Sandplay therapy with couples within the framework of analytical psychology

Sandplay therapy with couples is discussed within an analytical framework. Guidelines are proposed as a means of developing this relatively new area within sandplay therapy, and as a platform to open a wider discussion to bring together sandplay therapy and couple therapy. Examples of sand trays created during couple therapy are also presented to illustrate the transformations during the therapeutic process.     

Couple and Family Treatments: Study Quality and Level of Evidence

This paper examines the application of the guidelines for evidence‐based treatments in family therapy developed by Sexton and collaborators to a set of treatment models. These guidelines classify the models using criteria that take into account the distinctive features of couple and family treatments. A two‐step approach was taken: (1) The quality of each of the studies supporting the treatment models was assessed according to a list of ad hoc core criteria; (2) the level of evidence of each treatment model was determined using the guidelines. To reflect the stages of empirical validation present in the literature, nine models were selected: three models each with high, moderate, and low levels of empirical validation, determined by the number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The quality ratings highlighted the strengths and limitations of each of the studies that provided evidence backing the treatment models. The classification by level of evidence indicated that four of the models were level III, “evidence‐based” treatments; one was a level II, “evidence‐informed treatment with promising preliminary evidence‐based results”; and four were level I, “evidence‐informed” treatments. Using the guidelines helped identify treatments that are solid in terms of not only the number of RCTs but also the quality of the evidence supporting the efficacy of a given treatment. From a research perspective, this analysis highlighted areas to be addressed before some models can move up to a higher level of evidence. From a clinical perspective, the guidelines can help identify the models whose studies have produced clinically relevant results.     

Transmission of Cultural Values among Mexican‐Origin Parents and Their Adolescent and Emerging Adult Offspring

The integration of the U.S. and Mexican culture is an important process associated with Mexican‐origin youths' adjustment and family dynamics. The current study examined the reciprocal associations in parents' and two offspring's cultural values (i.e., familism and respect) in 246 Mexican‐origin families. Overall, mothers' values were associated with increases in youths' values 5 years later. In contrast, youths' familism values were associated with increases in fathers' familism values 5 years later. In addition, developmental differences emerged where parent‐to‐offspring effects were more consistent for youth transitioning from early to late adolescence than for youth transitioning from middle adolescence to emerging adulthood. Finally, moderation by immigrant status revealed a youth‐to‐parent effect for mother–youth immigrant dyads, but not for dyads where youth were U.S.‐raised. Our findings highlight the reciprocal nature of parent–youth value socialization and provide a nuanced understanding of these processes through the consideration of familism and respect values. As Mexican‐origin youth represent a large and rapidly growing segment of the U.S. population, research that advances our understanding of how these youth develop values that foster family cohesion and support is crucial.     

What Can We Learn from the Study of Mexican‐Origin Families in the United States?

Mexican‐origin families are a large and rapidly increasing subgroup of the U.S. population, but they remain underrepresented in family scholarship. This paper introduces a special section of four papers on Mexican‐origin families designed to contribute to the advancement of research on how cultural, family, and gender socialization processes unfold across key developmental periods and life transitions in this cultural context. Two longitudinal studies of Mexican‐origin families provided the data for these four papers: (a) The Juntos Project, an 8‐year longitudinal study of mothers, fathers, and adolescent sibling pairs in 246 Mexican‐origin families; and (b) The Supporting MAMI Project, a study following 204 adolescent mothers and their mother figures from the third trimester of pregnancy through their young children's 5th birthdays. In this introductory paper, we highlight four themes, including (a) differential acculturation and reciprocal socialization, (b) interdependence in families, (c) the intersection of culture and gender, and (d) methodological issues. We end with suggestions for future research.     

Associations between Positive Parenting Practices and Child Externalizing Behavior in Underserved Latino Immigrant Families

This study examined whether five specific parenting practices (i.e., monitoring, discipline, skill encouragement, problem solving, and positive involvement) were associated with reduced child externalizing behaviors among a sample of Latino immigrant families. It utilized baseline data from 83 Latino couples with children participating in a larger randomized controlled trial of a culturally adapted parenting intervention. Results reveal that monitoring, discipline, skill encouragement, and problem solving each made independent contributions to the prediction of child externalizing behavior, although not all in the expected direction. Further analyses examining mothers and fathers separately suggest that mother‐reported monitoring and father‐reported discipline practices uniquely contributed to these findings. These results may have important implications for prevention and clinical intervention efforts with Latino immigrant families, including the cultural adaptation and implementation of parenting interventions with this underserved population.     

More than One Way to Get There: Pathways of Change in Coparenting Conflict after a Preventive Intervention

This study explored pathways of change in the levels of conflict couples experienced after Supporting Father Involvement, an evidence‐based, prevention‐oriented couples and parenting intervention that included a diverse low‐income and working class group of participants. Pathways of change were examined for couples with baseline conflict scores that were initially low, medium, and high. The growth mixture model analysis found that the best‐fitting model for change in couples' conflict was represented by three distinctly different change patterns. The intervention was most successful for High‐Conflict couples. This finding contributes to a growing literature examining variations in how relationships change over time and the process of change, especially for couples in distress. This study supports further investigation into the impact and costs associated with universal interventions versus those that target specific groups of higher risk families.     

Delimiting Family in Syntheses of Research on Childhood Chronic Conditions and Family Life

Synthesis of family research presents unique challenges to investigators who must delimit what will be included as a family study in the proposed review. In this paper, the authors discuss the conceptual and pragmatic challenges of conducting systematic reviews of the literature on the intersection between family life and childhood chronic conditions. A proposed framework for delimiting the family domain of interest is presented. The framework addresses both topical salience and level of relevance and provides direction to future researchers, with the goal of supporting the overall quality of family research synthesis efforts. For users of synthesis studies, knowledge of how investigators conceptualize the boundaries of family research is important contextual information for understanding the limits and applicability of the results.     

Reflections on the Jungian nature of psychology as the discipline of interiority: a response to Saban's ‘Misunderstandings’

Psychology as the discipline of interiority is the name of the psychology that has developed from Wolfgang Giegerich's work in the field of analytical psychology. This article offers a counterview to that of Mark Saban's claim that Giegerich's psychology is ‘irrelevant’ to Jungians today and is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of Jungian psychology. It will be shown that, in fact, it is a fundamental misunderstanding of Giegerich's work that has led Saban to form erroneous conclusions. Links between Jung's and Giegerich's conceptions of the ‘objective psyche’ will be highlighted, along with other examples of how, contrary to Saban's conclusions, psychology as the discipline of interiority has obvious connections to, and grounding in, Jungian psychology.     

Two in one or one in two? Pushing off from Jung with Wolfgang Giegerich

This paper responds to a recent paper by Wolfgang Giegerich entitled ‘Two Jungs: apropos a paper by Mark Saban’. Giegerich disputes my assertion that the ‘rigorous notion’ at the heart of his psychology ‘finds no source in Jung's psychology, implicit or explicit’. In order to do this he posits the existence of two Jungs, an exoteric Jung and an esoteric Jung. The implications of Giegerich's binary scission of Jung are explored in this paper, and show that the tendency to exalt one Jung while disparaging the other betrays a comprehensive blindness toward the contradictory complexity of Jung's psychology as a whole. It is suggested that this blindness is the consequence of Giegerich's systematic prioritization of a neo‐Hegelian agenda that is in profound conflict with the telos of Jung's psychology.