Advertisement

Metatheory and Family Studies

  • David M. Klein
  • Joan A. Jurich

Abstract

In the course of a field’s development, some of its practitioners periodically step back and reflect on key issues, progress presumably being made, obstacles to progress, and directions for the future. This reflective search for self-understanding is a natural response to changing circumstances within any intellectual enterprise and has several distinct manifestations.1

Keywords

Family Life Family Therapy Family Study National Council Family Relation 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, B. N. (1988). Fifty years of family research: What does it mean? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 5–17.Google Scholar
  2. Alcoff, L. (1988). Cultural feminism versus post-structuralism: The identity crisis in feminist theory. Signs, 13, 405–436.Google Scholar
  3. Aldous, J. (1981). Second guessing the experts: Thoughts on family agendas for the eighties. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 267–270.Google Scholar
  4. Aklous, J. (1990). Family development and the life course: Two perspectives on family change. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 571–583.Google Scholar
  5. Aldous, J., & Hill, R. (1967). International bibliography of research in marriage and the family, 1900–1964. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  6. Alexander, J. C. (1982). Theoretical logic in sociology (Vol. 1). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. Aponte, H. J. (1985). The negotiation of values in therapy. Family Process, 24, 323–338.Google Scholar
  8. Appelbaum, R. P. (1970). Theories of social change. Chicago: Markham.Google Scholar
  9. Atkinson, M., & Gecas, V. (1978). What’s been published in family sociology in the past ten years? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Family Relations, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  10. Auerswald, E. H. (1985). Thinking about thinking in family therapy. Family Process, 24, 1–12.Google Scholar
  11. Avis, J. M. (1985). The politics of functional family therapy: A feminist critique. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11, 127–138.Google Scholar
  12. Bane, M. J. (1976). Here to stay: American families in the twentieth century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  13. Baptiste, D. A., . (1986). The image of the black family portrayed by television: A critical comment. Marriage and Family Review, 10, 41–65.Google Scholar
  14. Bartels, R. (1970). Marketing theory and metatheory. Homewood, IL: Irwin.Google Scholar
  15. Bayer, A. E. (1982). A bibliometric analysis of marriage and family literature. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 527–538.Google Scholar
  16. Bayer, A. E., Smart, J. C., & McLaughlin, G. W. (1990). Mapping intellectual structure of a scientific subfield through author co-citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41, 444–452.Google Scholar
  17. Berardo, F. M. (1980). Decade review: Family research 1970–79. Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.Google Scholar
  18. Berardo, F. M., & Shehan, C. L. (1984). Family scholarship: Reflection of the changing family? Journal of Family Issues, 5, 577–598.Google Scholar
  19. Bernal, G., & Ysern, E. (1986). Family therapy and ideology. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12, 129–135.Google Scholar
  20. Bernard, J. (1958). Areas for research in family studies. Sociology and Social Research, 42, 406–409.Google Scholar
  21. Bernard, J. S. (1976). Self-portrait of a family: letters by Jessie, Dorothy Lee, Claude, and David Bernard: With a commentary by Jessie Bernard. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  22. Bogue, D. J. (Ed.) (1974). The basic writings of Ernest W. Burgess. Chicago: Community and Family Study Center, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  23. Booth, A. (1990). Contemporary families: Looking forward, looking back. Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.Google Scholar
  24. Bopp, M. J., & Weeks, G. R. (1984). Dialectical metatheory in family therapy. Family Process, 23, 49–61.Google Scholar
  25. Boss, P. G. (1990). Family therapy and family research: Intertwined parts of the whole. In F. W. Kaslow (Ed.), Voices in family psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 17–32). Newberry Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Broderick, C. B. (1971a). A decade of family research and action. Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.Google Scholar
  27. Broderick, C. B. (1971b). Beyond the five conceptual frameworks: A decade of development in family theory. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 33, 139–158.Google Scholar
  28. Brody, G. H., & Endsley, R. C. (1981). Researching children and families: Differences in approaches of child and family specialists. Family Relations, 30, 275–279.Google Scholar
  29. Burgess, E. W. (1926). Topical summaries of current literature: The family. American Journal of Sociology, 32, 104–113.Google Scholar
  30. Burgess, E. W. (1947). The family and sociological research. Social Forces, 26, 1–6.Google Scholar
