Systems Theory

  • Gail G. Whitchurch
  • Larry L. Constantine


Modern systems theories about families are derived from General System Theory (GST), which is both a transdisciplinary field of study and a theoretical framework in which various microlevel approaches are known as “systems theories.” Systems theorists seek to explain the behavior of complex, organized systems of all sorts—from thermostats to missile guidance computers, from amoebas to families. Commonly referred to as “systems theory,” GST is also a program of theory construction aimed at building concepts, postulates, principles, and derived theorems that apply universally across all domains of application. Hence, GST is a theory of systems in general. Although numerous bodies of special knowledge have been labeled as systems models or theories, the body of theory that may be thought of as embracing them all is that of GST. Indeed, some scholars consider GST to be broader than a theory, but rather an alternative Weltanschauung—a unique worldview (Ruben & Kim, 1975) that requires adopting “systems thinking.” In other words, systems thinking is a way of looking at the world in which objects are interrelated with one another.


Family Therapy Family System General System Theory Circumplex Model Family System Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ackoff, R. L., & Sasieni, M. W. (1968). Fundamentals of operations research. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Amerongen, C. van. (1974). The way things work book of the computer: An illustrated encyclopedia of information science, cybernetics and data processing. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  3. Asen, K., George, E., Piper, R., & Stevens, A. (1989). A systems approach to child abuse: Management and treatment issues. Child Abuse and Neglect, 13, 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ault-Riche, M. (1986). A feminist critique of five schools of family therapy. In M. Ault-Riche (Ed.), Women and family therapy (pp. 1–15). Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems Corporation.Google Scholar
  5. Avis, J. M. (1987). Deepening awareness: A private study guide to feminism and family therapy. In L. Braverman (Ed.), A guide to feminist family therapy (pp. 15–45). New York: Harrington Park Press.Google Scholar
  6. Barnes, H. (1988). Cross-generational coalitions, discrepant perceptions and family functioning. Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family, 4, 175–198.Google Scholar
  7. Bateson, G. (1971). Cybernetics of self. Psychiatry, 34, 1–18.Google Scholar
  8. Baucom, D. H., & Adams, A. N. (1987). Assessing communication in marital interaction. In K. D. O’Leary (Ed.), Assessment of marital discord (pp. 139–181). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Beavers, W. R. (1977). Psychotherapy and growth: A family systems perspective. New York: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
  10. Beavers, W. R. (1982). Healthy, midrange, and severely dysfunctional families. In F. Walsh (Ed.), Normal family processes (pp. 45–66). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  11. Beavers, W. R., & Voeller, M. N. (1983). Family models: Comparing and contrasting the Olson Circumplex Model with the Beavers systems model. Family Process, 22, 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Beavers, W. R., & Voeller, M. N. (1985). Due modelli familiari: Il modello circonflesso di Olson e quello sistemico di Beavers [Two family models: The Olson circumplex and Beavers systems model]. Terapia Familiare, No. 18, 59–74.Google Scholar
  13. Becvar, D. S., & Becvar, R. J. (1988). Family therapy: A systemic integration. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  14. Beer, S. (1975). Platform for change: A message from Stafford Beer. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Bepko, C. S. (1986). Alcoholism as oppression: The dilemma of the woman in the alcoholic system. Family Therapy Collections, 16, 64–77.Google Scholar
  16. Bepko, C. S., & Krestan, J. (1985). The responsibility trap: A blueprint for treating the alcoholic family. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Berger, C. (1977). The covering law perspective as a theoretical basis for the study of human communication. Communication Quarterly, 75, 7–18.Google Scholar
  18. Berger, P., & Kellner, H. (1964). Marriage and the construction of reality. Diogenes, 64, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bertalanffy, L. von. (1968). General system theory. New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  20. Bertalanffy, L. von. (1975a). Perspectives on General System Theory: Scientific-philosophical studies. New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  21. Bertalanffy, L. von. (1975b). General System Theory. In B. D. Ruben & J. Y. Kim (Eds.), General Systems Theory and human communication (pp. 6–20). Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden.Google Scholar
  22. Bochner, A. P. (1976). Conceptual frontiers in the study of communication in families: An introduction to the literature. Human Communication Research, 2, 381–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Bochner, A. P., & Eisenberg, E. M. (1987). Family process: Systems perspectives. In C. R. Berger and S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 540–563). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Bograd, M. (1987). Enmeshment, fusion or relatedness? A conceptual analysis. In L. Braverman (Ed.), A guide to feminist family therapy (pp. 65–80). New York: Harrington Park Press.Google Scholar
  25. Boss, P., & Greenberg, J. (1984). Family boundary ambiguity: A new variable in family stress theory. Family Process, 23, 535–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Boulding, K. E. (1975). General System Theory—The skeleton of science. In B. D. Ruben & J. Y. Kim (Eds.), General Systems Theory and human communication (pp. 21–32). Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden.Google Scholar
