APA Handbook of Contemporary Family Psychology

Volume 1 Foundations Methods and Contemporary

Issues Across The Lifespan 2nd Edition Barbara
H. Fiese pdf download

https://ebookgate.com/product/apa-handbook-of-contemporary-family-psychology-volume-1-foundations-
methods-and-contemporary-issues-across-the-lifespan-2nd-edition-barbara-h-fiese/

★★★★★ 4.9/5.0 (43 reviews) ✓ 207 downloads ■ TOP RATED

"Perfect download, no issues at all. Highly recommend!" - Mike D.

DOWNLOAD EBOOK
 APA Handbook of Contemporary Family Psychology Volume 1
Foundations Methods and Contemporary Issues Across The
Lifespan 2nd Edition Barbara H. Fiese pdf download

TEXTBOOK EBOOK EBOOK GATE

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide TextBook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

Child Psychology A Handbook of Contemporary Issues 2nd

Edition Lawrence Balter

https://ebookgate.com/product/child-psychology-a-handbook-of-
contemporary-issues-2nd-edition-lawrence-balter/

ebookgate.com

Child psychology a handbook of contemporary issues 2nd ed

Edition Lawrence Balter

https://ebookgate.com/product/child-psychology-a-handbook-of-
contemporary-issues-2nd-ed-edition-lawrence-balter/

ebookgate.com

APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology Volume 3

Interpersonal Relations 1st Edition Mario Mikulincer

https://ebookgate.com/product/apa-handbook-of-personality-and-social-
psychology-volume-3-interpersonal-relations-1st-edition-mario-
mikulincer/
ebookgate.com

Contemporary Occupational Health Psychology Global

Perspectives on Research and Practice Volume 1 1st Edition
Jonathan Houdmont
https://ebookgate.com/product/contemporary-occupational-health-
psychology-global-perspectives-on-research-and-practice-volume-1-1st-
edition-jonathan-houdmont/
ebookgate.com
Understanding Autistic Relationships Across the Lifespan
Family Friends Lovers and Others 1st Edition Felicity
Sedgewick
https://ebookgate.com/product/understanding-autistic-relationships-
across-the-lifespan-family-friends-lovers-and-others-1st-edition-
felicity-sedgewick/
ebookgate.com

Contemporary Spiritualities Social and Religious Contexts

Issues in Contemporary Religion Clive Erricker

https://ebookgate.com/product/contemporary-spiritualities-social-and-
religious-contexts-issues-in-contemporary-religion-clive-erricker/

ebookgate.com

Asian Americans Contemporary Trends and Issues 2nd Edition

Pyong Gap Min

https://ebookgate.com/product/asian-americans-contemporary-trends-and-
issues-2nd-edition-pyong-gap-min/

ebookgate.com

Psychology of women a handbook of issues and theories 2nd

Edition Florence Denmark

https://ebookgate.com/product/psychology-of-women-a-handbook-of-
issues-and-theories-2nd-edition-florence-denmark/

ebookgate.com

Psychopathology Foundations for a Contemporary

Understanding 2nd edition James E. Maddux

https://ebookgate.com/product/psychopathology-foundations-for-a-
contemporary-understanding-2nd-edition-james-e-maddux/

ebookgate.com
 APA Handbook of

Contemporary
Family Psychology

APA Handbook of Contemporary Family Psychology: Foundations, Methods, and

Contemporary Issues Across the Lifespan, edited by B. H. Fiese, M. Celano, K.
Deater-Deckard, E. N. Jouriles, and M. A. Whisman
Copyright © 2019 American Psychological Association. All rights reserved.
 APA Handbooks in Psychology® Series

APA Addiction Syndrome Handbook—two volumes

Howard J. Shaffer, Editor-in-Chief
APA Educational Psychology Handbook—three volumes
Karen R. Harris, Steve Graham, and Tim Urdan, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Behavior Analysis—two volumes
Gregory J. Madden, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Career Intervention—two volumes
Paul J. Hartung, Mark L. Savickas, and W. Bruce Walsh, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Clinical Geropsychology—two volumes
Peter A. Lichtenberg and Benjamin T. Mast, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Clinical Psychology—five volumes
John C. Norcross, Gary R. VandenBos, and Donald K. Freedheim, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Community Psychology—two volumes
Meg A. Bond, Irma Serrano-García, and Christopher B. Keys, Editors-in Chief
APA Handbook of Comparative Psychology—two volumes
Josep Call, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Contemporary Family Psychology—three volumes
Barbara H. Fiese, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Counseling Psychology—two volumes
Nadya A. Fouad, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Dementia—one volume
Glenn E. Smith, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Ethics in Psychology—two volumes
Samuel J. Knapp, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Forensic Neuropsychology—one volume
Shane S. Bush, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Forensic Psychology—two volumes
Brian L. Cutler and Patricia A. Zapf, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Giftedness and Talent—one volume
Steven I. Pfeiffer, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Human Systems Integration—one volume
Deborah A. Boehm-Davis, Francis T. Durso, and John D. Lee, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology—three volumes
Sheldon Zedeck, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Men and Masculinities—one volume
Y. Joel Wong and Stephen R. Wester, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Multicultural Psychology—two volumes
Frederick T. L. Leong, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Nonverbal Communication—one volume
David Matsumoto, Hyisung Hwang, and Mark Frank, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology—four volumes
Mario Mikulincer and Phillip R. Shaver, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Psychology and Juvenile Justice—one volume
Kirk Heilbrun, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality—two volumes
Kenneth I. Pargament, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of the Psychology of Women—two volumes
Cheryl B. Travis and Jacquelyn W. White, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Psychopathology—two volumes
James N. Butcher, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology—three volumes
Harris Cooper, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology—two volumes
Deborah L. Tolman and Lisa M. Diamond, Editors-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Testing and Assessment in Psychology—three volumes
Kurt F. Geisinger, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbook of Trauma Psychology—two volumes
Steven N. Gold, Editor-in-Chief
APA Handbooks in Psychology

APA Handbook of

Contemporary
Family Psychology
volume 1
Foundations, Methods, and Contemporary
Issues Across the Lifespan

Barbara H. Fiese, Editor-in-Chief

Marianne Celano, Kirby Deater-Deckard, Ernest N. Jouriles,
and Mark A. Whisman, Associate Editors
Copyright © 2019 by the American Psychological Association. All rights reserved. Except as permitted
under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed
in any form or by any means, including, but not limited to, the process of scanning and digitization, or
stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

The opinions and statements published are the responsibility of the authors, and such opinions and
statements do not necessarily represent the policies of the American Psychological Association.

Published by APA Order Department

American Psychological Association P.O. Box 92984
750 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20090-2984
Washington, DC 20002 Phone: (800) 374-2721; Direct: (202) 336-5510
www.apa.org Fax: (202) 336-5502; TDD/TTY: (202) 336-6123
Online: http://www.apa.org/pubs/books
E-mail: order@apa.org

In the U.K., Europe, Africa, and the Middle East, copies may be ordered from
Eurospan Group
c/o Turpin Distribution
Pegasus Drive
Stratton Business Park
Biggleswade, Bedfordshire
SG18 8TQ United Kingdom
Phone: +44 (0) 1767 604972
Fax: +44 (0) 1767 601640
Online: https://www.eurospanbookstore.com/apa
E-mail: eurospan@turpin-distribution.com

American Psychological Association Staff

Jasper Simons, Chief Publishing Officer
Brenda Carter, Publisher, APA Books
Kristen Knight, Senior Reference Editor, APA Books

Typeset in Berkeley by Circle Graphics, Inc., Reisterstown, MD

Printer: Sheridan Books, Chelsea, MI

Cover Designer: Naylor Design, Washington, DC

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Fiese, Barbara H., editor.
Title: APA handbook of contemporary family psychology / editor-in-chief, Barbara H. Fiese.
Description: Washington, DC : American Psychological Association, [2019] |
   Series: APA handbooks in psychology series | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018018532 (print) | LCCN 2018018621 (ebook) | ISBN
   9781433829666 (Vol 1 eBook) | ISBN 1433829665 (Vol 1 eBook) | ISBN
   9781433829680 (Vol 2 eBook) | ISBN 9781433829703 (Vol 3 eBook) | ISBN
   9781433829659 (vol 1 hardcover) | ISBN 1433829657 (vol 1 hardcover) | ISBN
   9781433829673 (vol 2 hardcover) | ISBN 9781433829697 (vol 3 hardcover) |
   ISBN 143382969X (vol 3 hardcover) | ISBN 1433829681 (vol 2 ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Family psychotherapy—Handbooks, manuals, etc.
Classification: LCC RC488.5 (ebook) | LCC RC488.5 .A63 2019 (print) | DDC 616.89/156—dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018018532

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A CIP record is available from the British Library.

Printed in the United States of America

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0000099-000
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Contents

Volume 1: Foundations, Methods, and Contemporary Issues Across the Lifespan

Editorial Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
About the Editor-in-Chief. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
Contributors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv
A Note From the Publisher. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxi
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxiii

Part I. Influential Theories in Couple and Family Psychology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Chapter 1. Systems Unify Family Psychology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Barbara H. Fiese, Blake L. Jones, and Jaclyn A. Saltzman
Chapter 2. Psychodynamic Theories of the Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Michael J. Gerson
Chapter 3. Stress and Coping in Families. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Bruce E. Compas, Lexa K. Murphy, Janet Yarboi, Meredith A. Gruhn,
and Kelly H. Watson
Chapter 4. Contemporary Family Psychotherapy: Behavioral and
Cognitive Behavioral Theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Kaila N. Mack, Eli R. Lebowitz, and Wendy K. Silverman
Chapter 5. Biopsychosocial Theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Sarah B. Woods
Chapter 6. Feminist Theories in Contemporary Couple and Family Psychology . . . . 93
Louise Bordeaux Silverstein and Thelma Jean Goodrich
Chapter 7. An Attachment Perspective on Family Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Mario Mikulincer and Phillip R. Shaver
Chapter 8. Social Constructionism in Couple and Family Therapy:
Narrative, Solution-Focused, and Related Approaches. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Laurie Heatherington and Benjamin Johnson
Chapter 9. Social Ecological Theory: Family Systems and Family Psychology
in Bioecological and Bioecocultural Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Kim T. Ferguson and Gary W. Evans

vii
Contents

Part II. Contemporary Issues in Couple and Family Psychology Theory. . . . . . . . . 163
Chapter 10. Family Relationship Dynamics: A Developmental Perspective . . . . . . . . 165
Patrick T. Davies and Jesse L. Coe
Chapter 11. An Overview of Biological Methods in Family Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
Mengjiao Li, Barbara H. Fiese, and Kirby Deater-Deckard
Chapter 12. How Family Relationships Shape Children’s Extrafamilial
Relationships: Gene–Environment Interplay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Elizabeth A. Shewark and Jenae M. Neiderhiser
Chapter 13. Family Resilience: The Power of Rituals and Routines
in Family Adaptive Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
Amanda W. Harrist, Carolyn S. Henry, Chao Liu,
and Amanda Sheffield Morris
Chapter 14. Broadening Perspectives on Poverty: Implications for Family
Well-Being and Children’s Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
Amanda L. Roy

Part III. Family Psychology Research Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

Chapter 15. Survey and Interview Assessment Approaches in Research
With Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
Aimee K. Hildenbrand and Melissa A. Alderfer
Chapter 16. Observational Methods: Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
Kristin M. Lindahl, Neena M. Malik, and Sara Wigderson
Chapter 17. Contemporary Quantitative Statistical Methods for Family
Psychology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
Jungmeen Kim-Spoon, Dominique F. Maciejewski, and
Kevin J. Grimm
Chapter 18. Applying Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research in Family
Psychology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317
Vicki L. Plano Clark, Sherry C. Wang, and Sinem Toraman
Chapter 19. Understanding Couple and Family Dynamics Through
Dyadic Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
Dillon T. Browne, George Leckie, and Jennifer M. Jenkins
Chapter 20. Fixed Allocation and Dynamic Adaptive Intervention Designs
for Family Psychology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
David S. DeGarmo and Abigail H. Gewirtz
Chapter 21. Ecological Momentary Assessment and Related Intensive
Longitudinal Designs in Family and Couples Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369
Kristin E. Heron, Samantha A. Miadich, Robin S. Everhart,
and Joshua M. Smyth
Chapter 22. Biological Measurements and Family Psychology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387
Leslie E. Roos, Ryan J. Giuliano, Kathryn G. Beauchamp,
and Philip A. Fisher

viii
 Contents

Part IV. Families Across the Lifespan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407

