Advertisement

Family Communication

  • Gail G. Whitchurch
  • Fran C. Dickson

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of a communication approach to families and highlights how this approach enriches overall understanding of micro-level family processes. We draw mainly from the communication discipline because, although scholarship on families with a communication approach occurs in a number of disciplines, it is often situated in the family communication specialty area of the communication discipline. Therefore, our overarching goal is to increase understanding of how family communication specialists in the communication discipline conceptualize and research communication patterns within the family.

Keywords

Family Therapy Interpersonal Communication Family Communication Mass Communication Communication Approach 
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. Alberts, J. (1988). An analysis of couples. conversational complaints. Communication Monographs, 55, 184–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldous, J. (1978). Family careers: Developmental change in families. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. Aldous, J. (1996). Family careers: Rethinking the developmental perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Alexander, J. (1990). Television and family interaction. In J. Bryant (Ed.), Television and the American family (pp. 211–225 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, J. A., Birkhead, D., Eason, D. L., & Strine, M. S. (1988). The caravan of communication and its multiple histories: A dialogue. In R. P. Hawkins, J. M. Wiemann, & S. Pingree (Eds.), Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal processes (pp. 276–307 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Arliss, L. (1993). Contemporary family communication: Messages and meanings. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  7. Argyris, C. (1995). Knowledge when used in practice tests theory: The case of applied communication research. In K. N. Cissna (Ed.), Applied communication in the 21st century (pp. 1–19 ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Austin, E. W., Roberts, D. F., & Nass, C. I. (1990). Influence of family communication on children’s television-interpretation processes. Communication Research, 17, 545–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barnlund, D. C. (1970). A transactional model of communication. In K. K. Sereno & C. D. Mortensen, Foundations of communication theory (pp. 83–102 ). New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  10. Bateson, G. (1971). Cybernetics of self. Psychiatry, 34, 1–18.Google Scholar
  11. Baum, M., & Page, M. (1991). Caregiving and multigenerational families. The Gerontologist, 31, 762–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bavelas, J. B., & Segal, L. (1982). Family systems theory: Background and implications. Journal of Communication, 32, 99–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Baxter, L. A. (1987). Symbols of relationship identity in relationship cultures. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 261–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Baxter, L. A. (1988). A dialectical perspective on communication strategies in relationship development. In S. W. Duck, D. F. Hay, S. E. Hobfoll, W. Iches, & B. Montgomery (Eds.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 257–273 ). Chichester, England: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Baxter, L. A. (1990). Dialectical contradictions in relationship development. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Baxter, L. A. (1993). The social side of personal relationships: A dialectical perspective. In S. Duck (Ed.), Understanding relationship processes, 3: Social context and relationships (pp. 139–165 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Baxter, L. A., & Clark, C. L. (1996). Perceptions of family communication patterns and the enactment of family rituals. Western Journal of Communication, 60, 254–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Baxter, L. M., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  19. Baxter, L. A., & Simon, E. P. (1993). Relationship maintenance strategies and dialectical contradictions in personal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 225–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Berger, P., & Kellner, H. (1964). Marriage and the construction of reality. Diogenes, 64, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Berko, R. M. ( 1992, October). Teaching the family course: Ethical issues. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  22. Berlo, D. K. (1960). The process of communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  23. Bertalanffy, L. von. (1968). General System Theory. New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  24. Bertalanffy, L. von. (1975). Perspectives on General System Theory: Scientific-philosophical studies. New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  25. 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
  26. Bochner, A. P. (1984). The functions of communication in interpersonal bonding. In C. Arnold & J. Bowers (Eds.), Handbook of rhetorical and communication theory (pp. 554–621 ). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  27. Bochner, A. P., & Eisenberg, E. M. (1987). Family process: System perspectives. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 540–563 ). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Bochner, A. P., & Kiesinger, C. ( 1992, November). Ordinary People and the call of stories. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Communication Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  29. Booth-Butterfield, S., & Cotton, R. R. (1991). Ethical issues in the treatment of communication apprehension and avoidance. Communication Education, 40, 172–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Brennan, J. L., & Wamboldt, F. S. (1990). From the outside in: Examining how individuals define their experienced family. Communication Research, 17, 444–461.Google Scholar
  31. Brown, J. D., Childers, K. W., Bauman, K. E., & Koch, G. G. (1990). The influence of new media and family structure on young adolescents’ television and radio use. Communication Research, 17, 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Bryant, J. (Ed.). (1990). Television and the American family. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  33. Bryant, J., & Zillman, D. (Eds.). (1986). Perspectives on media effects. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Buerkel-Rothfuss, N. ( 1990, November). Teaching family communication: Keeping family skeletons in family closets. Paper presented at the Preconvention Conference on Family Communication, National Communication Association annual convention, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  35. Buerkel-Rothfuss, N. L., Fink, D. S., & Buerkel, R. A. (1995). Communication in the father-child dyad: The intergenerational transmission process. In T. J. Socha & G. H. Stamp (Eds.), Parents, children, and communication: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 63–86 ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  36. Burgess, E. W. (1926). The family as a unity of interacting personalities. The Family, 7 (1), 3–9.Google Scholar
