A beginner's guide to the problem-oriented first family interview

The large volume and diversity of family therapy resources can often confuse trainees who are in need of more abbreviated guidelines for managing their clinical responsibilities. This paper presents a structured outline of a problem-oriented first family interview for the family therapy supervisor and the beginning family therapist. We view the first interview as an integrated process including the important tasks preceding and following the initial family meeting. After the goals that shape the work of the first interview are described, a step-by-step guide to the twelve phases of the interview is presented: telephoning; forming hypotheses; the greeting; the social phase; identifying the problem; observing family patterns; defining goals; contracting; checklist; revising hypotheses; contacting the referral person; and gathering records. This approach to the first interview integrates a variety of structural and strategic procedures. The guide, intended for use in conjunction with close supervision, may serve as a foundation on which beginning therapists can build their unique styles.     

A systemic view of family therapy ethics

A critical review of the literature on family therapy ethics is used to develop the proposition that a more systemic analysis is needed, one that includes the levels of therapist and society as well as patient (family). These ideas are discussed through reexamining the issues of family secrets, therapist deceptiveness, and therapist advocacy of personal (feminist) values.     

The Relative Effectiveness of Three Compliance Techniques in Eliciting Donations to a Cultural Organization

To compare the relative effectiveness of three compliance techniques during a museum fund-raising drive, 89 individuals were asked to contribute $1 to the museum after having been exposed to an initial request according to one of the following conditions: (1) in the foot-in-thedoor condition, individuals were first asked to sign a petition in support of the museum; (2) in the door-in-the-face condition, they were initially asked for a $5 contribution; (3) in the. low-ball condition, they were asked to contribute 75 cents and then to increase this amount by 25 cents in order to support the children's program: and (4) in the control condition, subjects simply received the target request for $1. The groups differed significantly in terms of the number of individuals who donated, and in the amount of their contributions. The low-ball condition was generally the most effective, especially with respect to the amount of money contributed. This was followed in turn by the door-in-the-face and control conditions, with the foot-in-the-door condition the least effective in virtually every comparison. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for the experimental analysis of compliance, as well as the development of more effective fund-raising programs.     

THE RELATIVE MOTIVATIONAL PROPERTIES OF SENSORY AND EDIBLE REINFORCERS IN TEACHING AUTISTIC CHILDREN

We compared the effects of sensory and edible reinforcers on resistance to satiation in three autistic children while learning visual discrimination tasks. Within-subject designs were used to compare a single sensory reinforcer with a single edible reinforcer and to compare multiple sensory reinforcers with multiple edibles. Results indicated that multiple sensory reinforcers maintained responding over more trials than did multiple edible reinforcers; however, the use of single sensory reinforcers and single edibles resulted in about equal numbers of trials to satiation. Both multiple and single sensory reinforcers produced higher percentages of correct responses than edible reinforcers. The findings are discussed in terms of the advantages of sensory reinforcers in teaching autistic children.     

ASSESSMENT OF STIMULUS PREFERENCE AND REINFORCER VALUE WITH PROFOUNDLY RETARDED INDIVIDUALS

We evaluated a procedure for identifying potential reinforcers with profoundly retarded individuals. In Experiment 1, six persons were repeatedly exposed to 16 stimuli, and approach behaviors to each stimulus were used to identify preferred and nonpreferred stimuli. In Experiment 2, we examined the reinforcing properties of preferred and nonpreferred stimuli by delivering them contingently on the occurrence of arbitrarily selected responses. Results revealed that the preferred stimulus conditions typically produced higher rates of responding than did either the baseline or the nonpreferred stimulus conditions, suggesting that the procedure can be used to assess reinforcer value for individuals with limited behavioral repertoires.