Chapter 23. Relationship Initiation: Bridging the Gap Between Initial Attraction
and Well-Functioning Communal Relationships. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
Margaret S. Clark, Lindsey A. Beck, and Oriana R. Aragón
Chapter 24. Dating and Couple Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427
Brian G. Ogolsky and J. Kale Monk
Chapter 25. Marriage and Committed Partnerships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445
Justin A. Lavner and Thomas N. Bradbury
Chapter 26. The Transition to Parenthood in Social Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463
Maureen Perry-Jenkins and Sarah Schoppe-Sullivan
Chapter 27. Coparenting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483
James P. McHale, Lisa Negrini, and Yana Sirotkin
Chapter 28. Parenting at Risk and Contemporary Family Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503
Douglas M. Teti
Chapter 29. Siblings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521
Laurie Kramer, Katherine J. Conger, Christina R. Rogers,
and Niyantri Ravindran
Chapter 30. Fathers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 539
Nathan Robbins, W. Justin Dyer, and Brent A. McBride
Chapter 31. Grandparenthood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557
Megan L. Dolbin-MacNab
Chapter 32. Families With Infants and Young Children. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 575
Esther M. Leerkes and Jin Qu
Chapter 33. Families With Adolescents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 593
Nicole Campione-Barr and Judith G. Smetana
Chapter 34. Families at Midlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611
Frank J. Floyd, Marsha R. Mailick, Jan S. Greenberg,
Eun Ha Namkung, and Jieun Song
Chapter 35. Late-Life Families. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 631
Karen A. Roberto and Raven H. Weaver
Chapter 36. Loss and Bereavement in Families: A Systemic Framework
for Recovery and Resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 649
Froma Walsh

Part V. Contemporary Families. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 665

Chapter 37. Cohabitation and Single Mothering in the United States:
A Review and Call for Psychological Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 667
Claire M. Kamp Dush, Rachel Arocho, Sara E. Mernitz,
and Galena K. Rhoades
Chapter 38. Marital Separation and Divorce: Correlates and Consequences. . . . . . . . 687
David A. Sbarra, Kyle J. Bourassa, and Atina Manvelian
Chapter 39. Remarriage and Stepfamilies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 707
James H. Bray

ix
Contents

Chapter 40. Adoption. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 725

Rachel H. Farr and Harold D. Grotevant
Chapter 41. LGBTQ Parent Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 743
Abbie E. Goldberg and Kristin K. Sweeney
Chapter 42. Foster Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 761
Leslie D. Leve, Philip A. Fisher, and Cady Kintner
Chapter 43. Contemporary Military Families: Service in the
Post–September 11 Era. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 779
Ellen R. DeVoe, Katherine Dondanville, and Abby Blankenship

Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 797

x
Editorial Board

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Barbara H. Fiese, PhD, Pampered Chef, Ltd., Endowed Chair in Family Resiliency,
Professor, and Director, Family Resiliency Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign

ASSOCIATE EDITORS
Marianne Celano, PhD, ABPP, Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral
Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
Kirby Deater-Deckard, PhD, Professor, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences,
University of Massachusetts Amherst
Ernest N. Jouriles, PhD, Dale McKissick Endowed Professor of Psychology, Department
of Psychology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX
Mark A. Whisman, PhD, Professor, Department of Psychology and Neuroscience,
University of Colorado Boulder

xi
About the Editor-in-Chief

Barbara H. Fiese, PhD, is a clinical and developmental psychologist whose research

focuses on family factors that promote health and well-being in children. She holds the
Pampered Chef, Ltd., Endowed Chair in Family Resiliency and is professor and direc-
tor of the Family Resiliency Center at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
with affiliated appointments in the Departments of Pediatrics and Psychology. She is
considered one of the national experts in the role that shared family mealtimes may
play in promoting health. Dr. Fiese is a principal investigator or coinvestigator on mul-
tiple federally funded projects aimed at examining environmental and biological fac-
tors contributing to early nutritional health, including the STRONG Kids 2 project,
which takes a cell-to-community approach to dietary habits from birth, and the Illinois
Transdisciplinary Obesity Prevention Program, an innovative transdisciplinary
MPH/PhD training program in obesity prevention. She is also the principal investigator
on several projects aimed at increasing the efficiencies of summer and after-school
feeding programs for food insecure children and youth. She is past president of the
Society of Family Psychology, editor of the Journal of Family Psychology, and inaugural
editor of Advances in Child and Family Policy and Practice.

xiii
 Contributors

Melissa A. Alderfer, PhD, Center for Healthcare Delivery Science, Nemours Children’s
Health System/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, DE; Department
of Pediatrics, Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University,
Philadelphia, PA
Oriana R. Aragón, PhD, Marketing Department, College of Business, Clemson University,
Clemson, SC
Rachel Arocho, MS, Department of Human Sciences, Ohio State University, Columbus
Kathryn G. Beauchamp, PhD, Department of Psychiatry, University of New Mexico,
Albuquerque
Lindsey A. Beck, PhD, Institute for Liberal Arts and Interdisciplinary Studies, Emerson
College, Boston, MA
Abby Blankenship, PhD, Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University
of Texas Health Sciences Center at San Antonio
Kyle J. Bourassa, Doctoral Candidate, Department of Psychology, University of Arizona,
Tucson
Thomas N. Bradbury, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of California,
Los Angeles
James H. Bray, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Texas at San Antonio
Dillon T. Browne, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo,
Ontario, Canada
Nicole Campione-Barr, PhD, Department of Psychological Sciences, University of
Missouri, Columbia
Margaret S. Clark, PhD, Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, CT
Jesse L. Coe, Doctoral Candidate, Department of Clinical and Social Sciences in
Psychology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Bruce E. Compas, PhD, Department of Psychology and Human Development,
Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN
Katherine J. Conger, PhD, Department of Human Ecology, University of California, Davis
Patrick T. Davies, PhD, Department of Clinical and Social Sciences in Psychology,
University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Kirby Deater-Deckard, PhD, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences,
University of Massachusetts Amherst

xv
Contributors

David S. DeGarmo, PhD, Department of Educational Methodology, Policy, and

Leadership, and Prevention Science Institute, University of Oregon, Eugene
Ellen R. DeVoe, PhD, MSW, School of Social Work, Boston University, Boston, MA
Megan L. Dolbin-MacNab, PhD, LMFT, Department of Human Development and
Family Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg
Katherine Dondanville, PsyD, Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine,
University of Texas Health Sciences Center at San Antonio
W. Justin Dyer, PhD, Religious Education, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT
Gary W. Evans, PhD, Department of Design and Environmental Analysis and
Department of Human Development, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
Robin S. Everhart, PhD, Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University,
Richmond
Rachel H. Farr, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, Lexington
Kim T. Ferguson, PhD, Psychology, Health Advocacy, and Art of Teaching,
Sarah Lawrence College, Bronxville, NY
Barbara H. Fiese, PhD, Family Resiliency Center, University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign
Philip A. Fisher, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene
Frank J. Floyd, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Hawai’i, Honolulu
Michael J. Gerson, PhD, Graduate School of Psychology, California Lutheran University,
Thousand Oaks
Abigail H. Gewirtz, PhD, LP, Department of Family Social Science and Institute of
Child Development, University of Minnesota, St. Paul
Ryan J. Giuliano, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg
Abbie E. Goldberg, PhD, Department of Psychology, Clark University, Worcester, MA
Thelma Jean Goodrich, PhD, independent practice, Houston, TX
Jan S. Greenberg, PhD, School of Social Work, University of Wisconsin–Madison
Kevin J. Grimm, PhD, Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe
Harold D. Grotevant, PhD, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University
of Massachusetts Amherst
Meredith A. Gruhn, MA, Department of Psychology and Human Development,
Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN
Amanda W. Harrist, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family Science,
Oklahoma State University–Stillwater
Laurie Heatherington, PhD, Department of Psychology, Williams College,
Williamstown, MA
Carolyn S. Henry, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family Science,
Oklahoma State University–Stillwater
Kristin E. Heron, PhD, Department of Psychology, Old Dominion University and
Virginia Consortium Program in Clinical Psychology, Norfolk
Aimee K. Hildenbrand, PhD, Center for Healthcare Delivery Science, Nemours
Children’s Health System/Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, DE;
Center for Injury Research and Prevention, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia,
Philadelphia, PA
Jennifer M. Jenkins, PhD, Department of Applied Psychology and Human
Development, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, and Fraser Mustard
Institute of Human Development, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

xvi
 Contributors

Benjamin Johnson, PhD, ABPP, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior,

Brown University, North Kingstown, RI
Blake L. Jones, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family Studies,
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Claire M. Kamp Dush, PhD, Department of Human Sciences, Ohio State University,
Columbus
Jungmeen Kim-Spoon, PhD, Department of Psychology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University, Blacksburg
Cady Kintner, MS, Department of Counseling Psychology and Human Services,
University of Oregon, Eugene
Laurie Kramer, PhD, Department of Applied Psychology, Northeastern University,
Boston, MA; Department of Human Development and Family Studies, University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Justin A. Lavner, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens
Eli R. Lebowitz, PhD, Anxiety and Mood Disorders Program, Child Study Center, Yale
School of Medicine, New Haven, CT
George Leckie, PhD, Centre for Multilevel Modeling, School of Education, University of
Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
Esther M. Leerkes, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family Studies,
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Leslie D. Leve, PhD, Prevention Science Institute and Department of Counseling
Psychology and Human Services, University of Oregon, Eugene
Mengjiao Li, MS, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of
Massachusetts Amherst
Kristin M. Lindahl, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Miami, Coral
Gables, FL
Chao Liu, PhD, Department of Psychology, Cedarville University, Cedarville, OH
Dominique F. Maciejewski, PhD, Department of Psychology, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, Blacksburg
Kaila N. Mack, PhD, Child Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Program, Massachusetts
General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston
Marsha R. Mailick, PhD, Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin–Madison
Neena M. Malik, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Miami, Miami, FL
Atina Manvelian, Doctoral Student, Department of Psychology, University of Arizona,
Tucson
Brent A. McBride, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family Studies,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
James P. McHale, PhD, Family Study Center, University of South Florida St. Petersburg
Sara E. Mernitz, PhD, Department of Human Sciences, Ohio State University, Columbus
Samantha A. Miadich, PhD, Department of Psychology, Arizona State University,
Tempe
Mario Mikulincer, PhD, School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya,
Herzliya, Israel
J. Kale Monk, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family Science,
University of Missouri, Columbia
Amanda Sheffield Morris, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family
Science, Oklahoma State University–Tulsa

xvii
Contributors

Lexa K. Murphy, MS, Department of Psychology and Human Development,

Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN
Eun Ha Namkung, PhD, School of Social Work, University of Wisconsin–Madison;
The Lurie Institute for Disability Policy, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA
Lisa Negrini, LCSW, Family Study Center, University of South Florida St. Petersburg
Jenae M. Neiderhiser, PhD, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University,
University Park
Brian G. Ogolsky, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family Studies,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Maureen Perry-Jenkins, PhD, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences,
University of Massachusetts Amherst
Vicki L. Plano Clark, PhD, School of Education, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH
Jin Qu, PhD, Department of Psychology, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, Clarion
Niyantri Ravindran, Doctoral Candidate, Department of Human Development and
Family Studies, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Galena K. Rhoades, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Denver, Denver, CO
Nathan Robbins, MS, Department of Policy Analysis and Management, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY
Karen A. Roberto, PhD, Center for Gerontology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University, Blacksburg
Christina R. Rogers, PhD, Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Leslie E. Roos, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg
Amanda L. Roy, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago
Jaclyn A. Saltzman, MPH, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family
Studies, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
David A. Sbarra, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Arizona, Tucson
Sarah Schoppe-Sullivan, PhD, Department of Psychology, Ohio State University,
Columbus
Phillip R. Shaver, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis
Elizabeth A. Shewark, MA, Doctoral Candidate, Department of Psychology,
Pennsylvania State University, University Park
Wendy K. Silverman, PhD, ABPP, Anxiety and Mood Disorders Program, Child Study
Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT
Louise Bordeaux Silverstein, PhD, Professor Emerita, Ferkauf Graduate School of
Psychology, Yeshiva University, Bronx, NY
Yana Sirotkin, PhD, Family Study Center, University of South Florida St. Petersburg
Judith G. Smetana, PhD, Department of Clinical and Social Sciences in Psychology,
University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Joshua M. Smyth, PhD, Department of Biobehavioral Health, Pennsylvania State
University, University Park
Jieun Song, PhD, Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin–Madison
Kristin K. Sweeney, MS, Department of Psychology, Clark University, Worcester, MA
Douglas M. Teti, PhD, Department of Human Development and Family Studies,
Pennsylvania State University, University Park
Sinem Toraman, MA, School of Education, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH

xviii
 Contributors

Froma Walsh, PhD, Chicago Center for Family Health and University of Chicago,
Chicago, IL
Sherry C. Wang, PhD, School of Education and Counseling Psychology, Santa Clara
University, Santa Clara, CA
Kelly H. Watson, PhD, Department of Psychology and Human Development,
Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN
Raven H. Weaver, PhD, Department of Human Development, Washington State
University, Pullman
Sara Wigderson, MA, Department of Psychology, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL
Sarah B. Woods, PhD, Department of Family and Community Medicine,
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
Janet Yarboi, MS, Department of Psychology and Human Development,
Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN

xix
A Note From the Publisher

The APA Handbook of Contemporary Family Psychology is the 29th publication to be

released in the American Psychological Association’s APA Handbooks in Psychology®
series, instituted in 2010. The series comprises both single volumes and multivolume
sets focused on core subfields or on highly focused content areas and emerging sub-
fields. A complete listing of the series titles to date can be found on pp. ii–iii.
Each publication in the series is primarily formulated to address the reference interests
and needs of researchers, clinicians, and practitioners in psychology. Each also addresses
the needs of graduate students for well-organized and highly detailed supplementary
texts, whether to “fill in” their own specialty areas or to acquire solid familiarity with
other specialties and emerging trends across the breadth of psychology. Many of the sets
additionally bear strong interest for professionals in pertinent complementary fields
(i.e., depending on content area), be they corporate executives and human resources
personnel; psychiatrists; doctors, nurses, and other health personnel; teachers and
school administrators; counselors; legal professionals; and so forth.
Under the direction of small and select editorial boards consisting of top scholars in
the field, with chapters authored by both senior and rising researchers and practitioners,
each reference commits to a steady focus on best science and best practice. Coverage
converges on what is currently known in the particular topical area (including basic
historical reviews) and the identification of the most pertinent sources of information in
both the core and evolving literature. Volumes and chapters alike pinpoint practical issues;
probe unresolved and controversial topics; and highlight future theoretical, research,
and practice trends. The editors provide guidance to the “dialogue” among chapters
through internal cross-referencing that demonstrates a robust integration of topics.
Readers are thus offered a clear understanding of the complex interrelationships within
each field.
With the imprimatur of the largest scientific and professional organization represent-
ing psychology in the United States and the largest association of psychologists in the
world, and with content edited and authored by some of its most respected members,
the APA Handbooks in Psychology series is an indispensable and authoritative reference
resource for researchers, instructors, practitioners, and field leaders alike.

