Faculty Bibliography

This article describes a conceptual framework for couple-based assessment strategies grounded in empirical findings linking couple distress to a broad range of both individual and relationship characteristics. These characteristics can contribute to, exacerbate, or result from relationship problems. On the basis of these findings, the authors articulate specific targets of clinical inquiry reflecting relationship behaviors, cognitions, and affect as well as features of individual distress. Guided by this framework, empirically supported assessment strategies and techniques emphasizing relationship functioning across diverse methods are proposed, including the clinical interview, analog behavioral observation, and both self- and other-report measures. Discussion concludes with specific recommendations regarding clinical assessment of couple distress and directions for further research.

This study examined associations between couple communication about cancer and psychological distress and relationship satisfaction of women diagnosed with early stage breast cancer. One hundred forty-eight couples completed a videotaped discussion of a cancer-related issue and a general issue. Patients completed measures of psychological distress and relationship satisfaction. Videotapes were coded with the Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System. Analyses focused on partner responses to patient self-disclosures. During cancer-issue discussions, patients reported less distress when partners responded to disclosures with reciprocal self-disclosure and humor and when partners were less likely to propose solutions. Fewer links between partner responses to patient self-disclosures and distress were found in general-issue discussions. Results suggest partner responses play a role in women's adaptation to breast cancer.

This paper describes two studies investigating the interrater agreement of severity scales for family maltreatment used in America's largest child and family maltreatment agency: the U. S. military's Family Advocacy Program (FAP). The USAF-FAP Severity Index is a multidimensional rating system for clinicians' evaluations of the severity of seven forms of family maltreatment: partner physical, emotional, and sexual abuse; child physical, emotional, and sexual abuse; and child neglect. The first study evaluated the reliability of the scale as it is used in the field. The second study compared a generalizable sample of clinicians' ratings to an established "gold standard" of what the ratings should have been. The Severity Index demonstrated fair-to-good levels of reliability, suggesting that with minimal cost, investigating caseworkers can routinely assess, and make fairly reliable ratings of, the severity of seven forms of family maltreatment for each case they investigate.

The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of an empirically tested program for physical aggression: Physical Aggression Couples Treatment (PACT). Although we do not advocate standard "marital therapy" when there is ongoing husband-to-wife interspousal aggression, we present the rationale for, description of, and empirical support for a conjoint treatment approach to wife abuse abatement. © 2003 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

The cycle of violence posits that victimized children grow up to victimize others. Three forms of the cycle have never been tested: whether exposure to physical victimization and interparental violence additively or interactively increase risk for adulthood (a) child abuse perpetration; (b) partner abuse perpetration; or (c) partner abuse victimization. These hypotheses were tested in a nationally representative data set (1985 National Family Violence Survey) comprising 6,002 participants. Dually exposed, compared to singly exposed, women had significantly increased risk for adulthood family violence. Frequency of family-of-origin violence predicted adulthood child and partner abuse through both main and interactive effects.