Interpersonal Relations: Some Suggestions for Theory Development

Abstract

This article argues the need for theory development in the field of interpersonal relations training. Criteria, based on the four major divisions of philosophic inquiry (ontology, logic, axiology, and epistemology), are presented for assessing the substantive adequacy of interpersonal relations training theories. Three views of interpersonal relations-Ivey and Authier's Microcounseling, Kagan's Interpersonal Process Recall, and Strong's Social Psychological Approach-are then examined using these four criteria.Numerous programs have been developed based on the belief that interpersonal relationship variables are active in producing beneficial client change and that they are skills that can be learned (Carkhuff 1969;Egan, 1982;Ivey & Authier 1978;Kagan, 1975). Although many studies have appeared in the literature that purport to be investigations of these two beliefs, reviewers of this literature, for the most part, have been disappointed with the usefulness of the findings (Calia, 1974; Ford, 1979;Garfield, 1977;Marsden, 1971; Matarazzo, 1979). A common conclusion of these reviewers is that the studies are not testing theory. Marsden's (197 1) comment, made after considering the studies of the application of client-centered constructs to interpersonal relations, typified this theme.For the most part, (the studies) were not attempts to explore the implications of a theoretical position. Instead, they attacked a variety of sometimes trivial problems in scattergram fashion; the conditions constructs themselves were not considered in relation to theory but appear to have been used as theoretical, common-sense tools for looking at therapist behavior (p. 362). Dubin's (1969) ideas on the link between theory and research may explain some of the shortcomings of studies in this area. He makes a John W . Robillson i s a doctoral student and A1 Herman is a professor,