  31. Burns, A., Bottomley, G., & Jools, P. (Eds.) (1983). The family in the modern world. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  32. Burr, W. R. (1973). Theory construction and the sociology of the family. New York: Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
  33. Burr, W. R., & Leigh, G. K. (1983). Famology: A new discipline. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 467–480.Google Scholar
  34. Burr, W. R., Hill, R., Nye, F. I., & Reiss, I. (Eds.) (1979a). Contemporary theories about the family (Vol. 1). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  35. Burr, W. R., Hill, R., Nye, F. I., & Reiss, I. (Eds.) (1979b). Contemporary theories about the family (Vol. 2). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  36. Carter, E., & McGoldrick, M. (Eds.) (1980). The family life cycle: A framework for family therapy. New York: Gardner.Google Scholar
  37. Cavan, R. S. (1948). Discussion. American Sociological Review, 13, 132–134.Google Scholar
  38. Cerny, V., Dahl, N., Kamiko, T., & Aldous, J. (1974). International developments in family theory: A continuance of the initial “pilgrim’s progress.” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 36, 169–184.Google Scholar
  39. Christensen, H. T. (Ed.) (1964a). Handbook of marriage and the family. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  40. Christensen, H. T. (1964b). Development of the family field of study. In H. T. Christensen (Ed.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 3–22). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  41. Colapinto, J. (1979). The relative value of empirical evidence. Family Process, 18, 427–441.Google Scholar
  42. Cole, J. R., & Zuckerman, H. (1975). The emergence of a scientific specialty: The self-exemplifying case of the sociology of science. In L. A. Coser (Ed.), The idea of social structure: Papers in honor of Robert K. Merton (pp. 139–174). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  43. Cole, S. (1979). Age and scientific performance. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 958–977.Google Scholar
  44. Cole, S. (1980). The sociological method: An introduction to the science of sociology (3rd ed.). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  45. Collins, R. (1989). Sociology: Proscience or antiscience? American Sociological Review, 54, 124–139.Google Scholar
  46. Coyne, J. C. (1982). A brief introduction to epistobabble. Family Therapy Networker, 6, 27–28.Google Scholar
  47. Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges: Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  48. Dell, P. F. (1982). Beyond homeostatsis: Toward a concept of coherence. Family Process, 21, 21–41.Google Scholar
  49. Dell, P. F. (1986). On the need for conversation in the family therapy field. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12, 25–29.Google Scholar
  50. Doherty, W. J. (1986). Quanta, quarks, and families: Implications of quantum physics for family research. Family Process, 25, 249–264.Google Scholar
  51. Draper, T. W., & Marcos, A. C. (Eds.) (1990). Family variables: Conceptualization, measurement, and use. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  52. DuBois, B. (1983). Passionate scholarship: Notes on values, knowing and method in feminist social science. In G. Bowles & R. D. Klein (Eds.), Theories of womens’ studies (pp. 105–116). Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  53. Duhl, B. S. (1986). Outstalking the wild questions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12, 31–36.Google Scholar
  54. Edge, D. (1979). Quantitative measures of communication in science: A critical review. History of Science, 17, 102–134.Google Scholar
  55. Edwards, J. N. (1989). The family realm: A future paradigm or failed nostalgia? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 816–818.Google Scholar
  56. Ehrmann, W. (1957). A review of family research in 1956. Marriage and Family Living, 19, 279–289.Google Scholar
  57. Ellis, A., & Doorbar, R. R. (1952). Recent trends in sex, marriage and family research. Marriage and Family Living, 14, 338–340.Google Scholar
  58. Falicov, C. J. (Ed.) (1988). Family transitions: Continuity and change over the life cycle. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  59. Fee, E. (1981). Is feminism a threat to scientific objectivity? International Journal of Women’s Studies, 4, 378–392.Google Scholar
  60. Fendrich, M. (1984). Wives’ employment and husbands’ distress: A meta-analysis and a replication. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 871–879.Google Scholar
  61. Fiske, D. W., & Shweder, R. A. (Eds.) (1986). Metatheory in social science: Pluralisms and subjectivities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  62. Flax, J. (1987). Postmodernism and gender relations in feminist theory. Signs, 12, 621–643.Google Scholar
  63. Foote, N. (1957). The appraisal of family research. Marriage and Family Living, 19, 92–99.Google Scholar
  64. Foote, N. N., & Cottrell, L. S., Jr. (1955). Identity and interpersonal competence: A new direction in family research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  65. Freese, L. (1984). Cumulative problem solving in family sociology. Journal of Family Issues, 5, 447–469.Google Scholar
