Search

There is a critical need for high-quality and accessible treatments to improve mental health. Yet, there are indications that the research being conducted by contemporary marriage and family therapy (MFT) scholars focuses less on advancing and disseminating clinical interventions than in previous decades. In this article, we describe challenges to increasing rigorous clinical research in MFT. We use systems mapping and the intervention-level framework to identify strategic goals designed to drive innovation in clinical research in the field. It is our hope this article encourages dialog and action among MFT stakeholder groups to support clinical science that will improve the health and functioning of families., (© 2018 American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy.)

In this paper we argue that the therapist is a crucial change variable in psychotherapy as a whole and in couple, marital, and family therapy specifically. Therapists who work with complex systems require more skills to negotiate demanding therapy contexts. Yet, little is known about what differentiates effective couple, marital, and family therapists from those who are less effective, what innate therapy skills they possess, how they learn, and how they operationalize their knowledge in the therapy room. We discuss the need to emphasize evidence based therapists (as opposed to therapies), and implications of the importance of the role therapists for training, practice, research priorities, and policy.

Specific models guide the training of marriage and family therapists (MFTs) as they offer both structure and organization for both therapists and clients. Learning models may also benefit therapists-in-training by instilling confidence and preventing atheoretical eclecticism. The moderate common factors perspective argues that models are essential, but should not be taught as "the absolute truth," given there is no evidence for relative efficacy of one empirically validated model versus another, and no single model works in all instances. The following article provides a blueprint for infusing a common factors perspective into MFT programmes by reviewing innovations in course design, outlining specific teaching strategies, and highlighting potential implementation challenges., (© 2014 American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy.)

Recovery from a mild-to-moderate traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a challenging process for injured persons and their families. Guided by attachment theory, we investigated whether relationship conflict, social support, or sense of belonging were associated with psychological functioning. Community-dwelling persons with TBI (N = 75) and their relatives/significant others (N = 74) were surveyed on relationship variables, functional status, and TBI symptom severity. Results from this cross-sectional study revealed that only sense of belonging was a significant predictor of postinjury psychological functioning, although interpersonal conflict approached significance. No relevant preinjury or injury-related variables impacted these relationships, except marital status. Our findings suggest that interventions targeting strengthening the injured persons' sense of belonging and lowering interpersonal conflict may benefit those living with TBI., (© 2011 American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy.)

The article describes a research study that explored the process of how change occurred for one distressed couple and a specific therapist in a naturalistic setting. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected on the couple at multiple points in the therapy. A research team comprised of five members met regularly to analyze the data and collectively they arrived at a theory of change for the couple posttherapy. Conclusions are made related to how change occurred for the couple with an emphasis on the role of extratherapeutic events, client motivational factors, the therapeutic alliance, hope and expectancy factors, therapist factors, specific techniques and interventions, and other surprise factors that contributed to change.

In this article, we respond to Sexton, Ridley, and Kleiner (this issue) from three different perspectives. First, we discuss their criticisms as rooted in a portrait of common factors to which we do not subscribe. Second, we discuss points of agreement and partial agreement between our two articles. Finally, we discuss our areas of clear disagreement with their points of view. In these areas of disagreement we put forth the common factors approach as an empirically supported lens; we discuss the influence of investigator allegiance on the specificity conclusion; and we challenge the idea that the common factors lens is simple. In conclusion, we illustrate how common factors work through a credible therapy model using functional family therapy as an example.

In this article we argue that much of what makes one treatment effective is common to other forms of effective treatment--both in psychotherapy generally and in marital and family therapy (MFT) specifically. Yet MFT has largely ignored the research on common factors. In this article we present a moderate view of common factors that, while repudiating the extreme position that there is no difference among treatment models, stresses that there are common factors and mechanisms of change that undergird most forms of successful treatment. These common mechanisms of change should be given more attention in our field, which has tended to emphasize the uniqueness of our sacred models. We delineate some of the major common factors, review the empirical evidence for them, and discuss implications of adapting a common factors informed approach to family therapy.

The Delphi methodology was used to explore common factors across theories of marriage and family therapy (MFT). Leading clinicians and researchers from the American Family Therapy Academy and select faculty members from MFT training programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Marriage and Family Therapy Education were asked to achieve consensus regarding common factors. Respondents were asked to report on commonalities across the various MFT theories, as well as what they personally considered to be the core ingredients of change. A final profile of items was created from the responses. Qualitative interviews were conducted with selected panelists to clarify discrepancies as well as to add meaning to the data. Implications for the training and practice of MFTs as well as direction for future research are discussed.