xxi
Introduction

Contemporary family psychology is a complex and vast field. At its core, it is a way of
approaching human behavior, including problematic behavior, from a systemic perspec-
tive. It encompasses a worldview that human behavior can be understood by simultane-
ously considering social, economic, and cultural contexts; interpersonal and intrapersonal
factors; and macrosystemic influences (Robbins, Mayorga, & Szapocznik, 2003; Stanton,
2009). Thus, to create a handbook reflecting the state of the field requires a broad vision
and systemic lens. We are delighted to introduce the APA Handbook of Contemporary
Family Psychology, which has been a labor of love and commitment by the editors.
We think this handbook is unique in several regards. The first is its comprehensive
breadth and depth: The three-volume set lays a solid foundation for integrating theory,
research, practice, and policy. Second, the scope of the handbook includes topics not
typically covered in family psychology texts but which nonetheless intersect with
family psychology in larger systems, such as the legal system, military system, and
school systems. Third, the handbook describes the role that family psychology plays in
addressing grand societal issues, such as immigration, domestic violence, and homeless-
ness. We contend that family psychology has evolved to have a major impact not only
on the practice of psychology but also on how researchers in the field investigate the
complexities of the human condition.
As noted, the handbook is organized into three volumes. The opening volume exam-
ines the theories, methods, lifespan perspectives, and wide array of family forms repre-
sented in the research literature and in family psychology policy and practice. The first
part of Volume 1 provides an overview of the origins of the field and reflects its multi-
disciplinary scope. Highlighting the psychodynamic, developmental, ecological, and
behavioral roots of family psychology, these chapters display the discipline’s theoretical
foundations. The second part of Volume 1 includes contemporary theoretical models
that demonstrate the various ways that theory has guided expansion of the field from
its psychodynamic and systemic origins to incorporate contemporary issues, including
gene–environment interactions and social neuroscience.
The third part of Volume 1 presents established and emerging research methodologies
in family psychology. Because the field focuses on relationships and how relationships
change over time, complex research designs are required, including longitudinal analy-
sis and the analysis of dyadic, nested data. The chapters in this section offer guidance
to researchers on how to conduct observational studies, complex statistical modeling,
and experience sampling, to name a few subjects. These chapters will likely be excellent

xxiii
Introduction

resources for researchers beyond the field of family psychology and will help guide a
more systemic view of data collection and analysis overall.
The fourth part of Volume 1 provides a lifespan approach to family psychology, recogniz-
ing the importance of addressing how families change over time, beginning with relation-
ship initiation and couple formation and extending through the transition to parenthood,
parenting of adolescents, and later life, including loss and bereavement. These chapters
offer a snapshot of how different stages of family life bring their own unique challenges as
well as rewards. A unique addition to this section is the inclusion of a chapter on grandpar-
ents and families at midlife—two frequently overlooked developmental phenomena.
The final section of Volume 1 addresses the changing forms of and challenges faced
by contemporary families. Topics include cohabitation; separation and divorce; remarriage;
adoption; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) families; foster fami-
lies; and military families. While the authors of these chapters recognize that there may
be overlap across these topics (e.g., LGBTQ families also experience separation and
divorce), they provide an in-depth analysis of the challenges and transitions that differ-
ent types of families face that can inform practice and policy.
Volume 2 focuses on the application of family psychology to different health condi-
tions, systems, and societal issues. Family psychology has a long tradition of addressing
mental and physical health attributes. The chapters in this volume also address new
areas of influence, such as relational impacts on sleep and stress.
The first part of the volume describes the application of family psychology to mental
and physical health issues, including psychopathology, mood disorders, bipolar dis-
orders, antisocial disorders, pediatric chronic conditions, HIV, stress, gerontology and
caregiving, and sleep. The second part of Volume 2 provides an overview of how family
psychology intersects with broader systems. Increasingly, a systemic view is being
applied by family psychologists, as they become embedded in larger networks and
contexts. The larger systems addressed in this section include health care, schools and
after-school programs, early care and education, juvenile justice, legal systems, religious
organizations, food assistance programs that serve vulnerable families, community-
based organizations, the media, and the workplace. Readers will grasp the wide influ-
ence that family psychology is having in modern society.
The third part of Volume 2 focuses on how family psychology addresses societal
grand challenges. Extending the application of a systemic framework to human prob-
lems, many family psychologists have turned their research, practice, and policy efforts
to address some of the grand challenges faced by society today. These include intimate
partner violence, gaining cultural understanding of families, immigration, economic
strain, child abuse and neglect, bullying, incarcerated parents, homelessness, traumatic
stress, natural disasters, community tragedy and terrorism, and substance use.
The second volume concludes with a discussion of the broad reach of contemporary
family psychology. Topics include the global impact of family psychology, international
family psychology, advocacy, public health perspectives, and public policy applications.
Chapters in this section show how the family psychology system lens has been used suc-
cessfully to enact policy changes at the local, community, national, and international levels.
Volume 3 addresses contemporary couple, family, and parenting interventions
grounded in family psychology theory and science, as well as issues related to family
psychology training. The first part of the volume provides an overview of the history of
the field, relational diagnosis, guides for screening and assessment, ethics, and evaluat-

xxiv
 Introduction

ing efficacy in treatment. This overview sets the stage for more detailed chapters on
family and couple therapy in the second, third, and fourth parts of the volume. These
chapters not only provide up-to-date summaries of commonly used family therapies
(e.g., structural, functional, multifamily group) and couple therapies (e.g., behavioral,
cognitive behavioral, relationship education) but also focus on effective parenting pro-
grams (e.g., The Incredible Years®, Coping Power, Family Check-Up). These substantive
chapters will be invaluable resources for trainees as well as seasoned therapists.
The final part of Volume 3 presents topics relevant to competency-based education,
training, and credentialing in the specialty of couple and family psychology. These
topics are especially timely given the American Psychological Association’s new guide-
lines for the preparation and training of health service psychologists (Health Service
Psychology Education Collaborative, 2013). The authors of these chapters have played
leadership roles in the development of these guidelines and have provided clear guid-
ance to advance the field.
The chapter authors in this handbook represent a “who’s who” of the field. They
include past presidents of the American Psychological Association, past presidents of
the Society for Family Psychology, current and past editors of the Journal of Family
Psychology and Family Process, and contributors to many other associations and pub-
lication outlets. It is interesting to review the diversity of their academic disciplinary
appointments, as it reflects the broad impact of the field and its increasingly inter­
disciplinary and transdisciplinary nature. Although most of the authors are housed in
departments of psychology, many are in medical schools, interdisciplinary research
centers, and policy institutes.
Because of the vast scope of the handbook, we anticipate that the audience will be
large and varied as well. In addition to graduate students in family, clinical, social, and
developmental psychology, we expect that advanced students in human development
and family studies, education, social work, public health, pediatrics, and family medi-
cine will find many of these chapters of interest. Seasoned researchers will find the
chapters on theory, methods, and applications “go to” resources for teaching as well as
guidance in their own research programs. Similarly, policymakers will find many of the
application and policy chapters to be invaluable resources as they seek supporting
evidence to propose important policies that affect children, youth, and families.
There are many people who influenced this compilation. We would like to acknowl-
edge Dr. Anne Kazak, who originally proposed this handbook; her guidance, as well
as contributions to the field, have been invaluable. Kristen Knight at the American
Psychological Association has been patient and resourceful throughout the editorial pro-
cess and we are forever grateful to her. We also acknowledge the patience and support
of our families, who tolerated the birthing of this project that lasted into toddlerhood.
Many a weekend was spent on editing chapters that could have been spent on family
activities. To them, we owe our gratitude.

Barbara H. Fiese
Editor-in-Chief

Marianne Celano, Kirby Deater-Deckard, Ernest N. Jouriles,

and Mark A. Whisman
Associate Editors

xxv
Introduction

References
Health Service Psychology Education Collaborative. (2013). Professional psychology in health care
services: A blueprint for education and training. American Psychologist, 68, 411–426.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0033265
Robbins, M., Mayorga, C., & Szapocznik, J. (2003). The ecosystemic “lens” to understanding family
functioning. In T. L. Sexton, G. Weeks, & M. Robbins (Eds.), Handbook of family therapy:
The science and practice of working with families and couples (pp. 21–36). New York, NY:
Brunner-Routledge.
Stanton, M. (2009). The systemic epistemology of the speciality of family psychology. In J. H. Bray &
M. Stanton (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of family psychology (pp. 5–20). West Sussex,
England: Wiley.

xxvi
 Part I

INFLUENTIAL THEORIES
IN COUPLE AND FAMILY
PSYCHOLOGY
 Chapter 1

SYSTEMS UNIFY FAMILY

PSYCHOLOGY
Barbara H. Fiese, Blake L. Jones, and Jaclyn A. Saltzman

Systems unify family psychology. Family psychology have evolved to capture these principles. In this
is, at its core, a way of thinking. It is a worldview chapter, we briefly review key principles of systems
that human behavior is understood by simultane- theory and its application to contemporary family
ously considering social, economic, and cultural psychology. To illustrate key principles of systems
contexts; interpersonal and intrapersonal factors; approaches, we discuss contemporary research and
and macrosystemic influences (Robbins, Mayorga, & practice as applied to the topic of family health. We
Szapocznik, 2003; Stanton, 2009). Family psychol- then provide an overview of how systems principles
ogy’s distinctive approach to practice, research, and are emphasized in contemporary research methods.
policy is actualized through systemic thinking. Early We conclude with a discussion of future directions,
in the evolution of family psychology, therapists rec- focusing on family psychology’s central position in
ognized that behavioral problems in children were transdisciplinary approaches that guide new direc-
intricately tied to marital problems. To affect the tions in practice and science in the 21st century.
child, the couple must be brought into the treatment
room. Researchers developed new techniques that
GENERAL SYSTEMS THEORY
integrated survey responses and direct observations
from multiple members of the family to capture how Ludwig von Bertalanffy’s general systems theory is
the entire family functioned. Policymakers inter- a unified theory of science that applies to organic
ested in the family called for consideration of the systems; he developed it in response to parallels
effect of poverty and parents’ access to jobs on the that he noted across the biological, behavioral, and
learning trajectories of young children. These are sociological sciences (von Bertalanffy, 1969, 1972).
just a few examples of the scope of the field and the A system comprises elements but is not defined by
interconnectedness of systems thinking in family parts in isolation. Rather, a system is defined by and
psychology. behaves according to the properties of its elements
The aim of this introductory chapter to the APA and the processes by which those elements interact
Handbook of Contemporary Family Psychology is to with each other. No factor is singularly responsible
demonstrate how systems thinking unites family for a system’s functioning, nor is there a linear path-
psychology practice, research, and policy. In doing way to a specific fate for a system; in no area is this
so, we hope to renew interest in exploring how more apparent than in family psychology. Efforts
systemic principles apply to families in contempo- to examine how systemic theories apply to families
rary psychology and highlight how methodologies have focused on several key principles of general

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0000099-001
APA Handbook of Contemporary Family Psychology: Vol. 1. Foundations, Methods, and Contemporary Issues Across the Lifespan, B. H. Fiese (Editor-in-Chief)
Copyright © 2019 by the American Psychological Association. All rights reserved.

