Family Science Review
Research Articles
Donald A. Herrin & Scott D. Wright
ABSTRACT: In this article we attempt an historical overview of the developments and streams of through in ecology and human ecology in order to establish a framework for the study of family life from an ecological perspective. In part two of this paper (to published in the next issue of Family Science Review), we will identify and discuss in more detail the important considerations and constructs of ecology we believe are applicable to the study of family life.
Wesley R. Bur Donald A. Herrin, Randal D. Day, Ivan F. Beutler, & Geoffrey K. Leigh
ABSTRACT: This paper is an attempt to describe several aspects of the epistemologies that are used in the family discipline. It argues that phenomena such as the birth process and generations make the “family realm” unique, and the same way economic, psychic, social, and historical phenomena are unique, and this has allowed scholars in the last four decades to begin developing a family discipline that is as basic or primary as the other social sciences. The four intellectual traditions that have been using these new epistemologies in studying the family are described, and it is suggested that they have constructed more primary explanations than is generally recognized. Several examples of their primary explanations are described, and the paper concludes with some speculations about future possibilities the new epistemologies may make possible. .
James E. Deal
ABSTRACT: The role of similarity in the mate selection/courtship progress area is examined. A brief history of the use of similarity and the problems associated with its use are discussed, low to modest relations, unusable relations, no clear view of how similarity operates in relationship development. It is proposed that a possible explanation for the problem lies in the ways in which similarity is measured. A comparison of self perceptions is the more dominant assessment technique, but evidence form social interaction theory and the social psychological literature on person perception suggests that such comparisons may be inappropriate. A comparison of self- and other-perceptions may be a more appropriate method of assessment, but has its own problems. The literature in this area is reviewed and directions for future research are suggested.
Richard C. Endsley, Marilyn R. Bradbard, Greg Lang
ABSTRACT: The present study updates the findings of our previous research that child and family specialists function in virtual isolation from each other (Endsley & Brody, 1981). Examining the parent-child (p-c) relations research published in Child Development and the Journal of Marriage and the Family since 1980, and comparing these data to our earlier findings, we have concluded that child and family specialists still approach the study of p-c relations with substantially different methodologies and subjects. However, concomitant with a dramatic increase in the percentage of p-c studies published in both journals during 85- 86, there are recent signs of rapprochement in the use of more similar research methods and in more frequent cross-journal citations.
David C. Payne
ABSTRACT: “Family Science Undergraduate Programs: Time For A New Approach?,” (Brock, 1987) presents a curriculum approach focusing on “skills training” as a solution to the following assumed deficits in Family Science undergraduate programs: a) The lack of a clear-cut occupational identity, b) An insufficient amount of professional training, c) Declining numbers of undergraduate majors, and d) A career path which is not economically competitive. Noting that new approaches to therapy are assuming forms which focus more on “…prevention services, educational intervention, psychoeducation…”, the author suggests that family science departments will benefit from using similar “skill training” emphasis as a new model for curriculum development.
Gregory W. Brock
ABSTRACT: The rejoinder presents the opportunity to reply and reiterate several points from my original statement:
1. Changing the traditional family science curriculum by augmenting what exists is a good strategy, and one that I recommended.
2. The curriculum I proposed includes all of the traditional undergraduate course work plus the addition of professional level skills. Any reference to minimizing course work on theory is a simple misreading of the proposal.
3. Teaching skills to undergraduates was labeled as vocationalism (usually connoting trade skills). The traditional curriculum trains students to become academicians or in the view of many, nothing much at all (avocational pursuit). My proposal seeks to broaden, strengthen, and professionalize the undergraduate degree. Family science undergraduates should learn family theory, human development theory, and the ecological view of human problems experienced today. They also need the professional level skills required to change families and foster optimum human development.
4. The concern expressed about the effects of adopting a professional skills orientation on so called non-intervention faculty is very real. If the number of our majors continues to drop, non-intervention faculty will have few students to teach. Adding skills training of the type I have suggested to some content courses is well within the considerable capacity of existing faculty. We have tended to believe that intervention is the turf of the psychologists and social workers. We must discard that myth, value our expertise, and rightfully assume our role in the academic and professional services communities.
Douglas C. Bachel, James Walters, & David B. Eastwood
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this report is to present guidelines for authors submitting articles to the refereed scholarly journals in the social sciences. The recommendations are based on “collective experience of three editors of such journals and were delivered at a session of the Southeastern Regional Family Economics/Home Management 17th Annual Conference in Athens, Georgia held in February, 1988. The theme of the session was to present guidelines to assist faculty in preparing manuscripts for scholarly journal review. The panel presentation and discussion led to the points outlined below.
