Skip to main content

Families as Systems: Some Thoughts on Methods and Theory

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Emerging Methods in Family Research

Part of the book series: National Symposium on Family Issues ((NSFI,volume 4))

Abstract

General systems theory concepts, such as reciprocal causality and nested systems, compel a re-conceptualization of how families work. However, the application of systems theory to families (i.e. family systems theory) is short on theoretical specifics in regard to the internal functions of families. While family systems theory identifies important family processes it often overlooks the content of what family members share. Comments are offered on Gauthier and Moody (Chap. 5) and Cummings, Bergman, and Kuznicki (Chap. 6) with an eye toward the value of theoretical development. My own conceptual writings are discussed as examples of the potential value in applying systems theory to the study of families. In particular, I discuss hypotheses about (1) the “deep” meaning of family conflicts (i.e. power struggles or love struggles) and (2) emotions that motivate important relationship behavior in families (e.g., attachment, fight or flight).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Achenbach, T. M. (1999). The child behavior checklist and related instruments. In M. E. Maruish (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment (2nd ed., pp. 429–466). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32, 513–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Volume 1: Attachment. London: Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psychoanalysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Volume 2: Separation, anxiety and anger. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: Volume 3: Loss: Sadness and depression. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, J. & Shaver, P. R. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherlin, A. J. (2009). The marriage go-round: The state of marriage and the family in America today. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eldridge, K. A., & Christensen, A. (2002). Demand-withdraw communication during couple conflict: A review and analysis. In P. Noller, & J. A. Feeney (Eds.), Understanding marriage: Developments in the study of couple interaction (pp. 289–322). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emery, R. E. (1992). Family conflict and its developmental implications: A conceptual analysis of deep meanings and systemic processes. In C. U. Shantz & W. W. Hartup (Eds.), Conflict in child and adolescent development (pp. 270–298). London: Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emery, R. E. (2004). The truth about children and divorce: Dealing with the emotions so you and your children can thrive. New York: Viking/Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emery, R. E. (2011). Renegotiating family relationships: Divorce, child custody, and mediation (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emery, R. E., & Sbarra, D. A. (2002). What couples’ therapists need to know about divorce. In A. S. Gurman, & N. S. Jacobson (Eds.), Clinical handbook of couple therapy (3rd ed., pp. 508–532). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forgatch, M. S., & Patterson, G. R. (1998). Behavioral family therapy. In F. M. Dattilio (Ed.), Case studies in couple and family therapy: Systemic and cognitive perspectives (pp. 85–107). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furstenberg, F. F., Peterson, J. L., Nord, C. W., & Zill, N. (1983).The life course of children of divorce: Marital disruption and parental contact. American Sociological Review, 48, 656–668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez, D. J. (1993). America’s children: Resources from family, government, and the economy. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laumann-Billings, L., & Emery, R. E. (2000). Distress among young adults from divorced families. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 671–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leary, T. (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality. New York: Ronald Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child, interaction. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (4th ed., Vol. 4, pp. 1–101). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, G., & Leary, M. R. (2005). Why does social exclusion hurt? The relationship between social and physical pain. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 202–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minuchin, P. (1985). Families and individual development: Provocations from the field of family therapy. Child Development, 56, 289–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, C. (2000). Elephant memories: Thirteen years in the life of an elephant family. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Omark, D. R. (1980). The group: A factor or an epiphenomenon in evolution? In D. R. Omark, F. F. Strayer, & D. G. Freedman (Eds.), Dominance relations: An ethological view of human conflict and social interaction (pp. 21–67). New York: Garland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panksepp, J. (1998). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panksepp, J. (2005). Why does separation distress hurt? Comment on MacDonald and Leary. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 224–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, G. R. (1982). Coercive family processes. Eugene: Castalia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peris, T., & Emery, R. E. (2005). Redefining the parent-child relationship following divorce: Examining the risk for boundary dissolution. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 5, 169–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peris, T. S., Goeke-Morey, M. C., Cummings, E. M., & Emery, R. E. (2008). Marital conflict and support-seeking by parents in adolescence: Empirical support for the parentification construct. Journal of Family Psychology, 22, 633–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Public Law 104–193, (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowen, J., & Emery, R. E. (2012). Parental denigration: An empirical study of high conflict behaviors across marital status and their impact on parent-child relationships in young adulthood. Unpublished manuscript, University of Virginia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sbarra, D. S., & Emery, R. E. (2005). Coparenting conflict, nonacceptance, and depression among divorced adults: Results from a 12-year follow-up study of child custody mediation using multiple imputation. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 75, 63–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sbarra, D. S., & Emery, R. E. (2008). Deeper into divorce: Using actor-partner analyses to explore systemic differences in coparenting following mediation and litigation of custody disputes. Journal of Family Psychology, 22, 144–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vuchinich, S., Emery, R. E., & Cassidy, J. (1988). Family members as third parties in dyadic family conflict: Strategies, alliances, and outcomes. Child Development, 59, 1293–1302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Joireman, J., Teta, P., & Kraft, M. (1993). A comparison of three structural models for personality: The big three, the big five, and the alternative five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 757–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert E. Emery PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Emery, R. (2014). Families as Systems: Some Thoughts on Methods and Theory. In: McHale, S., Amato, P., Booth, A. (eds) Emerging Methods in Family Research. National Symposium on Family Issues, vol 4. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01562-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics