Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53705, USA.
J Fam Psychol. 2010 Dec;24(6):775-8. doi: 10.1037/a0021275.
Observational methods benefit the study of family process, but many expert rating systems are costly and time-consuming. This study examined the utility of using small groups of eight to ten nonexperts to rate family conflict and maternal sensitivity. Videotaped triadic interactions of 39 families were drawn from Lindahl (1998), and 22 mother-toddler free-play interactions were drawn from Baker, Messinger, Lyons, and Grantz (2010). Sixty undergraduates rated interactions from these samples in real time using computer-assisted technology. Nonexpert ratings of family conflict were reliable, demonstrated high concordance with expert ratings, and replicated a key finding from Lindahl (1998). Nonexpert ratings of maternal sensitivity replicated a relevant finding from Baker, Messinger et al. (2010). Concordance was lower for maternal sensitivity, however, because of the tendency of nonexperts to overattend to sensitive structuring compared with emotional supportiveness. A second study indicated that as few as six nonexperts could effectively rate maternal sensitive structuring, but that nonexperts were unable to accurately rate emotional supportiveness. Implications for research methods and for our understanding of these important family constructs are discussed.
观察法有益于家庭过程的研究,但许多专家评分系统既昂贵又耗时。本研究检验了使用八到十名非专家小组成员来评估家庭冲突和母亲敏感性的效用。从 Lindahl(1998)中抽取了 39 个家庭的三人互动录像,从 Baker、Messinger、Lyons 和 Grantz(2010)中抽取了 22 个母婴自由玩耍互动。60 名本科生使用计算机辅助技术实时对这些样本的互动进行评分。非专家对家庭冲突的评分是可靠的,与专家评分高度一致,并复制了 Lindahl(1998)的一个关键发现。非专家对母亲敏感性的评分复制了 Baker、Messinger 等人(2010)的一个相关发现。然而,由于非专家倾向于过度关注敏感的结构化而不是情感支持,因此母亲敏感性的一致性较低。第二项研究表明,即使只有六名非专家也可以有效地评估母亲的敏感结构,但非专家无法准确评估情感支持。讨论了这些对研究方法和我们对这些重要家庭结构的理解的影响。