دورية أكاديمية
أعرض في EDS

Validation of the Emotional Tone Index for Families (ETIF): A Multi-Informant Measure of Emotional Closeness.

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: Validation of the Emotional Tone Index for Families (ETIF): A Multi-Informant Measure of Emotional Closeness.
المؤلفون: Kerr S; Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA., Hudenko WJ; Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA.; Department of Psychiatry, Dartmouth's Geisel School of Medicine, Hanover, NH, USA., Godfrey DA; Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA., Lundgren SN; Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland., O'Malley AJ; The Dartmouth Institute, Dartmouth's Geisel School of Medicine, Hanover, NH, USA., Sharp C; Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
المصدر: Family process [Fam Process] 2021 Sep; Vol. 60 (3), pp. 935-949. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Oct 16.
نوع المنشور: Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
اللغة: English
بيانات الدورية: Publisher: Family Process Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 0400666 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1545-5300 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00147370 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Fam Process Subsets: MEDLINE
أسماء مطبوعة: Publication: New York, NY : Family Process
Original Publication: Baltimore [etc.]
مواضيع طبية MeSH: Emotions* , Parents*, Child ; Family Relations ; Female ; Humans ; Mothers ; Reproducibility of Results
مستخلص: Despite the importance of emotional closeness (EC) in families, few researchers have accurately measured the construct in a systemic way. Additionally, existing measures rely on ratings from one informant, typically the mother, to provide information on closeness within the entire family system. We examined EC in 140 individuals (37 families) using the Emotional Tone Index for Families (ETIF), a novel, multi-informant measure that obtains bidirectional information about EC within every family relationship. The parent identified as most familiar with the family also completed two widely used single-informant measures: The McMaster Family Assessment Device and the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales, version IV. The ETIF exhibited good test-retest reliability, high internal consistency, and concurrent validity with the single-informant measures. Though the primary respondent scores correlated highly with overall family closeness, results revealed only a modest association between closeness ratings within each dyad and parents rated higher levels of closeness toward their children than children rated closeness toward parents. These findings suggest that ratings from multiple informants provide valuable information about discrepancies in perceived closeness between family members and other complex family dynamics that cannot be captured by single-informant measures. Limitations, future directions, and implications for practice are discussed.
(© 2020 Family Process Institute.)
References: Berry, J. T., Hurley, J. H., & Worthington, E. L. Jr (1990). Empirical validity of the kvebaek family sculpture technique. American Journal of Family Therapy, 18(1), 19-31.
Berscheid, E., Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. (1989). The Relationship Closeness Inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 792-807.
Berscheid, E., Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. (2004). Measuring closeness: The relationship closeness inventory (RCI) revisited. In D. J. Mashek & P. Aron (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 81-101). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bihum, J. T., Wamboldt, M. Z., Gavin, L. A., & Wamboldt, F. S. (2002). Can the Family Assessment Device (FAD) be used with school aged children? Family Process, 41(4), 723-731.
Bredehoft, D. J., & Hey, R. N. (1985). An evaluation study of self-esteem: A family affair. Family Relations, 34(3), 411.
Cox, M. J., Paley, B., & Harter, K. (2001). Interparental conflict and parent-child relationships. In Grych, J. H. & Fincham, F. D. (Eds.). Interparental conflict and child development: Theory, research, and applications, (pp. 249-272). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crane, D. R., Dollahite, D. C., Griffin, W., & Taylor, V. L. (1987). Diagnosing relationships with spatial distance: An empirical test of a clinical principle. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 13(3), 307-310.
Davey, A. J., & Paolucci, B. (1980). Family interaction: A study of shared time and activities. Family Relations, 29(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.2307/583715.
Davies, P. T., & Cummings, E. M. (1994). Marital conflict and child adjustment: An emotional security hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 116(3), 387-411.
