. Family Forum, 3, 11–23. Pobrano z https://czasopisma.uni.opole.pl/index.php/ff/article/view/884

Cited by / Share

Bibliografia

Beavers, R., Hampson, R.B. (2000). The Beavers Systems Model of Family Functioning. Journal of Family Therapy, 22, 128–143.
Bray, J.H. (1995). Family assessment. Current issues in evaluating families. Family Relations, 44, 469–477.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. Thousand Oaks, California.
Bronfenbrenner, U., Morris, P.A. (1998). The ecology of developmental processes. W: W. Damon, R.M. Lerner (red.). Handbook of child psychology. t. 1. Theoretical models of human development (993–1023). New York: Wiley.
Conger, R.D., Conger, K.J. (2002). Resilience in midwestern families: selected findings from the first decade of a prospective, longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64 (May): 361–373.
Conger, R.D. i Donnellan, M.B. (2007). An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human development. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 175–99.
Czabała, J.Cz. (1988). Rodzina a zaburzenia psychiczne. Kraków.
Floyd, F.J., Weinand, J.W., Cimmarusti, R.A. (1989). Clinical family assessment: applying structured measurement procedures in treatment settings. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 15, 271–288.
Goldenberg, H. Goldenberg, I. (2006). Terapia rodzin. Kraków.
Hill, R. (1949). Families under stress: adjustment to the crises of war separation and reunion. New York.
McCubbin, M.A., McCubbin, H.I. (1993). Families coping with illness: the Resiliency Model of Family Stress, Adjustment and Adaptation. W: C. Danielson, B. Hamel-Bissell, P. Winstead-Fry (red.). Families, health and illness: Perspectives on coping and intervention (s. 21–64). St. Louis, Missouri.
McCubbin, H.I., McCubbin, M.A. (2001). Resiliency in families: a conceptual model of family adjustment and adaptation in response to stress and crises. W: M.A. McCubbin, A.I. Thompson, H.I. McCubbin (red). Family measures: stress, coping and resilience – inventories for research and practice (1–62). Hawaii.
McCubbin, H.I., McCubbin, M.A., Thompson, A.I., Thompson, E.A. (1998). Resilience in ethnic families (s. 3–48). W: H.I. McCubbin, E.A. Thompson, A.I. Thompson, J.E. Fromer, (1998). Resiliency in native American and immigrant families. California.
McCubbin, H.I., Patterson, J.M. (1983). Family stress and adaptation to crises: a Double ABCX Model of family behavior (87–106). W: D.H. Olson, R.C. Miller, (red.). Family Studies Review Yearbook, t. 1. Beverly Hills, California.
Miller, I.W., Ryan, C.E., Keitner, G.I., Bishop, D.S., Epstein, N.B. (2000). The McMaster Approach to families: theory, assessment, treatment and research. Journal of Family Therapy, 22, 168–189.
Olson, D. (2011). FACES IV and the Circumplex Model: validation study. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, t. 37, nr 1, 64–80.
Olson, D.H., Sprenkle, D.H., Russell, C. (1979). Circumplex model of marital and family systems: cohesion and adaptability dimensions, family types, and clinical applications. Family Process, 18, 3–28.
Ostoja-Zawadzka, K. (1994). Cykl życia rodzinnego. W: B. de Barbaro (red.). Wprowadzenie do systemowego rozumienia rodziny (18–30). Kraków.
Patterson, J.M. (2002). Integrating Family Resilience and Family Stress Theory. Journal of Marriage and Family, May, t. 64 (2), 349–360.
Plopa, M. (2005). Psychologia rodziny: teoria i badania. Elbląg.
Skelton, J.A., Buehler, C., Irby, M.B., Grzywacz, J.G. (2012). Where are family theories in family-based obesity treatment?: conceptualizing the study of families in pediatric weight management. International Journal of Obesity, 36, 891–900.
Skinner, H., Steinhauer, P., Sitarenios, G. (2000). Family Assessment Measure (FAM) and Process Model of Family Functioning. Journal of Family Therapy, 22, 190–210.
Tudge, J.R.H., Mokrova, I., Hatfield, B.E., Karnik, R.B. (2009). Uses and misuses of Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Theory of Human development. Journal of Family Theory and Review. 1, December, 198–210.
Van Breda, A.D. (2001). Resilience theory: A literature review. Pretoria, South Africa. http://www.vanbreda.org/adrain/resilience.htm (17.06.2013).
Walsh, F. (2012). Family resilience. Strengths forged through adversity. W: F. Walsh (red.). Normal family processes (wyd. 4) (399–427). New York. Google Scholar