Rohrbaugh Michael J
Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC; Psychology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.
Fam Process. 2014 Sep;53(3):434-44. doi: 10.1111/famp.12079. Epub 2014 Jun 6.
Social cybernetic (systemic) ideas from the early Family Process era, though emanating from qualitative clinical observation, have underappreciated heuristic potential for guiding quantitative empirical research on problem maintenance and change. The old conceptual wines we have attempted to repackage in new, science-friendly bottles include ironic processes (when "solutions" maintain problems), symptom-system fit (when problems stabilize relationships), and communal coping (when we-ness helps people change). Both self-report and observational quantitative methods have been useful in tracking these phenomena, and together the three constructs inform a team-based family consultation approach to working with difficult health and behavior problems. In addition, a large-scale, quantitatively focused effectiveness trial of family therapy for adolescent drug abuse highlights the importance of treatment fidelity and qualitative approaches to examining it. In this sense, echoing the history of family therapy research, our experience with juxtaposing quantitative and qualitative methods has gone full circle-from qualitative to quantitative observation and back again.
家庭治疗早期阶段的社会控制论（系统论）思想，尽管源自定性临床观察，但在指导关于问题维持与改变的定量实证研究方面，其启发式潜力一直未得到充分重视。我们试图装入新的、科学友好型瓶子里的旧概念包括反讽过程（当“解决方案”维持问题时）、症状-系统适配（当问题稳定关系时）以及共同应对（当“我们感”帮助人们改变时）。自我报告法和观察性定量方法在追踪这些现象方面都很有用，这三种结构共同为处理棘手的健康和行为问题提供了一种基于团队的家庭咨询方法。此外，一项针对青少年药物滥用的家庭治疗的大规模、以定量研究为主的疗效试验凸显了治疗保真度以及检查治疗保真度的定性方法的重要性。从这个意义上说，呼应家庭治疗研究的历史，我们将定量和定性方法并列使用的经验已经完整地兜了一圈——从定性观察到定量观察，再回到定性观察。
