Everri Marina, Mancini Tiziana, Fruggeri Laura
Department of Social Psychology, London School of Economics, Houghton Street, WC2A 2AE London, UK.
LASS Department, University of Parma, Borgo Carissimi, 10, 43121 Parma, Italy.
J Child Fam Stud. 2016;25(10):2987-2997. doi: 10.1007/s10826-016-0460-3. Epub 2016 Jun 3.
Previous studies using Olson's Circumplex Model and FACES IV, the self-report assessing family functioning, did not clarify the role of rigidity, a dimension of this model. Rigidity emerged as ambiguous: it was considered either as a functional or as a dysfunctional dimension. Building upon the results of previous studies, we provided a contribution intended to disambiguate the role of rigidity considering adolescents' perceptions and using a non-a priori classification analysis. 320 Italian adolescents (13-21 years) participated in this study and responded to a questionnaire containing scales of the study variables. A latent class analysis was performed to identify the association of rigidity with the other dimensions of Olson's model and with indicators of adaptive family functioning in adolescence: parental monitoring and family satisfaction. We found six clusters corresponding to family typologies and having different levels of functioning. Rigidity emerged as adaptive in the typologies named rigidly balanced and flexibly oscillating; it was associated with positive dimensions of family functioning, i.e. flexibility, cohesion, parental monitoring, and high levels of family satisfaction. Differently, when rigidity was associated with disengagement, low cohesion and flexibility, and lack of parental supervision, emerged as maladaptive. This was the case of two typologies: the rigidly disengaged and the chaotically disengaged. Adolescents of these families reported the lowest levels of satisfaction. In the two last typologies, the flexibly chaotic and the cohesively disorganized, rigidity indicated a mid-range functionality as these families were characterized by emotional connectedness but lack of containment. Clinical implications are discussed.
以往使用奥尔森环状模型和FACES IV(一种评估家庭功能的自评工具)的研究,并未阐明该模型维度之一——僵化性的作用。僵化性的表现较为模糊:它既被视为一个功能性维度,又被视为一个功能失调性维度。基于以往研究结果,我们通过考虑青少年的认知并运用非先验分类分析,对僵化性的作用进行了明确。320名意大利青少年(年龄在13至21岁之间)参与了本研究,并对包含研究变量量表的问卷做出了回应。我们进行了潜在类别分析,以确定僵化性与奥尔森模型的其他维度以及青少年适应性家庭功能指标(父母监控和家庭满意度)之间的关联。我们发现了六个与家庭类型相对应且功能水平各异的类别。在名为严格平衡型和灵活振荡型的家庭类型中,僵化性表现为适应性;它与家庭功能的积极维度相关,即灵活性、凝聚力、父母监控以及较高水平的家庭满意度。不同的是,当僵化性与疏离、低凝聚力和灵活性以及缺乏父母监管相关联时,则表现为适应不良。这在两种家庭类型中有所体现:严格疏离型和混乱疏离型。这些家庭的青少年报告的满意度最低。在最后两种家庭类型中,即灵活混乱型和凝聚失调型,僵化性表明具有中等程度的功能性,因为这些家庭的特点是情感联系但缺乏约束。我们还讨论了临床意义。