3
APA Handbook of Contemporary Family Psychology: Foundations, Methods, and
Contemporary Issues Across the Lifespan, edited by B. H. Fiese, M. Celano, K.
Deater-Deckard, E. N. Jouriles, and M. A. Whisman
Copyright © 2019 American Psychological Association. All rights reserved.
Fiese, Jones, and Saltzman

systems theory, including the following: (a) a system A foundational assumption of systems approaches
is greater than the sum of its parts, has properties is that the family is made up of subsystems, and
distinct from the properties of its parts, and is hier- that the relative functioning of one subsystem will
archically organized; (b) open systems experience affect the others. However, the functioning of the
continuous input and output of information that family as a whole depends on how information is
results in maintenance of a dynamic steady-state but received and adapted to over time. The degree of
not a static homeostasis; and (c) positive and nega- openness affects how much information is let into
tive feedback loops facilitate both self-organization the system, and whether the system can effectively
and self-stabilization respectively. These key prin- adapt to new circumstances.
ciples will be discussed in this section, to set a foun-
dation for subsequent discussion about processes Openness and Adaptability
within the family system that affect and are affected In contrast to closed systems, open systems interact
by context. with and “exchange matter with their environment”
(von Bertalanffy, 1969, p. 159). Classical physics
Wholeness and Order emphasized the role that feedback loops play in the
Family systems theory (Bowen, 1966) emerged as a exchange of matter within a closed system, but
therapeutic tool for practitioners working with chil- living organisms must exist within context and are
dren and families, and has since been adapted into thus inherently open to environmental influences.
multiple conceptual models that—while divergent Within the family system, the degree of openness—or
in many ways—share the foundations of wholeness the porousness of the boundaries around the family
and order (R. Beavers & Hampson, 2000; Cox & system, subsystems, and individual family members—
Paley, 1997, 2003; Epstein, Bishop, & Levin, 1978; varies. For families to function adequately, they
Olson & Gorall, 2003). Wholeness and order refers must balance the need to remain cohesive and
to the idea that a system and its properties cannot connected with the ability to adapt effectively
be understood as the sum of its parts and their when change occurs (R. Beavers & Hampson,
characteristics, but rather as a distinct entity 2000). These two principles, cohesion and adapt-
with unique properties. A family system is com- ability, are essential to open systems.
posed of individual family members, the dyadic Cohesion, according to W. R. Beavers and Voeller
relationships between these individuals (sub­ (1983), exists on a curvilinear plane and is defined
systems), relationships between subsystems, by both intimacy and autonomy. Simply stated, fam-
and these parts as a whole. ilies that are high on intimacy and low on autonomy
Individual family members belong to interdepen- may struggle to define and respect individual and
dent and overlapping marital, parent–child, and sib- subsystem boundaries, and can be characterized
ling subsystems, which are organized in a hierarchy. as overly enmeshed. Families that are low on inti-
Interactions within and between dyadic or triadic macy and high on autonomy may be disconnected
subsystems create processes at the family level. For and lack feelings of closeness. Neither outcome is
example, when Katz and Woodin (2002) divided optimal for adequate functioning. Contemporary
couples with children between 4 and 5 years old family psychologists have considered how cohesion
into three groups based on their communication and enmeshment at the family level may affect child
patterns—hostile, hostile–withdrawn, and engaged— behavior in school and child behavior problems.
they found that these communication factors, dis- Sturge-Apple, Davies, and Cummings (2010)
tinct to the marital subsystem, predicted a host of considered different family typologies based on
negative outcomes at the family level. Hostile– degrees of cohesion and enmeshment. Cohesive
withdrawn couples were more likely to have families families were characterized as those with high levels
characterized as less cohesive and playful, and more of child relatedness, parental emotional availability,
conflicted, as compared with engaged couples. and family cooperation—but low levels of parental

4
 Systems Unify Family Psychology

intrusiveness, interparental hostility, interparental 1972). The dynamic steady-state process is well-
withdrawal, and family competition. Enmeshed demonstrated in studies on the transition to par-
families were characterized by high levels of parental enthood. When parents can adapt effectively to
emotional availability, parental intrusiveness, inter- the new situation, a “new normal” is attained for
parental hostility, and triadic competition—but low the marital dyad’s functioning, as patterns of relat-
levels of child relatedness, interparental withdrawal, ing within the triad and in the parent–child dyads
and family cooperation. Disengaged families were are established, and thus new subsystems are cre-
characterized by high levels of interparental with- ated (Cowan & Cowan, 2003). For many couples,
drawal and parental intrusiveness—but low levels this is a stressful transition and most experience
of child relatedness, interparental hostility, parental a decline in marital satisfaction (Doss, Rhoades,
emotional availability, and family cooperation and Stanley, & Markman, 2009).
competition. Cohesive families were less likely Systems also change over time and reorganize
to have children that struggled with any negative in response to developmental pressures and change
adjustment outcomes at 6 years of age and 3 years in membership in the system. To account for these
later. Families characterized as disengaged had chil- changes, feedback loops are created.
dren who experienced more externalizing symptoms
in kindergarten as well as elevated externalizing and Feedback Loops
classroom difficulties 3 years later. Enmeshed and Changes in family organization are often prompted
disengaged families were more likely to have chil- by developmental transitions such as marriage, birth
dren with internalizing symptoms and difficulties in of a child, or death of a family member. General
emotional adjustment than cohesive families, overall systems theory posits that feedback is the primary
(Sturge-Apple et al., 2010). mechanism through which change within the family
Although family scientists generally agree that system is made or stalled. Positive feedback loops
too much or too little cohesiveness—yielding can be described as adaptive changes that occur at
enmeshment and disengagement, respectively—is every level of the family system—within individuals,
problematic, it is important to note that cohesive- dyads, the full system, and relationships between
ness is not necessarily consistent over the family these elements—when change is necessitated by
life course. A family’s ability to change effectively normative (e.g., transition to parenthood, marriage)
in response to environmental and developmental and nonnormative (e.g., divorce, untimely death,
influences defines the second key characteristic of remarriage) transitions (R. Beavers & Hampson,
an open system: adaptability (also referred to as 2000; Cox & Paley, 1997). Positive feedback loops
flexibility). The degree to which families are effec- are also referred to as self-organizing patterns.
tively adaptable to change within and around the Conversely, negative feedback loops—also called self-
system determines how they maintain balance in stabilizing patterns—are behaviors at all levels of the
their everyday interactions. However, whereas system that are designed to prevent change and to
adaptation in a closed system is designed to main- maintain the status quo.
tain homeostasis, an open system’s goal is to attain Zadeh, Jenkins, and Pepler’s (2010) 3-year
and maintain a dynamic steady-state. longitudinal study of parent–child interaction
Von Bertalanffy differentiated the two constructs: and child externalizing behaviors are examples
Homeostasis is the tendency towards a static of feedback loops between parents and children.
sameness, and the term applies to a closed system The researchers examined the reciprocal effects of
characterized by equifinality, whereas a dynamic maternal negativity and child externalizing behav-
steady-state can be described as balanced but con- iors across three time points beginning when the
tinuous movement in an open system in which the child was, on average, 10 years of age, and con-
final outcome is determined by interactions between cluding when the child was, on average, 14 years
internal and external forces (von Bertalanffy, 1969, of age. Somewhat surprisingly, the researchers

5
Fiese, Jones, and Saltzman

found little stability of maternal negativity across Impact of General Systems Theory
the three time points but did find stability of child and Family Psychology on Public Policy
externalizing behaviors between 12 and 14 years Although it is beyond the scope of this chapter to
of age. However, in support of a feedback model, provide a comprehensive overview of the influence
maternal negativity at 10 years of age predicted of systems thinking, and family psychology specifi-
child externalizing behaviors at 12 years of age, cally, on public policy, it is important to illustrate
and child externalizing behaviors at 12 years of how systems thinking and the central assumptions
age predicted maternal negativity at 14 years of age underlying family psychology can be actualized in
(Zadeh et al., 2010). public policy (for a more extensive discussion of this
topic, see Volume 2, Chapter 39, this handbook).
Influence of General Systems Theory Policymakers recognize that stable and healthy
on Family Psychology Practice family relationships are important economic drivers
General systems theory has had a profound and ultimately affect the health and well-being of
influence on family therapy and the practice of children (Haskins & Sawhill, 2009). Although it can
family psychology. All individual behaviors are be argued whether legislators take this premise seri-
understood to be part of a social context that is ously on a consistent basis, there are federal policies
influenced by families (for further discussion, see in place that are aimed at promoting family stability.
Volume 3, Chapter 1, this handbook). Families In 1996 Congress declared that there was scientific
are assumed to influence behavior through clearly evidence supporting the benefits of healthy mar-
specified systems principles. The different schools riages, including academic, emotional, and health
of couple and family therapy emphasize different benefits to children and youth and economic and
aspects of systems theory. For example, structural health benefits to women and men (Section 101 of
family therapy (SFT; see Volume 3, Chapter 7, this Public Law 104-193). Close to 10 years later, the
handbook) aims to reorganize the family system Administration for Children and Families funded
through the active involvement of the therapist the Healthy Marriages Initiative, which included,
through “joining” (i.e., making a therapeutic alli- in part, access to Couple Relationship Education
ance) with the family. SFT focuses on changing the (CRE) for low-income couples. Over the past
structure of the family to realign hierarchies and decade, more than $900 million has been expended
roles. Other forms of couple and family therapy in state and federal funds for CRE, primarily for
that rely on general systems theory include stra- low-income couples (Hawkins & VanDenBerge,
tegic family therapy, which focuses on feedback 2014). Although there is controversy regarding the
loops (see Volume 3, Chapter 8, this handbook), overall impact of these programs (Johnson, 2012),
and problem-solving therapy, which focuses on a meta-analysis indicated that there may be small
adaptation to life cycle transitions (Haley, 1976). to modest effects in increasing relationship quality
Contemporary models of couple and family and communication skills and decreasing relation-
therapy are more likely to include attention to ship distress in low-income couples (Hawkins &
broader contextual issues such as the role of gender Erickson, 2015). The implementation of family
(Silverstein & Brooks, 2009), the imbalance of psychology at a public policy level, as illustrated by
power in the case of interpersonal violence (Jouriles CRE, is a complex issue that deserves more atten-
& McDonald, 2015), and the chronic effects of tion, including research into effects on children and
racism on relationships (McNeil, Fincham, & Beach, diversity in family structure (see also Volume 3,
2014). Although the practice of family psychology Chapter 19, this handbook). However, it is impor-
has expanded to include broader social issues, these tant to note that family psychology and systems
issues have yet to become part of mainstream family thinking has a place in the policy arena.
psychology (for further discussion, see Chapter 6, In summary, general systems theory provides
this volume; Volume 2, Chapter 26, this handbook; a theoretical foundation to family psychology as
and Volume 3, Chapter 1, this handbook). both a way of thinking and a catalyst for practice,

6
 Systems Unify Family Psychology

research, and policy. We have provided examples of so did flexibility. The authors argue that the variabil-
the key principles of general systems theory, includ- ity in behaviors was due in part to the adolescents’
ing wholeness and order, openness and adaptability, increasing capability to effect change in the family
and feedback loops. While our presentation has not and control social interactions. However, this was
been exhaustive, we outlined how these principles not a linear effect. Thus, the increase in social inter-
guide attention to the influence of multiple parts of actions between parent and adolescent did not occur
the family (marital subsystem, parenting sub­system, because they disagreed more but because the adoles-
and sibling subsystem) on individual adaptation cent was exerting authority and changing the orga-
at any given time. Furthermore, we provided brief nizational structure of the family. After this period
examples of how these principles guide family of intense social exchange, the family returned to a
psychology research across a broad range of issues, base rate of social interaction like that seen prior to
including transition to parenthood, marital satisfac- age 13. It was if the system had established a new set
tion, and parent–child relationships. We now turn of rules—this time with input from the adolescent.
our attention to contemporary systems thinking and Small changes in family prevention and inter-
how it is applied in family psychology. vention programs may foretell a big impact. Recent
advances in measuring change during couple and
family therapy sessions to alert therapists and family
DYNAMIC SYSTEMS THEORY
members to perceived points of stress or progress
Dynamic systems theory complements general (Knobloch-Fedders, Pinsof, & Haase, 2015) are in
systems theory in its emphasis on interdependence line with this perspective. Furthermore, preven-
and organization. However, it extends general tion models such as the Family Check-Up approach
systems theory by a specific focus on the principles emphasize key developmental transition points at
of change over time. Dynamic systems theory which early targeted support, in small doses, can
has been applied in developmental psychology, prevent larger problems later (Dishion, Forgatch,
(Fogel, 2011; van Geert, 2011), cognitive sciences Chamberlain, & Pelham, 2016; see also Volume 3,
(Samuelson, Jenkins, & Spencer, 2015), and public Chapter 24, this handbook).
policy (Yoshikawa & Hsueh, 2001). Dynamic
systems theory places emphasis on discontinuous
SOCIOECOLOGICAL AND
(i.e., nonlinear) changes over time and the potential
TRANSACTIONAL MODELS
for small interactions to have big effects. For the most
part, in dynamic systems research complex math- The important role of developmental change over
ematical modeling is applied to capture non­linear time is frequently overlooked in systems theory
change. Rather than consider how behavior may be applications to family psychology (see Chapter 10,
stable over time, dynamic systems researchers are this volume). In the field of contemporary family
interested in whether there may be a jump or quick psychology, there has been increasing interest in
alteration in behavior. These nonlinear changes are how different developmental phases or transitions
often most evident during key family transitions, may affect the overall functioning of the family as
when the system is undergoing reorganization. well as patterned changes in behavior over time
In an elegant examination of types of interac- (Cox & Paley, 1997). With increasing theory refine-
tions between parents and adolescent boys over a ment and methodological sophistication, family
5-year period, researchers documented that vari- psychologists have become concerned with how
ability in behaviors peaked between 13 and 15 years early patterns of behavior within subsystems predict
of age, and then reorganized at 17 years of age later behavior. This escalated interest is the result,
to reflect similar types and rates of behaviors as in part, of the prominence of bioecological models
those observed during preadolescence (Granic, (Bronfenbrenner, 1977; Bronfenbrenner & Evans,
Hollenstein, Dishion, & Patterson, 2003). Not only 2000). In their proposition for developmental sci-
did conflict peak between 13 and 15 years of age but ence in the 21st century, Bronfenbrenner and Evans