Davies, P. T., Martin, M. J., Coe, J. L., & Cummings, E. M. (2016). Transactional cascades of destructive interparental conflict, children’s emotional insecurity, and psychological problems across childhood and adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 28(03), 653-671.
De Los Reyes, A., Ohannessian, C. M., & Laird, R. D. (2016). Developmental changes in discrepancies between adolescents’ and their mothers’ views of family communication. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25(3), 790-797.
Epstein, N. B., Baldwin, L. M., & Bishop, D. S. (1983). The McMaster family assessment device. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9(2), 171-180.
Feinberg, M. E., Solmeyer, A. R. & McHale, S. M. (2012) The third rail of family systems: Sibling relationships, mental and behavioral health, and preventive intervention in childhood and adolescence. Clinical child and family psychology review, 15(1), 43-57.
Feldman, B. J., Conger, R. D., & Burzette, R. G. (2004). Traumatic events, psychiatric disorders, and pathways of risk and resilience during the transition to adulthood. Research in Human Development, 1(4), 259-290.
Gerber, G. L. (1973). Psychological distance in the family as schematized by families of normal, disturbed, and learning-problem children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 40(1), 139.
Gorall, D. M., Tiesel, J., & Olson, D. H. (2004). FACES IV: Development and validation. Minneapolis, MN: Life Innovations.
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children’s self-regulation and competence in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(2), 143-154.
Harold, G. T., Osborne, L. N., & Conger, R. D. (1997). Mom and dad are at it again: Adolescent perceptions of marital conflict and adolescent psychological distress. Developmental Psychology, 33(2), 333-350.
Herzer, M., Godiwala, N., Hommel, K. A., Driscoll, K., Mitchell, M., Crosby, L. E. & et al. (2010). Family functioning in the context of pediatric chronic conditions. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 31(1), 26-34.
Holtz, R., Brannigan, G. G., & Schofield, J. J. (1980). The Kinetic Family Drawing as a measure of interpersonal distance. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 137(2), 307-308.
Katz, L. F., & Gottman, J. M. (1996). Spillover effects of marital conflict: In search of parenting and coparenting mechanisms. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 1996(74), 57-76.
Kerr, D. C. R., Lunkenheimer, E. S., & Olson, S. L. (2007). Assessment of child problem behaviors by multiple informants: a longitudinal study from preschool to school entry. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48(10), 967-975.
Kidder, S. J., & Kuethe, J. L. (1975). Children's parental schemata as related to reading achievement. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 40(3), 971-973.
Korchmaros, J. D., & Kenny, D. A. (2001). Emotional closeness as a mediator of the effect of genetic relatedness on altruism. Psychological Science, 12(3), 262-265.
Kouros, C. D., Papp, L. M., Goeke-Morey, M. C., & Cummings, E. M. (2014). Spillover between marital quality and parent-child relationship quality: Parental depressive symptoms as moderators. Journal of Family Psychology, 28(3), 315.
Koutra, K., Triliva, S., Roumeliotaki, T., Lionis, C., & Vgontzas, A. N. (2013). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Greek version of the family adaptability and cohesion evaluation scales IV package (FACES IV Package). Journal of Family Issues, 34(12), 1647-1672.
Krishnakumar, A., & Buehler, C. (2000). Interparental conflict and parenting behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Family Relations, 49(1), 25-44.
Liang, Z., Zhang, G., Deng, H., Song, Y., Zheng, W., & Sun, L. (2013). Links between marital relationship and child-parent relationship: Mediating effects of parents’ emotional expressiveness. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 45(12), 1355-1367.
Lippold, M. A., Davis, K. D., McHale, S. M., Buxton, O. M., & Almeida, D. M. (2016). Daily stressor reactivity during adolescence: The buffering role of parental warmth. Health Psychology, 35(9), 1027-1035.
Lucas-Thompson, R. G., & Granger, D. A. (2014). Parent-child relationship quality moderates the link between marital conflict and adolescents’ physiological responses to social evaluative threat. Journal of Family Psychology, 28(4), 538-548.