  27. Bradbury, S. A., & Marsh, M. R. (1988). Linking families in preadoption counseling: A family systems model. Child Welfare, 67, 327–335.Google Scholar
  28. Braden, J. P., & Sherrard, P. A. (1987). Referring families to nonschool agencies: A family systems approach. School Psychology Review, 16, 513–518.Google Scholar
  29. Broderick, C. B. (1990). Family process theory. In J. Sprey (Ed.), Fashioning family theory (pp. 171–206). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Broderick, C., & Smith, J. (1979). The general systems approach to the family. In W. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theories about the family Vol. 2, (pp. 112–129). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  31. Buckley, W. (1967). Sociology and modern systems theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  32. Burgess, E. W. (1926). The family as a unity of interacting personalities. The Family, 7, 3–9.Google Scholar
  33. Chandler, T. A. (1986). A profile of interaction in acute battering incidents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana.Google Scholar
  34. Constantine, L. L. (1986). Family paradigms. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  35. Constantine, L. L. (1989). Furniture as firewood: Blaming the systems paradigm. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 15, 111–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Constantine, L. L. (1993). The structure of family paradigms: An analytical model of family paradigms. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 19, (1)Google Scholar
  37. Constantine, L. L., & Israel, J. T. (1985). The family void: Treatment and theoretical aspects of the synchronous family paradigm. Family Process, 24, 525–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Dell, P. F. (1982). Beyond homeostasis: Toward a concept of coherence. Family Process, 21, 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. F. (1949). Knowing and the known Boston: Beacon Hill Press.Google Scholar
  40. Driesch, H. (1908). The science and philosophy of the organism. London: Adam & Charles Black.Google Scholar
  41. Duruz, N. (1987). L’approche systemique dans le cadre d’une consultation d’orientation scolaire et professionnelle. [The systems approach within the framework of school and vocational guidance] Revue Canadienne de Psycho-Education, 16, 23–30.Google Scholar
  42. Erchak, G. M. (1984). The escalation and maintenance of spouse abuse: A cybernetic model. Victimology, 9, 247–253.Google Scholar
  43. Fish, M.C., & Jain, S. (1988). Using systems theory in school assessment and intervention: A structural model for school psychologists. Professional School Psychology, 3, 291–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Fisher, B. A. (1978). Perspectives on human communication. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  45. Fisher, B. A. (1981). Implications of the “interactional view” for communication theory. In C. Wilder-Mott & J. H. Weakland (Eds), Rigor and imagination (pp. 195–209). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  46. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1976). A typological examination of communication in enduring relationships. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  47. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1987). Marital interaction. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaffee (Eds), Handbook of communication science (pp. 564–618). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  48. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1988). Between husbands and wives: Communication in marriage. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  49. Gacic, B. (1986). An ecosystemic approach to alcoholism: Theory and practice. Contemporary Family Therapy, 8, 264–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Gage, R. B. (1988). An analysis of relational control patterns in abusive couples. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Seton Hall University, South Orange, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  51. Galvin, K. M., & Brommel, B. J. (1991). Family communication: Cohesion and change (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  52. Gelles, R. J., & Maynard, P. E. (1987). A structural family systems approach to intervention in cases of family violence. Family Relations, 36, 270–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Getz, H., & Gunn, W. B. (1988). Parent education from a family-systems perspective. School Counselor, 35, 331–336.Google Scholar
  54. Giles-Sims, J. (1983). Wife battering: A systems theory approach. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  55. Gray, W. N., Duhl, F. D., & Rizzo, N. D. (1969). General Systems Theory and psychiatry. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  56. Grinker, R. R. (Ed.) (1967). Toward a unified theory of human behavior (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  57. Guest, J. (1976). Ordinary people. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
  58. Hampson, R. B., Beavers, W. R., & Hulgus, Y. F. (1988). Commentary: Comparing the Beavers and Circumplex models of family functioning. Family Process, 27, 85–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Hampson, R. B., Hulgus, Y. F., & Beavers, W. R. (1991). Comparisons of self-report measures of the Beavers systems model and the Olson Circumplex Model. Journal of Family Psychology, 4, 326–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hare-Mustin, R. T. (1978). A feminist approach to family therapy. Family Process, 17, 181–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Hess, R., & Handel, G. (1959). Family worlds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  62. Hill, R. (1972). Modern systems theory and the family: A confrontation. Social Science Information, 10 (October), 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Hines, P. M., & Hare-Mustin, R. T. (1978). Ethical concerns in family therapy. Professional Psychology, 9, 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Hook, N., & Paolucci, B. (1970). The family as an ecosystem. Journal of Home Economics, 62, 315–318.Google Scholar