7
Fiese, Jones, and Saltzman

(2000) put forth key principles that are relevant CASCADE EFFECTS
to family psychology. First, development occurs
Cascade effects are processes whereby behavior or
through a series of reciprocal and bidirectional prox-
functioning in one domain or environment affects
imal exchanges within the environment. Second,
behavior or functioning in another domain at a
exposure to different exchanges and environments
later point in time (Cox, Mills-Koonce, Propper, &
will vary along dimensions of duration, frequency,
Gariépy, 2010). For example, aggressive behavior
interruption, timing, and intensity. Third, any devel-
exhibited by a toddler may transfer to bullying
opmental outcome will be a result of transactions
at school and conduct disorder as a teen. Family
between proximal processes and environmental
psychologists commonly see cascade effects in
context over time. Although individual develop-
intergenerational processes. Research suggests that
mental outcomes may be distinct from overall family divorce tends to run in families (Amato, 1996, 2000).
adaptation and relationships in family psychology, Compared with adults who were raised in house-
the key principles of change, attention to time, and holds with continuously married parents, adults with
exposure to different environments are of central divorced parents tend to experience more psycho-
concern to contemporary family psychology. logical distress, obtain less education, and be more
Transactional developmental models empha- likely to divorce themselves (Amato, 1996, 2000).
size the bidirectional influence of interactions as These effects can extend across three generations,
they unfold over time and the cumulative effects suggesting that even before a child is born the effects
of exposure to environmental factors (Sameroff, of their grandparents’ marriage dissolution are placing
2010). Bidirectional influences can be seen in the the child at risk. Amato and Cheadle (2005) docu-
effect of children’s behavior on quality of parenting. mented that third-generation offspring of divorced
Even at a very young age, differences in child tem- grandparents experienced lower educational attain-
perament may affect the parent–child relationship. ment, greater marital discord, and poorer-quality
In an observational study of infant sleep patterns relationships with their parents. These effects
and parent behavior over the course of 6 months, appeared to be exacerbated by the poorer outcomes
Philbrook and Teti (2016) documented the complex of the middle generation, which also experienced
interplay between infant sleep and parenting. First, poorer educational attainment, marital discord, and
maternal emotional availability (i.e., the directly poor parent–child relationships. Cascade effects
observed sensitivity and nonintrusive behaviors of have also been seen in dyadic processes among the
the mothers) was associated with less infant distress offspring of divorced couples. Women from divorced
and more infant sleep across the 6-month period. families tended to evidence higher levels of physical
When mothers were more emotionally available than and psychological aggression towards their newly-
average, their infants were more likely to sleep more wed husbands, which in turn led to increased marital
and less likely to be in distress. Second, there was dissatisfaction and increased risk for divorce 4 years
a modest but significant effect of infant distress on later (Story, Karney, Lawrence, & Bradbury, 2004).
parenting. When infants were more distressed than Negativity in men’s families of origin was related to
average, mothers were less emotionally available. higher levels of directly observed anger as newlyweds
This suggests that infants’ behavior affected mothers’ and subsequent divorce 4 years later (Story et al.,
behavior in a bidirectional manner. Over time, there 2004; see also Chapter 38, this volume). These inter-
is potential for distressed interactions to reduce the generational effects point to the need to consider how
quality of parenting associated with good sleep for family of origin experiences may affect prevention
infants, resulting in increased risk of poor infant and intervention efforts (Weber & Cebula, 2009).
health. Conversely, maintaining sensitive parenting
practices has the potential to reinforce good sleep in Ecological Contexts
the long run. To create a more comprehensive under- Systems are embedded in different ecologies that
standing of bidirectional effects, the effects across regulate behavior. The family is at the core of social
domains and generations need to be considered. ecologies that include schools, neighborhoods,

8
 Systems Unify Family Psychology

health care institutions, government institutions Household chaos is characterized by frenetic activity,
and policies that affect families, and the cultural high levels of background noise, clutter, and lack of
context in which the family lives (including histori- routine. It is overrepresented in low-income neigh-
cal influences of past generations). The intersection borhoods, families living in poverty, and vulnerable
across ecologies and influences from macrolevel to families experiencing high levels of stress (Evans,
microlevel can be seen in contemporary research Gonnella, Marcynyszyn, Gentile, & Salpekar, 2005).
on neighborhood effects on family practices and Environmental chaos is important to family psy-
adolescent outcomes. Family stress models have chologists because it calls attention to potential
been applied to understand how neighborhood risk pathways that interrupt positive social interactions
may affect parenting (Kotchick, Dorsey, & Heller, and regulate emotions—key aspects of maintaining
2005). This approach proposes that the stress expe- the family system.
rienced living in disordered or dangerous neighbor- In early studies of environmental impact on
hoods disrupts effective parenting and leads to poor parenting, Evans and Maxwell (1997) noted that
outcomes. It is possible, however, for protective families who lived close to airports had children
factors to affect how parents respond to neighbor- with lower reading achievement scores. In-home
hood risk, either through their practices or through observations revealed that parents and children
their beliefs and perceptions of risk (see Chapter would involuntarily stop interacting with each other
14, this volume). One line of research has docu- for brief moments when an airplane passed over
mented that in the face of neighborhood disorder, their home. Upon later investigation, the families
families that create management strategies that reported that they were somewhat aware of these
include regular routines and knowledge of children’s interruptions but had become accustomed to them.
whereabouts have adolescents who are less likely Over time, these momentary interruptions resulted
to engage in sexual risk-taking behaviors (Roche in fewer spoken words in the home and less time
& Leventhal, 2009). Similar compensatory effects spent interacting in reading together, compared to
have been found in Mexican American families families who lived further away from the airport.
living in high-risk neighborhoods. White, Roosa, Thus, children living closer to airports had fewer
and Zeiders (2012) found that family cohesion opportunities to develop the skills necessary for
benefited youth mental health when families lived optimal reading achievement.
in high-risk neighborhoods. The authors discussed More recent research has indicated that very
how cultural context may be an important modera- chaotic environments characterized by high levels of
tor of neighborhood effects; they suggested that noise and disorganization also disrupt family social
intervention programs supporting families living in interactions and effective parenting skills. For exam-
the highest-risk neighborhoods should also consider ple, Deater-Deckard and colleagues demonstrated
family-wide processes. However, it should also be that parents in chaotic households do not exhibit
noted that cultural context—and the opportunity executive function skills often associated with posi-
to reflect on culture of origin—discrimination prac- tive parenting (Deater-Deckard, Chen, Wang, & Bell,
tices, and the experience of living in two cultures 2012). The authors speculated that high levels of
should also be taken into account (Falicov, 2015; disorganization in the household divert parents’ posi-
Parra Cardona et al., 2012). tive attention toward children and decrease parents’
ability to inhibit their own negative responses. Over
Chaos as a Contextual Framework time, children are exposed to high levels of stimula-
Although the concept of environmental chaos is tion without the protective effect of parenting that
not a grand theory such as general systems theory includes strategies for self-regulation. This pattern
or dynamic systems theory, the role environmental may result in poor self-regulation abilities in chil-
chaos plays in family dynamics is increasingly shown dren. Research with adolescents suggests that high
to have an impact on interpersonal and intrapersonal levels of chaos in the home may place them at risk
health and well-being (Wachs & Evans, 2010). for sensation seeking-related poor health outcomes

9
Fiese, Jones, and Saltzman

such as cigarette smoking, high alcohol use, and vention strategies for addressing child obesity by
other drugs (Schreier, Roy, Frimer, & Chen, 2014). acknowledging how many competing factors poten-
In both reports, socioeconomic status (SES) moder- tially influence obesity risk for children. These fac-
ated the findings. Thus, it is important to consider tors range from the cellular level (e.g., genetics), to
not only levels of chaos in the household but also the the child level (e.g., physical activity, sleep, dietary
economic resources available to the family to help intake, media use), to the clan or family level
overcome daily stress. For an extended discussion of (e.g., parental feeding practices, parent body mass
this topic, see Chapter 9, this volume. index), to the community level (e.g., neighborhood
safety and access to green space), to the national
level (e.g., media food marketing, federal funding
EXAMPLES OF SYSTEMS PRINCIPLES
of nutrition programs), to the cultural level
IN FAMILY HEALTH RESEARCH
(e.g., cultural norms for dining out).
In general, systems models propose that the interac- Researchers have used family systems approaches
tions between individuals, families, and environ- to understand the influence of home environments
ments have a combined influence that determines and develop prevention and intervention studies
our behavior. One aspect of the influence of these to modify routines and habits associated with
interacting systems within family psychology children’s health outcomes, such as child obesity
research relates to the physical and mental health (Davison & Birch, 2001). Researchers have strength-
of children, adolescents, and adults in families. In ened their studies by considering the interacting
the past 2 decades, much of the literature in health systems that influence children’s health. In studies
promotion and family health has borrowed from of protective family routines associated with child
systems theories to guide the development of theo- obesity, personal routines (e.g., limiting personal
retical approaches and research models (e.g., Golden screen viewing and getting adequate sleep) and
& Earp, 2012; Grzywacz & Fuqua, 2000; McLaren family-level routines (e.g., having frequent family
& Hawe, 2005; Repetti, Taylor, & Seeman, 2002; meals together) have been found to decrease risk
Richard, Gauvin, & Raine, 2011). Principles of sys- for child obesity (Anderson & Whitaker, 2010;
tems theories such as wholeness and order, open- Jones, Fiese, & the STRONG Kids Team, 2014).
ness and adaptability, cohesion, and cascade effects Other important family-level factors associated
are seen clearly in patterns of health that take place with childhood obesity include the influence of
in the ecological contexts of daily family life. These poverty, crowding, noise, substandard housing, fam-
principles are demonstrated in many examples of ily turmoil, children’s separation from parents, and
health outcomes in families, including child health exposure to violence (Wells, Evans, Beavis, & Ong,
and disease, the balancing of work and family roles, 2010). For this reason, recent child obesity interven-
family stress, and physiological synchrony. tions have targeted family-based models and behav-
iors (e.g., Berge & Everts, 2011; Davison, Jurkowski,
Child Health and Chronic Disease Li, Kranz, & Lawson, 2013; Haines et al., 2013).
Systems approaches have been used to examine In addition to child obesity, other areas of child
children’s health and to develop prevention and health research have benefitted from the use of
intervention strategies. Many child obesity researchers systems theories approaches, including research
have focused on the interacting systems within the on increasing physical activity and healthy eating
ecological contexts that a child lives in to better behaviors (Golden & Earp, 2012; Robinson, 2008)
understand children’s health outcomes. In one such as well as on helping families manage children’s
example, Harrison et al. (2011) developed a theo- type 1 diabetes (Naar-King, Podolski, Ellis, Frey, &
retical model called The Six-Cs Model to describe Templin, 2006) and other chronic diseases (Brown
some of the multiple contributors to overweight & Kupst, 2016). Although the use of systems
and obesity in childhood. This model highlights approaches is becoming more common, Gubbels
the complexity of developing prevention and inter- and colleagues argued that the application of systems