Mansfield, A. K., Keitner, G. I., & Dealy, J. (2015). The family assessment device: An update. Family Process, 54(1), 82-93.
Mansfield, A. K., Keitner, G. I., & Sheeran, T. (2019). The Brief Assessment of Family Functioning Scale (BAFFS): A three-item version of the general functioning scale of the family assessment device. Psychotherapy Research, 29(6), 824-831. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2017.1422213.
McFarlane, A. H., Bellissimo, A., & Norman, G. R. (1995). Family structure, family functioning and adolescent well-being: the transcendent influence of parental style. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 36(5), 847-864.
Miller, I. W., Epstein, N. B., Bishop, D. S., & Keitner, G. I. (1985). The McMaster family assessment device: Reliability and validity. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11(4), 345-356.
Miller, I. W., Kabacoff, R. I., Keitner, G. I., Epstein, N. B., & Bishop, D. S. (1986). Family functioning in the families of psychiatric patients. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 27(4), 302-312.
Ohannessian, C. M., & De Los Reyes, A. (2014). Discrepancies in adolescents’ and their mothers’ perceptions of the family and adolescent anxiety symptomatology. Parenting, 14(1), 1-18.
Olson, D. H. (1986). Circumplex model VII: Validation studies and FACES III. Family Process, 25(3), 337-351.
Olson, D. H. (2000). Circumplex model of marital and family systems. Journal of Family Therapy, 22(2), 144-167.
Olson, D. H. (2011). FACES IV and the Circumplex model: Validation study. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 37(1), 64-80.
Olson, D. H., Gorall, D. M., & Tiesel, J. W. (2004). Faces IV package. Minneapolis, MN: Life Innovations.
Olson, D. H., Russell, C. S., & Sprenkle, D. H. (1983). Circumplex model of marital and family systems: Vl. Theoretical update. Family process, 22(1), 69-83.
Paley, B., Conger, R. D., & Harold, G. T. (2000). Parents’ affect, adolescent cognitive -representations, and adolescent social development. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(3), 761-776.
Power, T. J., Andrews, T. J., Eiraldi, R. B., Doherty, B. J., Ikeda, M. J., DuPaul, G. J. & et al. (1998). Evaluating attention deficit hyperactivity disorder using multiple informants: The incremental utility of combining teacher with parent reports. Psychological Assessment, 10(3), 250-260.
Sentse, M., Lindenberg, S., Omvlee, A., Ormel, J., & Veenstra, R. (2010). Rejection and acceptance across contexts: Parents and peers as risks and buffers for early adolescent psychopathology. The TRAILS Study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38(1), 119-130.
Servaty-Seib, H. L., & Pistole, M. C. (2007). Adolescent grief: Relationship category and emotional closeness. OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying, 54(2), 147-167.
Staccini, L., Tomba, E., Grandi, S., & Keitner, G. I. (2015). The evaluation of family functioning by the family assessment device: A systematic review of studies in adult clinical populations. Family Process, 54(1), 94-115.
Steinberg, L. (2001). We know some things: Parent-adolescent relationships in retrospect and prospect. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 11(1), 1-19.
Tuccitto, D. E., Giacobbi, P. R., & Leite, W. L. (2010). The internal structure of positive and negative affect: A confirmatory factor analysis of the PANAS. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(1), 125-141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164409344522.
Türkdoğan, T., Duru, E., & Balkıs, M. (2018). Turkish adaptation of the family adaptability and cohesion scale IV. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.409110.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063.
Yu, S., Clemens, R., Yang, H., Li, X., Stanton, B., Deveaux, L. & et al. (2006). Youth and parental perceptions of parental monitoring and parent-adolescent communication, youth depression, and youth risk behaviors. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 34(10), 1297-1310.