  66. Fuchs, S. (1986). The social organization of scientific knowledge. Sociological Theory, 4, 126–142.Google Scholar
  67. Galligan, R. J. (1982). Innovative techniques: Siren or rose. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 875–886.Google Scholar
  68. Ganong, L, Coleman, M., & Mapes, D. (1990). A metaanalytic review of family structure stereotypes. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 287–297.Google Scholar
  69. Gergen, K. J. (1973). Social psychology as history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 309–320.Google Scholar
  70. Gibbs, J. (1972). Sociological theory construction. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden.Google Scholar
  71. Giddens, A. (1976). Classical social theory and the origins of modern sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 703–729.Google Scholar
  72. Gieryn, T. F. (1982). Relativist/constructivist programmes in the sociology of science: Redundance and retreat. Social Studies of Science, 12, 279–297.Google Scholar
  73. Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  74. Glenn, N. D. (1990). Quantitative research on marital quality in the 1980s: A critical review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 818–831.Google Scholar
  75. Goldklank, S. (1986). My family made me do it: The influence of family therapists’ families of origin on their occupational choice. Family Process, 25, 309–319.Google Scholar
  76. Goldner, V. (1985). Feminism and family therapy. Family Process, 24, 31–47.Google Scholar
  77. Goode, W. J., Furstenberg, F. F., Jr., & Mitchell, L. R. (Eds.) (1970). Willard Waller: On the family, education, and war: Selected writings. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  78. Gouldner, A. W. (1970). The coming crisis of western sociology. New York: Equinox Books.Google Scholar
  79. Grosz, E. A. (1987). Feminist theory and the challenge to knowledges. Women’s Studies International Forum, 10, 475–480.Google Scholar
  80. Gubrium, J. F., & Holstein, J. A. (1990). What is family? Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.Google Scholar
  81. Gurman, A. S. (1983). Family therapy research and the “new epistemology.” Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9, 227–234.Google Scholar
  82. Gurman, A. S., & Kniskern, D. P. (Eds.) (1981). Handbook of family therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
  83. Gurman, A. S., Kniskern, D. P., & Pinsof, W. M. (1986). Research on the process and outcome of marital and family therapy. In S. Garfield & A. Bergin (Eds), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (3rd ed., pp. 565–624). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  84. Halfpenny, P. (1982). Positivism and sociology: Explaining social life. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  85. Harding, S. (1986). The instability of the analytical categories of feminist theory. Signs, 11, 645–664.Google Scholar
  86. Hare-Mustin, R. T. (1986). The problem of gender in family therapy theory. Family Process, 26, 15–27.Google Scholar
  87. Haring-Hidore, M., Stock, W. A., Okun, M. A., & Witter, R. A. (1985). Marital status and subjective well-being: A research synthesis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 947–953.Google Scholar
  88. Heiskanen, V. S. (1971). The myth of the middle-class family in American family sociology. The American Sociologist, 6, 14–18.Google Scholar
  89. Held, B. S., & Pols, E. (1985). The confusion about epistemology and "epistemology"–and what to do about it. Family Process, 24, 509–517.Google Scholar
  90. Hill, R. (1951). Review of current research on marriage and the family. American Sociological Review, 16, 694–701.Google Scholar
  91. Hill, R. (1955). A critique of contemporary marriage and family research. Social Forces, 33, 268–277.Google Scholar
  92. Hill, R. (1958). Sociology of marriage and family behaviour, 1945–56: A trend report and bibliography. Current Sociology, 7, 1–33.Google Scholar
  93. Hill, R. (1968). Status of research about marriage and the family. In J. A. Peterson (Ed.), Marriage and family counseling: Perspective and prospect (pp. 19–43). New York: Association Press.Google Scholar
  94. Hill, R. (1980). Status of research on families. In J. A. Calhoun, E. H. Grotberg, & W. R. Rackley (Eds.), The status of children, youth and families 1979 (pp. 191–251). Washington, DC.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
  95. Hill, R. (1981). Whither family research in the 1980s: Continuities, emergents, and new horizons. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 255–257.Google Scholar
  96. Hill, R., & Hansen, D. A. (1960). The identification of conceptual frameworks utilized in family study. Marriage and Family Living, 22, 299–311.Google Scholar
  97. Hodgson, J. W., & Lewis, R. A. (1979). Pilgrim’s progress III: A trend analysis of family theory and methodology. Family Process, 18, 163–173.Google Scholar
  98. Holman, T. B., & Burr, W. R. (1980). Beyond the beyond: The growth of family theories in the 1970s. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 729–741.Google Scholar