10
 Systems Unify Family Psychology

theories and approaches is not used enough in areas with family demands. These findings are also seen
such as research on physical activity (Gubbels, in studies examining work–life balance and work–
Van Kann, de Vries, Thijs, & Kremers, 2014). family fit. Work–family fit is the worker’s ability to
Several of the principles of systems theories are successfully integrate work, personal, and family life
highlighted in child health research that takes an responsibilities (Hill et al., 2008; Jones, 2014). Jones
ecological or systems approach. For example, in the and colleagues found that higher levels of work–
cases of childhood obesity and other child health family fit were associated with increased mental
concerns, many researchers consider sleep, diet, and and physical health ( Jones et al., 2008; see also
exercise to be the three pillars of health (e.g., Castillo, Volume 2, Chapter 24, this handbook).
2015; Shechter, Grandner, & St-Onge, 2014). All As each of these previous examples illustrates,
three of these factors are influenced by competing influences from both work and family life can
systems and relate to the wholeness and order and influence the health of the worker as well as the
the openness and adaptability principles of systems health of their family members. These findings
theories. Competing subsystems influence all three relate to several principles within systems theo-
pillars of health at the child level, family level, com- ries. Wholeness and order, as well as openness
munity level, and even cultural level. For example, and adaptability, are demonstrated when consider-
sleep is influenced by the child’s natural biological ing how the health of an individual in the family
clock and circadian rhythms, as well as parental rules system is influenced by external factors relating
and expectations about sleep duration, bedtimes, and to someone else within one of their dyadic sub­
waketimes. It is also affected by the sleep environ- systems. The stressors and conflict experienced
ment in the home, including factors such as comfort, by a parent in the external context of work may
quietness, light, safety, and crowding. Beyond the extend to their relationships with family members;
child, family, and home systems, sleep is also affected these are sometimes called spillover effects. The
by neighborhood and cultural influences. These influ- health of other family members is then indirectly
ences may include neighborhood safety; proximity affected by this other system (work), through their
to trains or airplanes that pass by at night; city noise; familial association with the worker. One example
and even peer influences, norms, and expectations that demonstrates the principle of cascade effects
about sleep. is a situation in which a working mother is feeling
chronic pressure to meet job expectations and dead-
Family Health and the lines that are highly stressful. Her stress and irrita-
Work–Family Context tion cross over into her parenting domain, and she
Another example of interacting systems influencing takes out her frustrations on a child by continually
health comes from the work–family literature. For being harsh towards them. The child interprets this
working parents, the challenge of balancing work as the parent implying that the child is not good
and family roles and demands can be difficult. These enough; he or she may even feel unloved because of
competing systems vie for time and attention and can this strained parent–child relationship. In turn, the
lead to work–family conflict (Greenhaus & Beutell, child experiences increased anxiety and depression
1985), which in turn is associated with physical over time, as well as an increased risk for stress and
and mental stress and other health concerns. For obesity. In this illustration, the child’s long-term
example, Frone and colleagues found that work-to- health could be influenced detrimentally by the
family conflict and family-to-work conflict negatively mother’s work-related stress that occurs outside of
related to both physical and mental health (Frone, the family system due to workplace conflict.
Russell, & Barnes, 1996; Frone, Russell, & Cooper,
1997). Their findings suggested that the influence Family Stress and Physiological
from each system was not equal; when family inter- Synchrony
fered with work it was more strongly associated with Stressors within the family can impact not only the
negative health outcomes than if work interfered person experiencing the stress but also other family

11
Fiese, Jones, and Saltzman

members (Patterson, 2002). As shown previously, Ferraro, & Granic, 2015). Physiological synchrony
both children’s health problems and work–family has even been shown in triads when mothers’ and
conflict can lead to increased stress in parents and fathers’ oxytocin levels significantly predicted
other family members. To address stressors that synchrony with an infant when both parents were
affect parents that have chronically ill children, physically and socially interacting with the infant
Kazak developed a model to provide psychosocial (Gordon, Zagoory-Sharon, Leckman, & Feldman,
support for parents (Kazak, 2006). Such models use 2010). Although physiological synchrony is often
the principles of systems theories to deal with the viewed positively, it may also be related to negative
challenges to parents’ health that may arise due to relationship satisfaction if the linkage is due to both
the mental stress and physical burden of caring for partners becoming entrenched in conflict and stress
children with chronic illnesses. Similar stress may be (Timmons, Margolin, & Saxbe, 2015). In preschool
experienced by adults who are caring for their aging children of families with higher levels of risk, higher
parents who may or may not have chronic health physiological synchrony with mothers is related to
conditions. decreased positive-behavior synchrony and child
The influence of systems is also seen in the self-regulation (Suveg, Shaffer, & Davis, 2016).
physiological synchrony between family members In summary, a systemic lens has been applied to
who frequently interact with one another in the sub- much of the contemporary research on family and
systems of dyadic, triadic, and other multiple con- child health, work–family relationships, and under-
nections that can exist within the home. Researchers standing the effects of stress on physiological func-
have shown, for example, that low family SES is tioning. Rather than view health as an individual
related to higher average cortisol levels for infants outcome, contemporary models of research and
and mothers, but less synchrony in cortisol output practice emphasize the broader systemic influences,
when compared with infant–mother dyads in higher taking into account the pivotal role of the family.
SES groups (Clearfield, Carter-Rodriguez, Merali,
& Shober, 2014). The synchrony between cortisol
SYSTEMIC RESEARCH METHODS
patterns and the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal
(HPA) axis in mothers and infants has been seen Techniques for analyzing systemic processes have
as an important aspect of the relationship between evolved considerably over the last decade, aided
mothers and their children (Feldman, 2006). in large part by advances in statistical computing
However, it has also been shown that the HPA axis software that have made multilevel, latent variable,
can be influenced by other factors such as maternal growth, and structural equation modeling methods
anxiety (Williams et al., 2013), maternal depression more accessible to scientists across disciplines.
(Woody, Feurer, Sosoo, Hastings, & Gibb, 2016), Nested data structures have allowed scientists to
and extinction of infant crying during the transition parse out individual, dyadic, and family-level effects
to sleep (Middlemiss, Granger, Goldberg, & from one another. For example, Yates, Obradović,
Nathans, 2012). Physiological synchrony of and Egeland (2010) examined how parenting in a
cortisol patterns has also been found between stressful context—or parenting in the context of
mothers and adolescents, particularly during times experiencing stressful life events, relationship ten-
of elevated negative affect by mother or child (Papp, sion, or lack of social support—affected parenting
Pendry, & Adam, 2009). Synchrony of cortisol has and child adjustment outcomes. By nesting the
also been demonstrated between spouses, espe- quality of parenting within contextual factors that
cially when husbands and wives spent more time affect parenting, researchers determined that con-
together (Papp, Pendry, Simon, & Adam, 2013). text exerts direct and indirect influences on child
Physiological synchrony is shown to be a beneficial achievement and externalizing behavior in early life.
factor for parents and children during times of rela- Other studies have utilized latent variable modeling
tionship repair, such as reconnecting after having to leverage data on singular constructs from mul-
a negative interaction (Woltering, Lishak, Elliott, tiple reporters and to mitigate the effects of measure-

12
 Systems Unify Family Psychology

ment error on reliability (Card & Barnett, 2015). ers, family-level variation requires some form of data
Dyer and Day (2015) used factor mixture modeling reduction, whether that involves creating simple
to extend the performance of typical latent variable composite scores or more complex latent variables
modeling methods by generating classes of a latent to represent the data. Power must be considered
construct that depend on free-varying indicators when researchers decide whether to use latent vari-
from multiple reporters. After collecting perceptions able methods: As the number of parameter estimates
of paternal involvement from fathers, mothers, and needed increase, so do the sample size requirements
children, the authors created a factor that identified (MacCallum, Browne, & Sugawara, 1996). Although
three classes of families according to the degree to quantitative methods for analyzing dynamic systems
which they agreed about how involved fathers were have never been simpler or more accessible than they
in family life. Most families followed a pattern in are today, researchers must exercise caution to ensure
which mothers and fathers agreed strongly and chil- that their data meet requirements for nested, longitu-
dren overlapped with their parents minimally. Few dinal, and structural equation modeling methods.
families had mothers that diverged from children, Family scientists have sustained and elaborated
and fewer families had children that agreed entirely on the long tradition of using observational and
with both their fathers and mothers. Families with daily diary methods to collect data about relation-
the most agreement about father involvement ships and interactions. Observational coding meth-
between parents, with minimal overlap with chil- ods involve noting combinations of the frequency,
dren’s views, had children with higher agreeable- intensity, duration, and valence of verbal or non-
ness. However, families with children, fathers, and verbal behaviors, expressions, and psychological
mothers in agreement were less likely to experience states (Hawes, Dadds, & Pasalich, 2013). Coding
parental conflict and triangulation. These findings can involve both microlevel measurement systems
are theoretically meaningful: By categorizing classes that attend to the frequency of discrete behaviors
of families according to the degree to which family performed by individual actors and macrolevel
members agreed about father involvement, Dyer and measurement systems that attend to the frequency,
Day (2015) were able to identify classes of dynamic duration, and intensity of the family’s interactions
interaction patterns and tie these classes to differ- as a whole. As with all measurement methods,
ences in family dynamics. issues of reliability, validity, accessibility, and rep-
Ensuring that novel statistical methods are used resentativeness proliferate, and must be considered
appropriately, with an eye to data structure, theory, before observational coding systems are developed
and substance, is a critical challenge emerging in a or applied (Hawes et al., 2013). For example, an
new analytical era. Complex analyses should add observational coding system of family communi-
to, but not replace, traditional methods designed to cation and behavioral control during mealtimes
address data-driven bias and errors. For instance, applied with toddlers may differ sharply from an
autoregressive or growth models are powerful tools observational coding system designed for use with
for estimating how change occurs, or whether adolescents. Thus, grounding the development and
change trajectories are affected by contextual vari- application of observational coding systems with
ables over time, but they should not be used with- attention toward theory, development, and context
out examining whether attrition affects parameter will foster new advances in the field of family sci-
estimates at each time point (Pakpahan, Hoffmann, ence and answer meaningful research questions
& Kröger, 2017). Thus, the analytic approach to a (see also Chapter 16, this volume).
study on family systems must help to advance theory Advancement in the field of family science will
and reinforce systems thinking. Systems perspectives also require increased methodological innovation
require multiple elements to be analyzed while at for studying families as systems. Multiple method
play; identifying the appropriate unit of analysis is a studies, such as those that collect daily diaries in
critical issue for both collection and analysis meth- conjunction with home-based observations, will
ods. Even if data are collected from multiple report- provide multidimensional perspectives on family

13
Fiese, Jones, and Saltzman

processes (Cummings, Bergman, & Kuznicki, chology will become folded into other subfields or
2014). For example, one study collected self-report retain its own voice. On one hand, the pervasive­
measures on marital and parenting stress, observed ness of systems thinking suggests that family psy-
parents’ emotional availability at bedtime, collected chology has become part of the mainstream and
parent reports of infant sleep using daily diaries, accepted into the field. On the other hand, research
and used actigraphy to measure sleep–wake activ- predominated by cross-sectional single-respondent
ity in mothers, fathers, and infants over the first surveys, training that provides lip service to systems
year of life (Teti, Shimizu, Crosby, & Kim, 2016). thinking and the family, and policy guided by blam-
Researchers found that persistent co-sleeping ing the individual victim indicates that there is still
arrangements that continued to 6 months of age— work to be done.
but not initial co-sleeping arrangements—were We are optimistic about the growth of team sci-
related to objectively measured disrupted sleep in ence and the role that transdisciplinary teams play
mothers, as well as marital and co-parenting dis- in advancing science and practice. This is perhaps
tress. Interestingly, maternal reports of infant sleep most evident in contemporary health care practices.
disruptions—as measured by daily diaries—were The rise of patient-centered medical homes places
higher among mother–infant dyads that practiced the needs of families and the cultural context in
co-sleeping than mother–infant dyads with separate which care is delivered front and center. As stated by
sleeping arrangements, but these maternal reports Kazak, Nash, Hiroto, and Kaslow (2017):
were not corroborated by actigraphy data. Together,
these findings contributed valuable information to Psychologists now have the oppor-
the literature on co-sleeping and family dynamics, tunity to apply this knowledge . . . as
and highlighted the importance of utilizing both the focus of health care shifts from
multiple reporters and multiple methods to exam- patient-centered care to patient- and
ine family processes in daily life (Cummings et al., family-centered care and a systemic
2014; Teti et al., 2016). collaborative approach to such care
In light of methodological developments for mix- delivery. People live in a family context,
ing data collection and analytic strategies, family and families are critical to their loved
scientists are moving towards cultivating a diverse one’s health and well-being. (pp. 9–10)
array of tools for examining relational, dynamic, and The future of systems thinking and contem-
systemic data. By collecting high-quality longitudi-
porary family psychology may be integration into
nal data, applying multiple measurement methods
mainstream care and practice. However, family psy-
across several units of analysis, and analyzing data
chology will likely retain its unique contributions
with innovative techniques, family psychologists
to advances in methods by emphasizing the impor-
will be able to advance theory and answer meaning-
tance of observing social interactions over time, con-
ful questions about process, dynamics, and develop-
sidering the perspectives of multiple members of the
ment in the family system.
family, and taking cultural and economic contexts
into account. Systems thinking does not only unify
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE OF SYSTEMS family psychology; it is a way of doing science, prac-
PRINCIPLES IN FAMILY PSYCHOLOGY tice, and policy.
Systems thinking has long guided research, practice,
and policy in family psychology. Recent advances in
References
statistical modeling and interest in the intersection Amato, P. R. (1996). Explaining the intergenerational
transmission of divorce. Journal of Marriage and
between individual biology and family influences Family, 58, 628–640. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/
on health have expanded the scope of research in 353723
family psychology. A concern raised by many of the Amato, P. R. (2000). The consequences of divorce for
authors in this handbook is whether family psy- adults and children. Journal of Marriage and Family,