  65. Humphrey, L. L., & Stern, S. (1988). Object relations and the family system in bulimia: A theoretical integration. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 14, 337–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Infante, D. A., Rancer, A. S., & Womack, D. F. (1990). Building communication theory. Prospects Heights, IL: Waveland.Google Scholar
  67. Jacobson, N. S. (1985). Toward a nonsectarian blueprint for the empirical study of family therapies. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11, 163–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  69. Jankowski, J., Holtgraves, M., & Gerstein, L. (1988). A systemic perspective on work and family units. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 3, 91–112.Google Scholar
  70. Kantor, D., & Lehr, W. (1975). Inside the family. New York: Harper Colophon Books.Google Scholar
  71. Kearney, J. (1986). A time for differentiation: The use of a systems approach with adolescents in community-based agencies. Journal of Adolescence, 9, 243–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Keeney, B. P. (1983). Aesthetics of change. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  73. Lane, G., & Russell, T. (1987). Neutrality vs. social control. Family Therapy Networker, 11, 52–56.Google Scholar
  74. Laszlo, E. (1972). The systems view of the world. New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  75. Lederer, W. J., & Jackson, D. D. (1968). The mirages of marriage. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  76. Lee, C. (1988). Theories of family adaptability: Toward a synthesis of Olson’s Circumplex and the Beavers systems models. Family Process, 27, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Lerner, H. G. (1987). Is family systems theory really systemic? A feminist communication. Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family, 3, 47–63.Google Scholar
  78. Libow, J. A., Raskin, P.A., & Caust, B. L. (1982). Feminist and family systems therapy: Are they irreconcilable? American Journal of Family Therapy, 10, 3–12.Google Scholar
  79. Littlejohn, S. W. (1989). Theories of human communication (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  80. Lusterman, D. D. (1988). School-family intervention and the Circumplex Model. Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family, 4, 267–283.Google Scholar
  81. Maddock, J. W., & Lange, C. G. (1988). Integrating Milan therapy and the Circumplex Model: Ecosystemic consultation with families and their helpers. Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family, 4, 141–174.Google Scholar
  82. Massey, R. (1986). What/who is the family system? American Journal of Family Therapy, 14, 23–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Matthews, W. J., & Roberts, J. (1988). The entrance of systems family therapy into a residential treatment center. Child and Youth Services, 11, 77–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Maynard, P. F., & Hultquist, A. (1988). The Circumplex Model with adjudicated youths’ families. Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family, 4, 249–266.Google Scholar
  85. McGoldrick, M., Pearce, J. K., & Giordano, J. (Eds.) (1982). Ethnicity and family therapy. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  86. McIsaac, H. (1986–87). Toward a classification of child custody disputes: An application of family systems theory. Mediation Quarterly, 14–15, 39–50.Google Scholar
  87. Miller, J. G. (1978). Living systems. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  88. Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  89. Minuchin, S., Rosman, B. L., & Baker, L. (1978). Psychosomatic families: Anorexia in context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Mishler, E. G., & Waxier, N. E. (1968). Interaction in families: An experimental study of family processes and schizophrenia. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  91. Montgomery, J., & Fewer, W. (1988). Family systems and beyond. New York: Human Sciences Press.Google Scholar
  92. Neumann, J. von, & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  93. Nye, F. I., & Berardo, F. M. (1981). Emerging conceptual frameworks in family analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  94. Olson, D. H. (1988a). Family assessment and intervention: The Circumplex Model of Family Systems. Child and Youth Services, 11, 9–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Olson, D. H. (1988b). Circumplex Model of Family Systems: VIII. Family assessment and intervention. Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family, 4, 7–49.Google Scholar
  96. Olson, D. H. (1991). Commentary: Three-dimensional (3-D) Circumplex Model and revised scoring of FACES III. Family Process, 30, 74–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Olson, D. H., Sprenkle, D., & Russell, C. (1979). Circumplex Model of Marital and Family Systems I: Cohesion and adaptability dimensions, family types and clinical applications. Family Process, 18, 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Olson, D. H., Russell, C., & Sprenkle, D. H. (1983). Circumplex Model of Marital and Family Systems: VI: Theoretical update. Family Process, 22, 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Olson, D. H., Russell, C., & Sprenkle, D. H. (1985). Sistemi familiari e di coppia: Un modello circonflesso [Family and marital systems: A circumplex model]. Terapia Familiare, No. 18, 39–58.Google Scholar
  100. Olson, D. H., McCubbin, H., Barnes, H. L., Larsen, A. S., Muxen, M. J., & Wilson, M. A. (1989). Families: What makes them work (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  101. Parsons, T., & Bales, R. F. (1955). Family, socialization, and interaction process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
  102. Pinsof, W. M. (1989). A conceptual framework and methodological criteria for family therapy process research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 53–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Porter, A. (1969). Cybernetics simplified London: English Universities Press.Google Scholar