  99. Howard, R. L. (1981). A social history of American family sociology, 1865–1940. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  100. Jurich, J. A. (1987). Implications of post-positivism for the theory-method-data relationship in family studies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Family Relations, Atlanta.Google Scholar
  101. Jurich, J. A. (1989). The family realm: Expanding its parameters. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 819–822.Google Scholar
  102. Jurich, J. A., & Burr, W. R. (1988). Valuing “change” and its implications for theory, research, and practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Family Relations, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  103. Kain, E. L. (1990). The myth of family decline: Understanding families in a world of rapid social change. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  104. Kaslow, F. W. (Ed.) (1990a). Voices in family psychology (Vol. 1). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  105. Kaslow, F. W. (Ed.) (1990b). Voices in family psychology (Vol. 2). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  106. Keeney, B. F. (1983). Aesthetics of change. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  107. Keller, E. F. (1982). Feminism and science, Signs, 7, 589–602.Google Scholar
  108. Klein, D. M. (1980). Commentary on the linkages between conceptual frameworks and theory development in sociology. Sociological Quarterly, 21, 443–453.Google Scholar
  109. Klein, D. M., & Tholin, K. (1990). Two decades of theory construction and research methodology: A new history of the preconference workshop. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Family Relations, Seattle.Google Scholar
  110. Klein, J. F., Calvert, G. P., Garland, T. N., & Poloma, M. M. (1969). Pilgrim’s progress I: Recent developments in family theory. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 31, 677–687.Google Scholar
  111. Klein, D. M., Hill, R., Miller, B. C., & Schvaneveldt, J. D. (1973). Toward a propositional theory of family problem solving: Forging integrative linkages. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Family Relations, Toronto.Google Scholar
  112. Klein, D. M., Schvaneveldt, J. D., & Miller, B. C. (1977). The attitudes and activities of contemporary family theorists. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 7, 5–27.Google Scholar
  113. Knorr-Cetina, K. D. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford, England: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  114. Kolb, W. L. (1948). Sociologically established family norms and democratic values. Social Forces, 26, 451–456.Google Scholar
  115. Komarovsky, M., & Waller, W. (1945). Studies of the family. American Journal of Sociology, 50, 443–451.Google Scholar
  116. Kuhn, T. S. (1962/1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. In O. Neurath, R. Carnap, & C. Morris (Eds), International encyclopedia of unified science (Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 1–173). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  117. Lavee, Y., & Dollahite, D. C. (1991). The linkage between theory and research in family science. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 361–373.Google Scholar
  118. Lebow, J. (1984). On the value of integrating approaches to family therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 10, 127–138.Google Scholar
  119. Levine, D. N. (1989). Simmel as a source for sociological metatheory. Sociological Theory, 7, 161–174.Google Scholar
  120. Luepnitz, D. A. (1988). The family interpreted: Feminist theory in clinical practice. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  121. MacKinnon, L. K., & Miller, D. (1987). The new epistemology and the Milan approach: Feminist and sociopolitical considerations. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 13, 139–155.Google Scholar
  122. Martindale, D. (1976). The romance of a profession: A case history in the sociology of sociology. Chicago: Adams.Google Scholar
  123. Masterman, M. (1970). The nature of a paradigm. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 59–89). London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  124. Mattessich, P., & Hill, R. (1987). Life cycle and family development. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 437–469). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  125. Menaghan, E. G. (1989). Escaping from the family realm: Reasons to resist claims for its uniqueness. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 822–825.Google Scholar
  126. Merton, R. K. (1967). On theoretical sociology: Five essays, old and new. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  127. Mies, M. (1983). Towards a methodology for feminist research. In G. Bowles & R. D. Klein (Eds.), Theories of women’s studies (pp. 117–139). Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  128. Miller, B. C., Rollins, B. C., & Thomas, D. L. (1982). On methods of studying marriages and families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 851–873.Google Scholar
  129. Mogey, J. (1969). Sociology of marriage and family behavior, 1957–1968: A report and bibliography. Current Sociology, 17, 5–51.Google Scholar