Zhou, Q., Eisenberg, N., Losoya, S. H., Fabes, R. A., Reiser, M., Guthrie, I. K. & et al. (2002). The relations of parental warmth and positive expressiveness to children’s empathy-related responding and social functioning: A longitudinal study. Child Development, 73(3), 893-915.
معلومات مُعتمدة: Audrey and Theodor Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth
فهرسة مساهمة: Keywords: Emotional Closeness; Family; Measurement; Multi-Informant; cercanía emocional; familia; medición; varios informantes; 多个信息提供者; 家庭; 情感亲密程度; 测量
Local Abstract: [Publisher, Spanish; Castilian] A pesar de la importancia de la cercanía emocional en las familias, pocos investigadores han medido con precisión el constructo de una manera sistémica. Además, las herramientas de medición existentes dependen de las valoraciones de un informante, normalmente la madre, para proporcionar información sobre la cercanía dentro de todo el sistema familiar. Analizamos la cercanía emocional en 140 personas (37 familias) usando el Índice de Tono Emocional para las Familias (ITEF), una herramienta de medición novedosa que obtiene información bidireccional sobre la cercanía emocional dentro de cada relación familiar por parte de varios informantes. El progenitor identificado como el más familiarizado con la familia también completó dos evaluaciones de un solo informante ampliamente utilizadas: el Dispositivo de McMaster de Evaluación Familiar (McMaster Family Assessment Device) y las Escalas de Evaluación de la Cohesión y la Adaptabilidad Familiar (Family Adapatability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales), versión IV. El ITEF demostró buena fiabilidad de prueba-reprueba, una alta coherencia interna y validez simultánea con las evaluaciones de un solo informante. Aunque los puntajes del encuestado principal se correlacionaron en gran medida con la cercanía familiar general, los resultados revelaron solo una asociación modesta entre las valoraciones de cercanía dentro de cada díada, y los padres indicaron niveles más altos de cercanía hacia sus hijos de lo que los hijos lo hicieron hacia sus padres. Estos resultados sugieren que las valoraciones de varios informantes proporcionan información valiosa acerca de las discrepancias en la cercanía percibida entre los miembros de la familia y otra dinámica familiar compleja que no puede captarse mediante las mediciones de un solo informante. Se explican las limitaciones, las futuras direcciones y las implicancias para la práctica. [Publisher, Chinese] 尽管情感亲密度在家庭中很重要，但很少有研究人员能以系统的方式准确地量化这一概念。此外，现有的测量方法依赖于单个信息提供者的评分，通常是母亲，来提供整个家庭系统内有关亲密程度的信息。本研究使用家庭情感基调指数(ETIF)对140个个体(37个家庭)的EC进行了研究。这是一种全新的、由多个个体提供信息的测量方法，可以在每个家庭关系中获得关于EC的双向信息。被确认为最熟悉家庭的父母也完成了两个广泛使用的单一信息测量即麦克马斯特家庭评估工具和家庭适应性和凝聚力评估量表的第四版。ETIF表现出良好的测试-重测可靠性，高度的内部一致性，以及与单一信息测量的同步有效性。 虽然主要受访者的得分与整体家庭亲密程度高度相关，但结果显示，每对夫妇之间的亲密度评分之间只有适度的关联，父母对孩子的亲密度评分高于孩子对父母的亲密度评分。父母对子女的亲密程度评分高于子女对父母的亲密程度评分。这些研究结果表明，来自多个信息提供者的评级提供了宝贵的信息，说明家庭成员之间感知的亲密度差异和其他复杂的家庭动态，这些信息不能被单一信息提供者的测量所捕获。本文讨论了本研究的局限性、未来的方向和对实践的意义。.
تواريخ الأحداث: Date Created: 20201016 Date Completed: 20220202 Latest Revision: 20220202
رمز التحديث: 20221213
DOI: 10.1111/famp.12608
PMID: 33064306
قاعدة البيانات: MEDLINE
الوصف
تدمد:1545-5300
DOI:10.1111/famp.12608