  104. Rapoport, A. (1972). The search for simplicity. In E. Laszlo (Ed.), The relevance of general systems theory (pp. 15–30). New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  105. Rapoport, A. (1975). Modern systems theory—An outlook for coping with change. In B. D. Ruben & J. Y. Kim (Eds), General systems theory and human communication (pp. 33–51). Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden.Google Scholar
  106. Raush, H. L., Barry, W. A., Hertel, R. K., & Swain, M. A. (1974). Communication, conflict, and marriage. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  107. Reiss, D. (1981). The family’s construction of reality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  108. Reiss, D., Oliveri, M. E., & Curd, K. (1983). Family paradigm and adolescent behavior. New Directions for Child Development, 22, 77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Roberts, B. (1988, Spring). A family systems approach to child care. Journal of Child Care, 69–76.Google Scholar
  110. Ruben, B. D., & Kim, J. Y. (1975). General Systems Theory and human communication. Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden.Google Scholar
  111. Russell, T. T., & Morrill, C. M. (1989). Adding a systemic touch to rational—emotive therapy for families. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 11, 184–192.Google Scholar
  112. Satir, V. (1972). Peoplemaking. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.Google Scholar
  113. Schwartz, R. (1987). Families and eating disorders. Journal of Psychotherapy and the family, 3, 87–103.Google Scholar
  114. Scott, B. (1987). Human systems, communication and educational psychology. Educational Psychology in Practice, 3, 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Sein, E. P., Fundudis, T., & Kolvin, I. (1987). A behavioral and systems approach to family therapy: A position paper. Journal of Family Therapy, 9, 339–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  117. Spencer Brown, G. (1972). Laws of form. New York: Julian Press.Google Scholar
  118. Spengler, O. (1922). Der Untergang des Abendlandes: Umrisse einer Morphologie der Weltgeschichte [The setting of the western hemisphere: A morphological outline of world history] (Vols. 1–2). Munchen: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
  119. Steinglass, P. (1975a). The simulated drinking gang: An experimental model for the study of a systems approach to alcoholism: I. Description of the model. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 161, 100–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Steinglass, P. (1975b). The simulated drinking gang: An experimental model for the study of a systems approach to alcoholism: II. Findings and implications. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 161, 110–122.Google Scholar
  121. Steinglass, P., & Wolin, S. (1974). Explorations of a systems approach to alcoholism. Archives of General Psychiatry, 31, 527–532.Google Scholar
  122. Steinglass, P., with Bennett, L. A., Wolin, S. J., & Reiss, D. (1987). The alcoholic family. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  123. Straus, M. A. (1973). A General Systems Theory approach to a theory of violence between family members. Social Science Information, 12, 105–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Stulberg, T. L. (1989). Spouse abuse: An ecosystemic approach. Contemporary Family Therapy, 11, 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Thomas, V., & Olson, D. H. (in press). Problem families and the Circumplex Model: Observational assessment using the Clinical Rating Scale (CRS). Journal of Marital and Family Therapy.Google Scholar
  126. Trepper, T. S., & Sprenkle, D. H. (1988). The clinical use of the Circumplex Model in the assessment and treatment of intrafamily child sexual abuse. Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family, 4, 93–111.Google Scholar
  127. Vosler, N. R. (1989). A systems model for child protective services. Journal of Social Work Education, 25, 20–28.Google Scholar
  128. Walsh, F. (1982). Normal family processes. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  129. Walsh, F., & Olson, D. H. (1988). Utility of the Circumplex Model with severely dysfunctional family systems. Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family, 4, 51–78.Google Scholar
  130. Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J., & Jackson, D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  131. Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J. H., & Fisch, R. (1974). Change: Principles of problem formation and problem resolution New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  132. Waxier, N. E., & Mishler, E. G. (1971). Experimental studies of families. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology volume 6, pp. 249–304. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  133. Weinberg, G. M. (1975). An introduction to general systems thinking. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  134. Weitzman, J., & Dreen, K. (1982). Wife beating: A view of the marital dyad. Social Casework, 63, 259–265.Google Scholar
  135. Whitchurch, G. G. (1989). A typology of relationship process in interspousal violence. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51, 1795-A. (University Microfilms No. DA-9019303).Google Scholar
  136. White, M. (1986). Anorexia nervosa: A cybernetic perspective. Dulwich Centre Review, 1986, 56–65.Google Scholar
  137. Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics, or control and communication in the animal and the machine. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  138. Yerby, J., Buerkel-Rothfuss, N., & Bochner, A. (1990). Understanding family communication. Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gail G. Whitchurch
    • 1
  • Larry L. Constantine
    • 2
  1. 1.Family Research InstituteIndiana UniversityIndianapolis
  2. 2.Acton

Personalised recommendations