Reliability in Constructing Genograms: A Study Among Marriage and Family Therapy Doctoral Students

Abstract

Although genograms are widely utilized in the field of marriage and family therapy, there has been no empirical research establishing marriage and family therapists' accuracy in using the genogram as an information‐gathering tool. This article reports results of an evaluation of how accurately marriage and family therapy doctoral students record content information on genograms. Subjects included 17 doctoral students in AAMFT accredited marriage and family therapy programs who constructed genograms from a fictitious scenario. The results indicate that marriage and family therapy doctoral students are highly accurate in recording named persons' names and symbols; moderately accurate in recording unnamed persons, occupations, relationship descriptors, medical issues, personal issues and descriptive phrases, and other significant symbols; and most inaccurate in recording dates and ages. Students' accuracy scores for recording content data on genograms were not found to be significantly correlated with experience level in the doctoral program or self‐rated genogram construction ability. Implications for marriage and family therapists and trainers are provided, including a call for more standardized instruction in genogram construction.

Family Career Genograms: Beginning Life Design With Exploratory Students

“…Few empirical studies have been conducted on the genogram. Coupland, Serovich, and Glenn (1995) found variable accuracy among doctoral students recording genograms. Rohrbraugh, Rogers, and McGoldrick (1992) revealed poor reliability among counselors in a medical setting, and Whiston (2012) reported little evidence of validity for genograms.…”

The Family Genogram Interview

“…The unstructured nature of genogram interviewing also prevents researchers from rigorously testing theoretical and clinical assumptions about family functioning using a genogram assessment (Coupland et al, 1995). Development of a more structured genogram interview—with clear operationalizations of family emotional processes that are replicable across interviewers, within a study, and across studies—would facilitate more empirical research on multigenerational family processes and their implications for individual or family functioning.…”

“…Although the research investigating the reliability of genogram interviewing as it is currently conducted in the field is limited, two previous studies confirm the need for greater structure built into genogram interviewing in research and clinical settings. For example, among marriage and family doctoral students, Coupland, Serovich, and Glenn (1995) found the reliability of relationship information obtained by different clinicians was quite low. Further, Rohrbaugh, Rogers, and McGoldrick (1992) investigated whether a mixed sample of expert therapists and family physicians trained in genogram administration could achieve acceptable levels of interinterviewer reliability on several dimensions.…”

“…Taken together, the lack of agreement about the essential elements needed in a genogram interview and the lack of a consistent theoretical foundation for genogram assessment items hinder the reliability of genogram-based family assessment and research (Coupland et al, 1995). Given the widespread popularity of genogram interviewing, there is a need to improve the standardization and theoretical foundation of how this type of family assessment is conducted both for research and application in couple and family therapy.…”

Genograms: Use in Therapy with Asian Families with Diverse Cultural Heritages

“…These visual mappings of three or four generations of a family are used to organize, clarify, and explore family and relationship data in therapy. As a heuristic tool (Coupland et al 1995), the genogram is also useful for generating hypotheses for therapeutic interventions in clinical work. Genograms are used in varied ways: from career counseling to work with clients to explore issues of intimacy, sexuality and related problems, decision making, cultural factors, and spirituality (cf.…”