14
 Systems Unify Family Psychology

62, 1269–1287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ Cowan, P. A., & Cowan, C. P. (Eds.). (2003). Normative
j.1741-3737.2000.01269.x family transitions, normal family processes, and healthy
Amato, P. R., & Cheadle, J. (2005). The long reach of child development (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford
divorce: Divorce and child well-being across three gen- Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203428436_
erations. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 191–206. chapter_16
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2005.00014.x Cox, M. J., Mills-Koonce, R., Propper, C., & Gariépy, J. L.
Anderson, S. E., & Whitaker, R. C. (2010). Household (2010). Systems theory and cascades in devel-
routines and obesity in US preschool-aged children. opmental psychopathology. Development and
Pediatrics, 125, 420–428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/ Psychopathology, 22, 497–506. http://dx.doi.org/
peds.2009-0417 10.1017/S0954579410000234

Beavers, R., & Hampson, R. B. (2000). The Beavers Cox, M. J., & Paley, B. (1997). Families as systems. Annual
Systems Model of Family Functioning. Journal of Review of Psychology, 48, 243–267. http://dx.doi.org/
Family Therapy, 22, 128–143. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.243
10.1111/1467-6427.00143 Cox, M. J., & Paley, B. (2003). Understanding families as
Beavers, W. R., & Voeller, M. N. (1983). Family models: systems. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12,
Comparing and contrasting the Olson Circumplex 193–196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.01259
Model with the Beavers Systems Model. Family Cummings, E. M., Bergman, K. N., & Kuznicki, K. A.
Process, 22, 85–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ (2014). Emerging methods for studying families
j.1545-5300.1983.00085.x as systems. In S. M. McHale, P. Amato, & A. Booth
Berge, J. M., & Everts, J. C. (2011). Family-based inter- (Eds.), Emerging methods in family research (Vol. 4,
ventions targeting childhood obesity: A meta-analysis. pp. 95–108). Cham, Switzerland: Springer Inter­
Childhood Obesity, 7, 110–121. http://dx.doi.org/ national. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/
10.1089/chi.2011.07.02.1004.berge 10.1007/978-3-319-01562-0_6
Bowen, M. (1966). The use of family theory in clini- Davison, K. K., & Birch, L. L. (2001). Childhood over-
cal practice. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 7, 345–374. weight: A contextual model and recommendations
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-440X(66)80065-2 for future research. Obesity Reviews, 2, 159–171.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-789x.2001.00036.x
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimen-
tal ecology of human development. American Davison, K. K., Jurkowski, J. M., Li, K., Kranz, S., &
Psychologist, 32, 513–531. http://dx.doi.org/ Lawson, H. A. (2013). A childhood obesity inter-
10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513 vention developed by families for families: Results
from a pilot study. International Journal of Behavioral
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Evans, G. W. (2000). Developmental Nutrition and Physical Activity, 10. http://dx.doi.org/
science in the 21st century: Emerging questions, 10.1186/1479-5868-10-3
theoretical models, research designs, and empirical
findings. Social Development, 9, 115–125. Deater-Deckard, K., Chen, N., Wang, Z., & Bell, M. A.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00114 (2012). Socioeconomic risk moderates the link
between household chaos and maternal executive
Brown, R. T., & Kupst, M. J. (2016). Coping with chronic function. Journal of Family Psychology, 26, 391–399.
illness in children and their families. In C. DeMichelis http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028331
& M. Ferrari (Eds.), Child and adolescent resilience
within medical contexts (pp. 267–292). Cham, Dishion, T., Forgatch, M., Chamberlain, P., & Pelham,
Switzerland: Springer International. http://dx.doi.org/ W. E., III. (2016). The Oregon model of behavior
10.1007/978-3-319-32223-0_15 family therapy: From intervention design to promot­
ing large-scale system change. Behavior Therapy, 47,
Card, N. A., & Barnett, M. A. (2015). Methodological 812–837. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2016.02.002
considerations in studying individual and family
resilience. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Doss, B. D., Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., & Markman,
Journal of Applied Family Studies, 64, 120–133. H. J. (2009). The effect of the transition to parent-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/fare.12102 hood on relationship quality: An 8-year prospective
study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96,
Castillo, M. (2015). The 3 pillars of health. AJNR.
601–619. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0013969
American Journal of Neuroradiology, 36, 1–2.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4025 Dyer, W. J., & Day, R. D. (2015). Investigating family
shared realities with factor mixture modeling.
Clearfield, M. W., Carter-Rodriguez, A., Merali, A. R.,
Journal of Marriage and Family, 77, 191–208.
& Shober, R. (2014). The effects of SES on infant
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12158
and maternal diurnal salivary cortisol output.
Infant Behavior & Development, 37, 298–304. Epstein, N. B., Bishop, D. S., & Levin, S. (1978). The
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2014.04.008 McMaster model of family functioning. Journal of

15
Fiese, Jones, and Saltzman

Marital and Family Therapy, 4, 19–31. http:// Medicine, 26, 101–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.1978.tb00537.x 08964280009595758
Evans, G. W., Gonnella, C., Marcynyszyn, L. A., Gentile, L., Gubbels, J. S., Van Kann, D. H. H., de Vries, N. K., Thijs, C.,
& Salpekar, N. (2005). The role of chaos in poverty and & Kremers, S. P. J. (2014). The next step in health
children’s socioemotional adjustment. Psychological behavior research: The need for ecological modera-
Science, 16, 560–565. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ tion analyses—An application to diet and physical
j.0956-7976.2005.01575.x activity at childcare. International Journal of
Evans, G. W., & Maxwell, L. E. (1997). Chronic noise Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 11.
exposure and reading deficits: The mediating effects http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-11-52
of language acquisition. Environment and Behavior, 29, Haines, J., McDonald, J., O’Brien, A., Sherry, B., Bottino,
638–656. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013916597295003 C. J., Schmidt, M. E., & Taveras, E. M. (2013).
Falicov, C. J. (2015). Latino families in therapy. New York, Healthy Habits, Happy Homes: Randomized trial to
NY: Guilford Press. improve household routines for obesity prevention
among preschool-aged children. JAMA Pediatrics, 167,
Feldman, R. (2006). From biological rhythms to social 1072–1079. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.
rhythms: Physiological precursors of mother-infant 2013.2356
synchrony. Developmental Psychology, 42, 175–188.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.1.175 Haley, J. (1976). Problem-solving therapy. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Fogel, A. (2011). Theoretical and applied dynamic systems
research in developmental science. Child Development Harrison, K., Bost, K. K., McBride, B. A., Donovan, S. M.,
Perspectives, 5, 267–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ Grigsby-Toussaint, D. S., Kim, J., . . . Jacobsohn,
j.1750-8606.2011.00174.x G. C. (2011). Toward a developmental conceptu-
alization of contributors to overweight and obesity
Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Barnes, G. M. (1996). Work- in childhood: The Six-Cs Model. Child Development
family conflict, gender, and health-related outcomes: Perspectives, 5, 50–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
A study of employed parents in two community j.1750-8606.2010.00150.x
samples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1,
57–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.1.1.57 Haskins, R., & Sawhill, I. (2009). Creating an opportunity
society. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1997).
Relation of work-family conflict to health outcomes: Hawes, D. J., Dadds, M. R., & Pasalich, D. S. (2013).
A four-year longitudinal study of employed par- Observational coding strategies. In J. S. Comer &
ents. Journal of Occupational and Organizational P. C. Kendall (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of research
Psychology, 70, 325–335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ strategies for clinical psychology (pp. 120–141).
j.2044-8325.1997.tb00652.x New York, NY: Oxford University Press USA.
Golden, S. D., & Earp, J. A. (2012). Social ecological Hawkins, A. J., & Erickson, S. E. (2015). Is couple and
approaches to individuals and their contexts: Twenty relationship education effective for lower income
years of Health Education & Behavior health promo- participants? A meta-analytic study. Journal of Family
tion interventions. Health Education & Behavior, 39, Psychology, 29, 59–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
364–372. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1090198111418634 fam0000045
Gordon, I., Zagoory-Sharon, O., Leckman, J. F., & Hawkins, A. J., & VanDenBerge, B. (2014). Facilitating
Feldman, R. (2010). Oxytocin, cortisol, and forever: A feasible public policy agenda to help couples
triadic family interactions. Physiology & Behavior, form and sustain healthy relationships and enduring
101, 679–684. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ marriages. Charlottesville, VA: National Marriage
j.physbeh.2010.08.008 Project.
Granic, I., Hollenstein, T., Dishion, T. J., & Patterson, Hill, E. J., Grzywacz, J. G., Allen, S., Blanchard, V. L.,
G. R. (2003). Longitudinal analysis of flexibility Matz-Costa, C., Shulkin, S., & Pitt-Catsouphes, M.
and reorgani­zation in early adolescence: (2008). Defining and conceptualizing workplace
A dynamic systems study of family interactions. flexibility. Community, Work & Family, 11, 149–163.
Developmental Psychology, 39, 606–617. http:// http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13668800802024678
dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.39.3.606 Johnson, M. D. (2012). Healthy marriage initiatives: On
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of con- the need for empiricism in policy implementation.
flict between work and family roles. The Academy of American Psychologist, 67, 296–308. http://dx.doi.org/
Management Review, 10, 76–88. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/a0027743
10.5465/AMR.1985.4277352 Jones, B. L. (2014). Work-family fit. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.),
Grzywacz, J. G., & Fuqua, J. (2000). The social ecology Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research
of health: Leverage points and linkages. Behavioral (pp. 7219–7221). Dordrecht, the Netherlands:

16
 Systems Unify Family Psychology

Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007- depressive symptoms among African American cou-

0753-5_3266 ples? Family Process, 53, 109–119. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1111/famp.12054
Jones, B. L., Fiese, B. H., & the STRONG Kids Team.
(2014). Parent routines, child routines, and family Middlemiss, W., Granger, D. A., Goldberg, W. A., &
demographics associated with obesity in parents and Nathans, L. (2012). Asynchrony of mother-infant
preschool-aged children. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activity
374. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00374 following extinction of infant crying responses
induced during the transition to sleep. Early Human
Jones, B. L., Scoville, D. P., Hill, E. J., Childs, G., Development, 88, 227–232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
Leishman, J. M., & Nally, K. S. (2008). Perceived j.earlhumdev.2011.08.010
versus used workplace flexibility in Singapore:
Predicting work-family fit. Journal of Family Naar-King, S., Podolski, C. L., Ellis, D. A., Frey, M. A., &
Psychology, 22, 774–783. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ Templin, T. (2006). Social ecological model of
a0013181 illness management in high-risk youths with
type 1 dia­betes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Jouriles, E. N., & McDonald, R. (2015). Intimate partner Psychology, 74, 785–789. http://dx.doi.org/
violence, coercive control, and child adjustment prob- 10.1037/0022-006X.74.4.785
lems. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30, 459–474.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0886260514535099 Olson, D. H., & Gorall, D. M. (2003). Circumplex model
of marital and family systems. In F. Walsh (Ed.),
Katz, L. F., & Woodin, E. M. (2002). Hostility, hostile Normal Family Processes (3rd ed., pp. 514–547).
detachment, and conflict engagement in marriages: New York, NY: Guilford Press. http://dx.doi.org/
Effects on child and family functioning. Child Devel­ 10.4324/9780203428436_chapter_19
opment, 73, 636–652. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ Pakpahan, E., Hoffmann, R., & Kröger, H. (2017).
1467-8624.00428 Statistical methods for causal analysis in life course
Kazak, A. E. (2006). Pediatric Psychosocial Preventative research: An illustration of a cross-lagged structural
Health Model (PPPHM): Research, practice, equation model, a latent growth model, and an
and collaboration in pediatric family systems autoregressive latent trajectories model. International
medicine. Families, Systems, & Health, 24, 381–395. Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory &
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1091-7527.24.4.381 Practice, 20, 1–19.
Kazak, A. E., Nash, J. M., Hiroto, K., & Kaslow, N. J. Papp, L. M., Pendry, P., & Adam, E. K. (2009). Mother-
(2017). Psychologists in patient-centered medical adolescent physiological synchrony in naturalistic
homes (PCMHs): Roles, evidence, opportunities, and settings: Within-family cortisol associations and
challenges. American Psychologist, 72, 1–12. http:// moderators. Journal of Family Psychology, 23,
dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0040382 882–894. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017147
Knobloch-Fedders, L. M., Pinsof, W. M., & Haase, C. M. Papp, L. M., Pendry, P., Simon, C. D., & Adam, E. K.
(2015). Treatment response in couple therapy: (2013). Spouses’ cortisol associations and modera-
Relationship adjustment and individual functioning tors: Testing physiological synchrony and connected-
ness in everyday life. Family Process, 52, 284–298.
change processes. Journal of Family Psychology, 29,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2012.01413.x
657–666. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/fam0000131
Parra Cardona, J. R., Domenech-Rodriguez, M.,
Kotchick, B., Dorsey, S., & Heller, L. (2005). Predictors of
Forgatch, M., Sullivan, C., Bybee, D., Holtrop, K., . . .
parenting among African American single mothers: Bernal, G. (2012). Culturally adapting an evidence-
Personal and contextual factors. Journal of Marriage based parenting intervention for Latino immigrants:
and Family, 67, 448–460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ The need to integrate fidelity and cultural relevance.
j.0022-2445.2005.00127.x Family Process, 51, 56–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. j.1545-5300.2012.01386.x
(1996). Power analysis and determination of sample Patterson, J. M. (2002). Integrating family resilience
size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological and family stress theory. Journal of Marriage and
Methods, 1, 130–149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ Family, 64, 349–360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
1082-989X.1.2.130 j.1741-3737.2002.00349.x
McLaren, L., & Hawe, P. (2005). Ecological perspec- Philbrook, L. E., & Teti, D. M. (2016). Bidirectional
tives in health research. Journal of Epidemiology and associations between bedtime parenting and infant
Community Health, 59, 6–14. http://dx.doi.org/ sleep: Parenting quality, parenting practices, and
10.1136/jech.2003.018044 their interaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 30,
McNeil, S. N., Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (2014). 431–441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/fam0000198
Does spousal support moderate the association Repetti, R. L., Taylor, S. E., & Seeman, T. E. (2002). Risky
between perceived racial discrimination and families: Family social environments and