  130. Morgan, D. H. J. (1990). Issues of critical sociological theory: Men in families. In J. Sprey (Ed.), Fashioning family theory, new approaches (pp. 67–106). Newberry Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  131. Morioka, K. (1981). Introduction: The development of family sociology in Japan. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 12, i–xiii.Google Scholar
  132. Mowrer, E. R. (1941). Recent trends in family research. American Sociological Review, 6, 499–511.Google Scholar
  133. Mullins, N. C. (1973). Theories and theory groups in contemporary American sociology. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  134. Mullins, N. C. (1983). Theories and theory groups revisited. In R. Collins (Ed.), Sociological theory 1983 (pp. 319–337). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  135. Nimkoff, M. F. (1948). Trends in family research. American Journal of Sociology, 52, 477–482.Google Scholar
  136. Nye, F. I. (1979). Choice, exchange, and the family. In W. R. Burr, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, & I. L. Reiss (Eds), Contemporary theories about the family (Vol. 2, pp. 1–41). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  137. Nye, F. I. (1988). Fifty years of family research, 1937–1987. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 305–316.Google Scholar
  138. Nye, F. I., & Bayer, A. E. (1963). Some recent trends in family research. Social Forces, 41, 290–301.Google Scholar
  139. Nye, F. I., & Berardo, F. M. (1966/1981). Emerging conceptual frameworks in family analysis. New York: Macmillan/Praeger.Google Scholar
  140. Olson, D. H. (1971). Marital and family therapy: Integrative review and critique. In C. B. Broderick (Ed.), A decade review of family research and action (pp. 241–278). Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.Google Scholar
  141. Olson, D. H., Russell, C. S., & Sprenkle, D. H. (1980). Marital and family therapy: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 239–259.Google Scholar
  142. Osmond, M. W. (1984). Feminist research and scientific criteria. Journal of Family Issues, 5, 571–576.Google Scholar
  143. Osmond, M. (1987). Radical-critical theories. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 103–124). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  144. Pavalko, R. M. (1988). Sociology of occupations and professions (2nd ed.). Itasca, IL: Peacock.Google Scholar
  145. Phillips, S. R., & Farrington, K. (1987). Twenty five years later the legacy of Hill and Hansen lives on: Emerging conceptual frameworks for family study in the 1980s. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Family Relations, Atlanta.Google Scholar
  146. Piercy, F. P., & Sprenkle, D. H. (1990). Marriage and family therapy: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 1116–1126.Google Scholar
  147. Polanyi, M. (1964). Personal knowledge. New York: Harper Torchbooks.Google Scholar
  148. Popper, K. R. (1970). Normal science and its dangers. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 51–58). London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  149. Price, D. J. deS. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  150. Ralebipi, M. D. R. (Ed.) (1990). Inventory of marriage and family literature (Vol. XV-1988/89). Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.Google Scholar
  151. Rank, M. R., & LeCroy, C. W. (1983). Toward a multiple perspective in family theory and practice: The case of social exchange theory, symbolic interactionism, and conflict theory. Family Relations, 32, 441–448.Google Scholar
  152. Reskin, B. F. (1978). Scientific productivity, sex, and location in the institution of science. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 1235–1243.Google Scholar
  153. Ritzer, G. (1975). Sociology: A multiple paradigm science. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  154. Ritzer, G. (1988). Sociological metatheory: A defense of a subfield by a delineation of its parameters. Sociological Theory, 6, 187–200.Google Scholar
  155. Ritzer, G. (1991). Biography: A (still) underutilized metasociological method. Contemporary Sociology, 20, 10–12.Google Scholar
  156. Rodman, H. (1980). Are conceptual frameworks necessary for theory building? The case of family sociology. Sociological Quarterly, 21, 429–441.Google Scholar
  157. Ruano, B. M., Bruce, J. D., & McDermott, M. M. (1969). Pilgrim’s progress II: Recent trends and prospects in family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 31, 688–698.Google Scholar
  158. Rychlak, J. (1977). The psychology of rigorous humanism. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  159. Schumm, W. R. (1982). Integrating theory, measurement and data analysis in family studies survey research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 983–998.Google Scholar
  160. Schumm, W. R. (1990). Evolution of the family field: Measurement principles and techniques. In J. Touliatos, B. F. Perlmutter, & M. A. Straus (Eds), Handbook of family measurement techniques (pp. 23–36). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  161. Shaw, M. E., & Costanzo, P. R. (1970). Theories of social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  162. Shields, C. G. (1986). Critiquing the new epistemologies: Toward minimum requirements for a scientific theory of family therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12, 359–372.Google Scholar
