"Factor analyses of the family assessment device," by Ridenour, Daley, & Reich

Ridenour, Daley, and Reich conducted a series of factor analyses using the correlational matrix of the subscale scores of the Family Assessment Device (FAD), published in Family Process, December, 1999. They conclude that "the FAD subscales be reorganized from their current seven-subscale format" (p. 507). We propose that this suggestion for reorganization is premature and based on the inappropriate application of an "internal consistency" model of scale construction to the FAD. We further suggest that the most important criteria regarding an assessment instrument are those of reliability, validity, and clinical utility. In the absence of this kind of data regarding alternative organizations of the FAD, we believe that the original subscales remain the best choice.     

Cognitive predictors of symptom return following depression treatment

This study tested whether poor cognitive change during depression treatment predicted time to return of depressive symptoms. Depressed participants (N = 121) completed assessments of dysfunctional attitudes and extreme thinking (i.e., number of totally agree and totally disagree responses) during hospitalization and again after 6 months of outpatient treatment. Participants then completed monthly depression assessments for 1 year. Survival analyses for time to symptom recurrence during follow-up were conducted among participants who reported 50% improvement in their depressive symptoms and were at least partially asymptomatic at the end of treatment (n = 53). Poor change in dysfunctional attitudes and poor change in extreme thinking both predicted shorter time to return of depressive symptoms.     

Why Fix What Isn't Broken? A Rejoinder to Ridenour,Daley, & Reich*

Ridenour, Daley, & Reich (2000) suggest that the Family Assessment Device should be reorganized. We disagree and provide further reasons why such a reorganization is unwise.     

Increases in manic symptoms after life events involving goal attainment

Bipolar disorder has been conceptualized as an outcome of dysregulation in the behavioral activation system (BAS), a brain system that regulates goal-directed activity. On the basis of the BAS model, the authors hypothesized that life events involving goal attainment would promote manic symptoms in bipolar individuals. The authors followed 43 bipolar I individuals monthly with standardized symptom severity assessments (the Modified Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and the Bech-Rafaelsen Mania Rating Scale). Life events were assessed using the Goal Attainment and Positivity scales of the Life Events and Difficulties Schedule. As hypothesized, manic symptoms increased in the 2 months following goal-attainment events, but depressed symptoms were not changed following goal-attainment events. These results are congruent with a series of recent polarity-specific findings.     

The McMaster Approach to Families: theory, assessment, treatment and research

The McMaster Approach to Families is a comprehensive model of family assessment and treatment. This paper provides an overview of the McMaster Approach and consists of five major sections. First, the under-lying theoretical model (McMaster Model of Family Functioning) is described. Second, the three assessment instruments of the approach (Family Assessment Device, McMaster Clinical Rating Scale, McMaster Structured Interview of Family Functioning) and their psychometric properties are summarized. Third, the family treatment model (Problem Centered Systems Therapy of the Family) is presented. Fourth, the research conducted using the McMaster Approach is reviewed. Finally, the clinical uses and advantages of the McMaster Approach are discussed.     

Depressed patients with dysfunctional families: description and course of illness.

Sixty-eight depressed patients were subdivided according to their family's level of family functioning into functional and dysfunctional groups. Patients from dysfunctional families did not differ from those from functional families on measures of severity of depression, chronicity of depression, depression subtypes, other nonaffective psychiatric diagnoses, history of depression, or neuroendocrine functioning. Patients from dysfunctional families did have significantly higher levels of neuroticism. A 12-month follow-up of these patients indicated that depressed patients with dysfunctional families had a significantly poorer course of illness, as manifested by higher levels of depression, lower levels of overall adjustment, and a lower proportion of recovered patients. Thus, impaired family functioning appears to be an important prognostic factor in major depression.     

A cross-cultural study of family functioning

The Family Assessment Device (FAD) was used to compare patterns of family functioning in two cultural settings, North America and Hungary. The sample size consisted of 95 nonclinical North American families and 58 nonclinical Hungarian families. No cross-cultural differences were found in the families' general functioning nor in their affective involvement or affective responsiveness as measured by the FAD. Hungarian families, however, perceived their functioning as significantly better than the North American families in problem-solving and in communication. North American families rated themselves significantly better than the Hungarians in setting family rules and boundaries and in meeting their family responsibilities. Results from this study suggest that cultural values can affect a family's functioning and that differences in areas of family functioning can be captured using the FAD. A discussion of broad societal values of the two cultures was used to interpret the contrasting patterns of family functioning.Cross-cultural studies serve many purposes. In general they provide knowledge about the different cultures under investigation. As such, they broaden and enrich our perspectives of ourselves and the world around us. More specifically they highlight similarities and differences across cultures, information that can be helpful in further refining our understanding of the impact of diverse and varying socio-political forces.A topic of particular interest to family therapists and researchers is family functioning in different cultural settings. In spite of continuing research in this area, few studies examine cross-cultural patterns of family interactions and even fewer do so with instruments specifically designed to assess family functioning.From a family perspective, particularly looking at pathology in family functioning, cross-cultural comparisons can be used to highlight areas of dysfunction common to families irrespective of the cultural context. From a cross-cultural perspective, family comparisons can be used to point out the cultural effects and emphases given to different dimensions of functioning within a common system (i.e., the family unit).Both conceptual and methodological problems have contributed to shortcomings in previous cross-cultural studies (Fabrega, 1974; Kleinman, 1987; Flaherty et al., 1988; Rogler, 1989). A basic criticism of such studies has been the assumption that meanings and values in one culture are equivalent to those in another.Another issue, which is particularly pertinent to our study, is the use of an instrument which is developed in one culture and administered in another cultural setting. A potential problem this raises is inferring cultural differences between groups when the translated and the original instruments are not actually comparable in meaning. In fact, one objective of the study was to see whether our own self-report measure of family functioning, the Family Assessment Device (FAD, Epstein et al., 1978, 1983), could be successfully used in another cultural setting.The following report is part of a larger research project, conducted in 1986–87, that compared depressed and nonclinical families across two cultures. The findings presented here are comparisons between nonclinical Hungarian and nonclinical North American families. In our earlier study differences in family interactions between clinically depressed and nonclinical families were evident in both cultural settings (Keitner et al., in press). It was not clear, however, if significant cross-cultural differences in family functioning would be found for the normal group of families and, if so, how these would differ from their ill counterparts. Inclusion of the normal families thus served two purposes, as controls in the larger study to test within cultural differences and as comparison groups in a separate analysis to test between cultural differences.A specific objective of this study was to contrast patterns of perceived family functioning in nonclinical Hungarian families and North American families. Another objective was to determine if the Family Assessment Device (FAD), a self-report measure of family functioning, could be successfully used in different cultural contexts. Hungary was chosen as an appropriate country of study for several reasons. It is at the crossroads of East and West, sharing enough similarities with western culture to validate comparisons, yet different enough in both its cultural and sociopolitical system that some differences could be expected to emerge. Because it is likely that the Hungarian social system is less familiar to readers than that of North American, the results are discussed with particular reference to Hungary.We would like to thank Drs. J. Furedi and T. Kurimay for help in translating the Family Assessment Device and Professors J. Szilard and Muszong-Kovacs for their support of this study. This work was supported in part by the Firan Foundation.