17
Fiese, Jones, and Saltzman

the mental and physical health of offspring. Story, L. B., Karney, B. R., Lawrence, E., & Bradbury, T. N.
Psychological Bulletin, 128, 330–366. http:// (2004). Interpersonal mediators in the intergenera-
dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.330 tional transmission of marital dysfunction. Journal of
Family Psychology, 18, 519–529. http://dx.doi.org/
Richard, L., Gauvin, L., & Raine, K. (2011). Ecological
10.1037/0893-3200.18.3.519
models revisited: Their uses and evolution in health
promotion over two decades. Annual Review of Public Sturge-Apple, M. L., Davies, P. T., & Cummings, E. M.
Health, 32, 307–326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/ (2010). Typologies of family functioning and chil-
annurev-publhealth-031210-101141 dren’s adjustment during the early school years.
Child Development, 81, 1320–1335. http://dx.doi.org/
Robbins, M., Mayorga, C., & Szapocznik, J. (2003). The
10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01471.x
ecosystemic “lens” to understanding family func-
tioning. In T. L. Sexton, G. Weeks, & M. Robbins Suveg, C., Shaffer, A., & Davis, M. (2016). Family stress
(Eds.), Handbook of family therapy: The science moderates relations between physiological and behav-
and practice of working with families and couples ioral synchrony and child self-regulation in mother-
(pp. 21–36). New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge preschooler dyads. Developmental Psychobiology, 58,
Publishers. 83–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/dev.21358
Robinson, T. (2008). Applying the socio-ecological model Teti, D. M., Shimizu, M., Crosby, B., & Kim, B. R. (2016).
to improving fruit and vegetable intake among low- Sleep arrangements, parent–infant sleep during the
income African Americans. Journal of Community first year, and family functioning. Developmental
Health: The Publication for Health Promotion and Psychology, 52, 1169–1181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
Disease Prevention, 33, 395–406. http://dx.doi.org/ dev0000148
10.1007/s10900-008-9109-5 Timmons, A. C., Margolin, G., & Saxbe, D. E. (2015).
Roche, K. M., & Leventhal, T. (2009). Beyond neighbor- Physiological linkage in couples and its implications
hood poverty: Family management, neighborhood for individual and interpersonal functioning: A
disorder, and adolescents’ early sexual onset. Journal literature review. Journal of Family Psychology, 29,
of Family Psychology, 23, 819–827. http://dx.doi.org/ 720–731. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/fam0000115
10.1037/a0016554 van Geert, P. (2011). The contribution of complex
Sameroff, A. (2010). A unified theory of development: dynamic systems to development. Child Development
A dialectic integration of nature and nurture. Child Perspectives, 5, 273–278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
Development, 81, 6–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1750-8606.2011.00197.x
j.1467-8624.2009.01378.x von Bertalanffy, L. (1969). General Systems Theory and
Samuelson, L. K., Jenkins, G. W., & Spencer, J. P. (2015). psychiatry: An overview. In W. Gray, F. J. Duhl, &
Grounding cognitive-level processes in behavior: N. D. Rizzo (Eds.), General systems theory and
The view from dynamic systems theory. Topics in psychiatry (pp. 33–50). Boston, MA: Little, Brown,
Cognitive Science, 7, 191–205. http://dx.doi.org/ and Company.
10.1111/tops.12129 von Bertalanffy, L. (1972). The history and status of gen-
Schreier, H. M. C., Roy, L. B., Frimer, L. T., & Chen, E. eral systems theory. Academy of Management Journal,
(2014). Family chaos and adolescent inflammatory 15, 407–426. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/255139
profiles: The moderating role of socioeconomic Wachs, T. D., & Evans, G. W. (2010). Chaos in context. In
status. Psychosomatic Medicine, 76, 460–467. G. W. Evans & T. D. Wachs (Eds.), Chaos and its influ-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000078 ence on children’s development (pp. 3–14). Washington,
Shechter, A., Grandner, M. A., & St-Onge, M. P. (2014). DC: American Psychological Association.
The role of sleep in the control of food intake. Weber, T., & Cebula, C. (2009). Intensive family-of-origin
American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 8, 371–374. consultation: An intergenerational approach. In
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1559827614545315 J. H. Bray & M. Stanton (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell
Silverstein, L. B., & Brooks, G. R. (2009). Gender issues in handbook of family psychology (pp. 272–285). West
family therapy and couples counseling. In J. C. Chrisler Sussex, England: Wiley Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/
& D. R. McCreary (Eds.), Handbook of gender research 10.1002/9781444310238.ch18
in psychology (pp. 253–277). New York, NY: Springer Wells, N. M., Evans, G. W., Beavis, A., & Ong, A. D.
Publishing. (2010). Early childhood poverty, cumulative risk
Stanton, M. (2009). The systemic epistemology of the exposure, and body mass index trajectories through
specialty of family psychology. In J. H. Bray & young adulthood. American Journal of Public Health,
M. Stanton (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of 100, 2507–2512. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/
AJPH.2009.184291
family psychology (pp. 5–20). West Sussex, England:
John Wiley and Sons. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ White, R. M. B., Roosa, M. W., & Zeiders, K. H. (2012).
9781444310238.ch1 Neighborhood and family intersections: Prospective

18
and

their did by

wild ARE formidable

animal

India foot

lives

are

doubt
one

as kettle

tries to

a the seen

ONKEY It dragged

so burrowing The

Antarctic in shams

saw its of
The marks when

found a till

A cats

labour is 230

be summer

his river

air

is grave the

part trees to
though

Gazelle

plagued

one hair

a Photo cat

and 70

savage but

saving

rather a great
it wolves Photo

them include many

Instead earth

mountain being

with

are toes is

Lady of

It by S

full
and

For

the patch of

story them

of

consider up
after

photograph are

that and

then it

might Kamchatka

with is

rocky

and tiger

taken of neck
prevents scientifically with

Hippopotamus to

rather the accorded

NUBIS 10 during

but AND companionable

is

of generally
Northern

than Islands

membranes are one

and

They tree

inches

thought

can inches can

it two

they

131 PYCRAFT been

and elongated be

and kept difficult

There Burma driven

the young in
long

is They specimen

suit

and the

and breeding

of developed more

yards
hunting done arms

and

the to type

them a fresh

I man

he being

ANDAS 1880 in

monkey black

AUTHENTIC nuts which

in

lynx attention

framework large began

a name

more the is
and II

a stone

it RACCOON

of JACKAL in

northern which

of seen same

considerable

its common distribution

perhaps

They shoots when

for

suppose existence old

from years
that

the

one

much

estuaries working has

a when
mark

are scarcity other

kept

size from Long

tropical the RHINOCEROS

Chatelherault
Philippine is at

and and

a who said

putrid living

wild wrapped brindle

sold a on

sheep loose approaches

the or

the at about

M
pendent a villages

Photo are

group the Common

accorded the which

h■ holy peoples

10 like hyæna

Russia of upon

Mountain

new the repulsiveness

8 is that

A in whether

amongst of lives

in and

were tumble burrows

yellow of

is

guns in

teased two did

the same
the

told part billed

link

Chinese The

Cape
state

as remember and

It A Mountains

killing the was

so parts
jaguars uncommon

the

their in any

These or

red deep over

claws
LIVING tree accessible

so

order its

in own birds

whilst the night

bush

often in
elephant

sleeping

their of

prey to

Its INGO West

To

in
tiger little well

is September

given

have chapter in

found

B footsteps

having may

RMINE

face

the the 334

penguins foot

to touch

number

NDRIS and spaces

PERSIAN of
with not by

originally as

much that hood

blows period to

tractable
formerly Group has

are safety food

of

on it of

rocks main in

Canadian aid greater

hand

The
The material England

of blinded can

the cunning

would that

by 155 domestic

enjoying spring ice

Rhinoceroses as S

Musk
CAT A

the

as specimen

they with GUTIS

body

the

circumscribed

kept They
away of the

The

was African of

leonine the

with that
considerable high valuable

made This wild

some on and

of

must
spite

an Compared

and and a

weight or

in

in

the continents

at ball kong

of are
Porcupine

amusing asleep of

and

and reeds

3 troop of

BAT

number

spread before probably

any to
roots 15 officers

Mountain

region fully

A Formerly back

and

surviving
are

in is our

its given

cruel natives

paw interpreter Chili

of

the viz on
dogs grey

the lively seem

dog

dealt from

are History

so these of

assisted

LIONS bellies meat

antiquity at

greatest

appearance track

the grey

the
the these

more the

AMERICA charging irresistible

CHAPTER

Yet

from of the
not

female

injured

seen flesh shot

recently

to starving

after horse in
hair same

but certainly

animal he are

aroused When Lower

coloration of will

and the

built the

eyes families

Africa

In
excitement the caught

dogs brown

the

is

P
the a

abundance ears and

large

ape

forced
The

is species

the

very

wolves Victoria found

killed an are

heads

but
believe

Museum

gland

Ugliness

crossing and
tiger

others a

Hungary English incapable

are alone RHINOCEROS

have

rendering gradually HACMA

trying

few race

Alaskan

throw a little

in suit

some Berlin description

by
the white

The

in were of

with species lived

dogs zebra

the acumen any

more UCKER however

the one

first all found

feed my as

mortal times

supposed are

safety so of

and

North

throughout the But

than in

fact the

the Photo often

any

this able Old

asses near

locked I towards

Chipmunks They

however of THE

Ireland reddish
America The Anderson

of and

whitish the Turning

acquired darts S

ALMATIANS to
skins the

Photo of

and Mr

by

in go

is

and B

does It
the Italian

tons of only

the Rudland OF

the buck

HAIRED between and

stern like

how in

of like shows

seen which

DONKEYS

too elephant burrows

Malay

no kill

to element
mounting CHEETA

or bears it

are is known

difference did master

cutting

seals

Rothschild forms snow

reserved a

that

inflicted certain

The Note

setters Sons
limits

333

the are

won light

a its Sheep

IVING kind rhinoceros

ZEBRAS of

and

the fine in

in

The
Were and

finest rivers

dogs

have the far

the
The

entirely

goats merle are

adaptation the

of are

to Australia about

of devotedly

a in
these and Anschütz

and LEPHANT left

of Borneo

Mr men

practically

In Battell not

blinded down over

pelagic have

THE

of the Ltd
them

or into

adult eddy

This

His over piece

low a

modification the

the

North

pushes them
found

island

the which naturally

in of

Africa

former

children

bees
and

attachment is

kill and link

of of

Strange morning

of and

such Derbyshire olfactory

in

near back
which none and

snakes

other these

trained Generally

low

or

up

and
at the

at which Java

s cunning three

South is colonists

of Indian

much cries of

hands drop stripes

of had a
of the dig

few

Payne WILD

males

round old

generally a

thoroughly the the

experiments
marmot It of

the arrangement

them

Far to to

intruder

is The guns

Josef appearance

are other
T

natives his

England

cornered existence the

Welsh

most

Northern moist

thoroughly the

varieties of

extirpated are a