  163. Small, W., & Griffith, B. C. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures: I: Identifying and graphing specialties. Science Studies, 4, 17–40.Google Scholar
  164. Snizek, W. E. (1979). Toward a classification of the interrelationship between theory and research: Its form and implications. In W. E. Snizek, E. R. Fuhrman, & M. K. Miller (Eds), Contemporary issues in theory and research: A metasociological perspective (pp. 197–209). Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  165. Spiegel, J. P. (1954). New perspectives in the study of the family. Marriage and Family Living, 16, 4–12.Google Scholar
  166. Sprey, J. (1988). Current theorizing on the family: An appraisal. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 875–890.Google Scholar
  167. Sprey, J. (1990). Theoretical practice in family studies. In J. Sprey (Ed.), Fashioning family theory: New approaches (pp. 9–33). Newberry Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  168. Stacey, J., & Thorne, B. (1985). The missing feminist revolution in sociology. Social Problems, 32, 301–316.Google Scholar
  169. Storer, N. W. (1966). The social system of science. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  170. Straus, M. A. (1964). Measuring families. In H. T. Christensen (Ed.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 335–400). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  171. Suppe, F. (1977). The structure of scientific theories (2nd ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  172. Sussman, M. B. (1968). Current state and perspectives of research on the family. Social Science Information, 7, 35–50.Google Scholar
  173. Sussman, M. B. (1986). The Charybdis of publishing in academia. Marriage and Family Review, 10, 1–9.Google Scholar
  174. Taggart, M. (1985). The feminist critique in epistemological perspective: Questions of context in family therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11, 113–126.Google Scholar
  175. Thomas, D. L., & Wilcox, J. E. (1987). The rise of family theory: A historical and critical analysis. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 81–102). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  176. Thomas, J. L. (1955). Theory and research in family sociology. American Catholic Sociological Review, 15, 104–116.Google Scholar
  177. Thompson, L. (1987). Objectivity and subjectivity in feminist and family science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Family Relations, Atlanta.Google Scholar
  178. Thompson, L., & Walker, A. J. (1982). The dyad as the unit of analysis: Conceptual and methodological issues. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 889–900.Google Scholar
  179. Thome, B., & Yalom, M. (1982). Rethinking the family: Some feminist questions. New York: Longmans.Google Scholar
  180. Tiryakian, E. A. (1979). The significance of schools in the development of sociology. In W. E. Snizek, E. R. Fuhrman, & M. K. Miller (Eds.), Contemporary issues in theory and research: A metasociological perspective (pp. 211–233). Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  181. Tomm, K. (1983). The old hat that doesn’t fit. Family Therapy Networker, 7, 39–41.Google Scholar
  182. Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B. F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.) (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  183. Turner, J. H. (1982). The structure of sociological theory. (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey.Google Scholar
  184. van Leeuwen, L. T. (1981). Early family sociology in Europe: Parallels to the United States. In R. L. Howard (Ed.), A social history of American family sociology, 1865–1940 (pp. 95–139). Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  185. Wallace, W. L. (Ed.) (1969). Sociological theory: An introduction. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  186. Walker, A. J., & Thompson, L. (1984). Feminism and family studies. Journal of Family Issues, 5, 545–570.Google Scholar
  187. Walters, J. (1962). A review of family research in 1959, 1960, and 1961. Marriage and Family Living, 24, 158–162.Google Scholar
  188. Wampler, K. S. (1982). Bringing the review of literature into the age of quantification: Meta-analysis as a strategy for integrating research findings in family studies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 1009–1023.Google Scholar
  189. Woodger, J. H. (1939). The technique of theory construction. In O. Neurath, R. Carnap, & C. Morris (Eds), International encyclopedia of unified science (Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 1–81). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  190. Woodward, K. L., & Denworth, L. (1990). The order of innovation. Newsweek, May 21, 78.Google Scholar
  191. Wynne, L. C. (1983). Family research and family therapy: A reunion? Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy, 9, 113–117.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • David M. Klein
    • 1
  • Joan A. Jurich
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of Notre DameNotre Dame
  2. 2.Child Development and Family StudiesPurdue UniversityWest Lafayette

Personalised recommendations