Common factors and other nontechnique variables in marriage and family therapy.

Abstract

Nontechnique Variables in Marriage and family Therapy he field of marriage and family therapy (MFT) has been slow to consider the common factors. This is ironic as most of these important factors for change are highly relational in nature. While keeping in mind a few exceptions-the work of Duncan and his colleagues (Duncan, 1992; Duncan, Hubble, 6 Miller, 1997; Duncan, Solovey, 6 Rusk, 1992) and the attention given within MFT research to the therapeutic alliance-we agree with Wampler's ( 1997) conclusion: "Outcome research in marriage and family therapy has largely ignored the research literature on common factors underlying effective psychotherapy" (p. 10).The neglect of the common factors becomes understandable once the history of the profession is examined. In the first three decades of MFT's existence, distinctiveness was strongly emphasized over commonality. Family therapy began as a maverick discipline. It was oppositional, even defiant to the prevailing psychotherapy zeitgeist. In addition, perhaps because they were rebels of a sort, many of the discipline's founders were feisty and dynamic. They drew attention to their uniqueness and created theories matching their personalities. Carl Whitaker's experiential family therapy, for example, stressing spontaneity, creativity, and the benefits of "craziness," flowed from his "right-brained," iconoclastic style. Minuchin's structural family therapy, positing family problems as flaws in family organization, fit T I

The Multisystemic and Multilevel Investigation of the Expanded Therapeutic Alliance‐Psychological Functioning Relationship in Individual Therapy

“…Within covers the alliance between the client and the people who are important to him/her (“The people who are important to me”). This concept of the expanded therapeutic alliance is considered to be a common factor essential to the practice of all systemic-based therapies (Sprenkle, Blow, & Dickey, 1999; Sprenkle & Blow, 2004; Sprenkle, Davis, & Lebow, 2009). …”

The Development of Core Competencies for the Practice of Marriage and Family Therapy

“…These definitions will aid in studying what occurs in therapy that enhances therapeutic outcome for clients. We have some general and broad notions of common factors of effective MFT treatment (e.g., Blow & Sprenkle, 2001; Sprenkle & Blow, 2004; Sprenkle, Blow, & Dickey, 1999); however, the CC provide a level of specificity that allows for more clearly operationalizing and thus understanding what occurs in therapy that is helpful. Finally, researchers may be more able to address issues relevant to regulatory agencies, government policy and funding agencies, third‐party payers, and others who are interested in mental health issues.…”

What Clients of Couple Therapy Model Developers and Their Former Students Say About Change, Part I: Model‐Dependent Common Factors Across Three Models

“…The next steps for MFT researchers interested in furthering our understanding of common factors include generating hypotheses about what components of different models are common factors responsible for change (Blow & Sprenkle, 2001; Sprenkle & Blow, 2004a; Sprenkle, Blow, & Dickey, 1999; Wampler, 1997), determining if they are necessary and/or sufficient by empirically relating these factors to outcome, understanding how and when they are implemented across various models (and if how and when they are implemented makes a difference), and formulating a theory or model of these components that provides adequate clinical, training, and research guidance. The end result could be a meta‐theory of change in MFT which would point clinicians, researchers, and educators to what needs to happen when helping people change.…”