Assessing individual family members' constructions of family problems.

Much contemporary family therapy theory and practice takes into account clients' cognitive constructions of their family problems. Recent calls for therapists to elicit and work with clients' causal explanations and narratives parallel accumulating evidence in the social-clinical literature about the predictive importance of attributions in family relationships. In this article, we introduce the Constructions of Problems Scale (CPS), provide preliminary evidence of its reliability and validity, and suggest ways in which it can be used clinically to reveal new areas for questioning and to generate new ideas. The CPS is a brief questionnaire that can be used to create a profile of each individual family member's private constructions. To complete the CPS, each family member writes a free-form narrative of the presenting problem and then rates his or her perceptions of the contributing causes. The CPS profiles can be used to compare the perspectives of different family members and to assess cognitive constructions at different points in treatment. We discuss its potential for these and other clinical uses.

Assessing clients' constructions of their problems in family therapy discourse.

To study family members' narrative descriptions of their difficulties, we developed an observational coding system, the Cognitive Construction Coding System (CCCS). In this system, 4 dimensions of clients' problem descriptions (intrapersonal-interpersonal) and causal explanations (internal-external, responsible-not responsible, linear-circular) are coded in the context of a Problem Elaboration Episode, a segment of psychotherapy discourse. In Studies 1 and 2 the reliability of the CCCS was assessed using transcripts from family therapy texts and interviews provided by 7 constructivist theorists. Across studies, mean interjudge agreements ranged from 56% to 98%; the mean reliability estimates were, however, more modest and variable (range .46 to .94). In Study 3, trained judges coded videotapes in which volunteers described personal problems that corresponded to specific CCCS codes. Results of this experiment showed that, on every dimension, the coding was more accurate than chance, all ps < 005. In Study 4, the CCCS successfully discriminated 6 of 8 family intake sessions in which the parents' descriptions of the presenting problem either did or did not shift from intrapersonal to interpersonal over the course of the interview. Directions for future research with the coding system are suggested, along with a discussion of its relevance for practice.

Transforming narratives: a change event in constructivist family therapy.

One important clinical task in family therapy involves transforming the client's construction of the presenting problem from an individual, intrapersonal view to an interpersonal, relational, or systemic one (Sluzki, 1992). To study the transformation process in initial sessions, we sampled 8 families in which the referring parent requested help for a child's problem. The 8 therapists, trained and experienced in Sluzki's (1992) narrative approach, attempted to facilitate a transformation in the parents' initial construction of the problem. In 4 sessions, the transformation was independently judged to be successful by the therapist and observers, while in 4 other sessions the transformation was judged to be unsuccessful. Videotapes of the 8 interviews were analyzed qualitatively, and the parents' verbatim descriptions of the problem were coded using the Cognitive Constructions Coding System (Friedlander, 1995). We compared the successful and the unsuccessful sessions and developed a conceptual model of the successful transformation process that included client performances as well as therapist operations (Greenberg, 1986). While many elements in the model were consistent with Sluzki's (1992) "blue-print" transformation, several new elements were added. Practical implications are described, along with limitations and recommendations for future research.

Children's attributions about family arguments: implications for family therapy.

Children's attributions about the causes of family arguments affect both their interpretations of the meaning of and their adjustment to such events. Children's attributions about family arguments are, therefore, of importance in family therapy, especially for therapists who work from a cognitive or constructivist perspective. In an exploratory study, we examined children's attributions about family arguments in two arenas: marital arguments and parent-child arguments. Ninety-two children, aged 5-12, listened to an audiotaped argument and answered a series of structured questions concerning different attributions about the causes of such arguments. Descriptive analyses of the most and least endorsed attributions provided an overall map of the "stories" children tell about the causes of family arguments, and showed that, in general, they are more likely to endorse multiple, interacting causes than internal, blaming attributions. Additionally, children of all ages made somewhat different attributions concerning mothers vs. fathers in marital arguments. Implications for family therapy and suggestions for future clinical research are discussed.