The Marriage Contract

Sager, Clifford J.; Kaplan, Helen Singer; Gundlach, Ralph H.; Kremer, Malvina W.; Lenz, Rosa; Royce, Jack R.

doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1971.00311.x

Cited by 35 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yang and P. C. Rosenblatt contract in Korea are ''to stay together until death'' and ''to love each other either healthy or sick.'' Couples also have implicit contracts (Sager et al, 1971), unverbalized and perhaps unverbalizable agreements of the form ''I will do X if you do Y.'' When one of the partners is terminally ill, that may be a violation of both explicit and implicit contracts.…”

Section: Explicit and Implicit Contracts In Couple Systemsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Couple Rage and Emotional Distancing when a Partner is Dying

Yang

Rosenblatt

2007

Journal of Loss and Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Explicit and Implicit Contracts In Couple Systemsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Couple Rage and Emotional Distancing when a Partner is Dying

Yang

Rosenblatt

2007

Journal of Loss and Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Even as psychoanalytic therapists were moving inevitably toward modern conjoint methods, they seemed to still cling to a core individual mindset. Thus, Sager (1967b), certainly the most widely influential marriage therapist in the psychoanalytic tradition during the 1960s and 1970s (e.g., Sager, 1967a, 1976, 1981; Sager, Kaplan, Gundlach et al, 1971) wrote, “I am not primarily involved in treating marital disharmony, which is a symptom, but rather in treating the two individuals in the marriage” (Sager, 1967b, p. 185). Sager had not yet moved (cf.…”

Section: Phase Ii: Psychoanlaytic Experimentation (1931–1966)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The History of Couple Therapy: A Millennial Review

Gurman¹,

Fraenkel²

2002

Family Process

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we review the major conceptual and clinical influences and trends in the history of couple therapy to date, and also chronicle the history of research on couple therapy. The evolving patterns in theory and practice are reviewed as having progressed through four distinctive phases: Phase I--Atheoretical Marriage Counseling Formation (1930-1963); Phase II--Psychoanalytic Experimentation (1931-1966); Phase III--Family Therapy Incorporation (1963-1985); and Phase IV--Refinement, Extension, Diversification, and Integration (1986-present). The history of research in the field is described as having passed through three phases: Phase I--A Technique in Search of Some Data (1930-1974), Phase II--Irrational(?) Exuberance (1975-1992), and Phase III--Caution and Extension (1993-present). The article concludes with the identification of Four Great Historical Ironies in the History of Couple Therapy.

show abstract

“…The four terms in this ratio work together in a mutual, contingent relationship that conforms to the analogic form: Tom: :affectionate as Susan: :Tom's self importance. Marital therapists (Gottman, Notarius, Gonso, & Markman, 1976;Patterson, Hops, & Weiss, 1975;Rappaport & Harrell, 1972;Sager, et al, 1971;Weiss, Birchler, & Vincent, 1974;Weiss, Hops, & Patterson, 1973) have promoted the adoption of explicit contractual agreement (analogy) between couple members. These are generally of the analogic form: husband does X if wife does Y (a "contingency" contract), or husband does X and wife does Y (a "good faith" contract).…”

Section: Examplementioning

confidence: 98%

On linguistic and social forms: Correspondences between metaphoric and intimate relationships

Stephen

Enholm

1987

Western Journal of Speech Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study compares metaphors and intimate relationships. It is argued that both may be viewed as relational and that both may be categorized into four distinct styles. Hypotheses addressing correspondences between the four linguistic and social styles were investigated in an empirical study. Twenty-six couples completed a 48-item Q-sort containing word pairs representing four types of metaphors. Couple members also completed measures of symbolic interdependence, adjustment/happiness, commitment, and agreement. A Q factor analysis assigned subjects to one of three relationship types on the basis of the types of metaphors chosen to characterize their relationships. Differences between the three types' scores on the measures of relationship qualities provided validity for the assignment of types and for concluding that parallels exist between linguistic and social forms.Questions addressing the relationships between language and social behavior have long interested scholars. The perspective derives from such figures as Sapir and Whorf, Simmel, Mead, Cooley, Cassier, and Burke; and more recently, Blumer, Chomsky, Duncan, and Goffman (see Duncan, 1967 for a review; also Combs & Mansfield, 1976). These theorists, among others, have approached the language-behavior relationship from their own disciplinary vantages and have generated specialized hypotheses related to several central, widely held propositions. Among these propositions are the guiding notions that: (a) the stock of available symbols determines boundaries for thought and expression within a culture; (b) a language system may be grammatically structured in order to permit the possibility of adequate expression or grasp of some propositions and not others; and (c) the recognition of symbols as social instruments leads to the analysis of intention, purpose, or motive through examination of actors' linguistic choices and characteristic symbolic styles.

show abstract

The Marriage Contract

Cited by 35 publications

References 0 publications

Couple Rage and Emotional Distancing when a Partner is Dying

Couple Rage and Emotional Distancing when a Partner is Dying

The History of Couple Therapy: A Millennial Review

On linguistic and social forms: Correspondences between metaphoric and intimate relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About