  37. Burke, J. A., Becker, S. L., Arbogast, R. A., & Naughton, J. M. (1987). Problems and prospects of applied research: The development of an adolescent smoking prevention program. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 15, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Burleson, B. R., & Denton, W. H. (1992). A new look at similarity and attraction in marriage: Similarities in social-cognitive and communication skills as predictors of attraction and satisfaction. Communication Monographs, 59, 268–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Canary, D. J., Brossmann, B. G., & Seibold, D. R. (1987). Argument structures in decision-making groups. Southern Speech Communication Journal, 53, 18–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Canary, D. J., Weger, H., Jr., & Stafford, L. (1991). Couples’ argument sequences and their associations with relational characteristics. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 55, 159–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Carroll, J. B. (1968). Basic and applied research in education: Definitions, distinctions, and implications. Harvard Educational Review, 38, 263–276.Google Scholar
  42. Chartier, J., & Chartier, M. R. (1975). Perceived parental communication and self-esteem: An exploratory study. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 34, 26–31.Google Scholar
  43. Cissna, K. N. (1982). Editor’s note: What is applied communication research? Journal of Applied Communication Research, 10(2), i-iii.Google Scholar
  44. Cissna, K. N., Cox, D. E., & Bochner, A. P. (1990). A dialectic of marital and parental relationships within the stepfamily. Communication Monographs, 57, 44–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. (1995). Family reconfiguring following divorce. In S. W. Duck and J. T. Wood (Fils.), Understanding relationship processes, 5: Relationship challenges (pp. 73–108 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  46. Cooney, T. M., & Uhlenberg, P. (1992). Support from parents over the life course: The adult child’s perspective. Social Forces, 71, 63–84.Google Scholar
  47. Constantine, L. L. (1986). Family paradigms. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  48. 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
  49. Craig, R. T. (1989). Communication as a practical discipline. In B. Dervin, L. Grossberg, B. J. O’Keefe, & E. Wartella (Eds.), Rethinking communication: Volume 1, paradigm issues (pp. 97–122 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. Craig, R. T. (1995). Applied communication research in a practical discipline. In K. N. Cissna (Ed.), Applied communication in the 21st century (pp. 147–155 ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  51. Crocker, L. (1951). Communication and the family. Journal of Communication, 1, 63–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Cryer-Downs, V. (1989). The grandparent-grandchild relationship. In J. F. Nussbaum (Ed.), Life-span communication: Normative processes (pp. 257–281 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  53. Davis, M. S. (1973). Intimate relations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  54. Delia, J. G. (1987). Communication research: A history. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaffee, Handbook of Communication Science (pp. 20–98 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  55. Desmond, R. J., Singer, J. L., & Singer, D. G. (1990). Family mediation: Parental communication patterns and influences of television on children. In J. Bryant (Ed.), Television and the American family (pp. 293309 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  56. Dickson, F C. (1995). The best is yet to be: Research on long-lasting marriages. In J. T. Wood & S. W. Duck (Eds.), Understudied relationships: Off the beaten track (pp. 22–50 ). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  57. Dickson-Markman, F., & Markman, H. J. (1988). The effects of others on marriage: Do they help or hurt? In P. Noller & M. A. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Perspectives on marital interaction (pp. 294–322 ). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters, Ltd.Google Scholar
  58. Dixson, M. D. (1995). Models and perspectives of parent-child communication. In T. J. Socha and G. H. Stamp (Eds.), Parents, children, and communication: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 43–62 ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  59. Doherty, W. J. (1997a). The intentional family. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  60. Doherty, W. J. (1997b). Making time for your marriage. Family Circle, June 24, 1997 issue, pp. 34–37. (Reprinted section of The intentional family.) Google Scholar
  61. Duck, S. W. (1990). Relationships as unfinished business: Out of the frying pan and into the 1990s. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Duncan, S. F, & Brown, G. (1992). RENEW: A program for building remarried family strengths. Families in Society, 73, 149–158.Google Scholar
  63. Eadie, W. F. (1990). Being applied: Communication research comes of age. Journal of Applied Communication Research, special issue (no volume number), p. 1–6.Google Scholar
  64. Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (1992). Telling and performing personal stories: The constraints of choice in abortion. In C. Ellis & M. Flaherty (Eds.), Investigating subjectivity (pp. 97–101 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  65. Ericson, P. M., & Rogers, L. E. (1973). New procedures for analyzing relational communication. Family Process, 12, 244–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ferguson, S. M., & Dickson, F. C. (1995). Children’s expectations of their single parents’ dating behaviors: A preliminary investigation of emergent themes relevant to single parent dating. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23, 308–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Fisher, B. A. (1978). Perspectives on human communication. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  68. Fitzpatrick, M. A. T. (1976). A typological examination of communication in enduring relationships. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University.Google Scholar
  69. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1988). Between husbands and wives: Communication in marriage. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  70. Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1990). Ageing, health, and family communication: A theoretical perspective. In H. Giles, H. Coupland, & J. M. Wiemann (Eds.), Communication, health, and the elderly, Fulbright papers, vol. 8 (pp. 213–228 ), Manchester, England: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Dindia, K. (1986). Couples and other strangers: Talk time in spouse-spouse interaction. Communication Research, 13, 625–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Ritchie, L. D. (1993). Communication theories. In P. Boss, W. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. Schumm, & S. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp. 565–585 ). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Ritchie, L. D. (1994). Communication schemata within the family: Multiple perspectives on family interaction. Human Communication Research, 20, 275–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Fitzpatrick, M. A., Vangelisti, A. L., & Finnan, S. M. (1994). Perceptions of marital interaction and change during pregnancy: A typology approach. Personal Relationships, 1, 101–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Fitzpatrick, M. A., & Wamboldt, F. S. (1990). Where is all said and done? Toward an integration of intrapersonal and interpersonal models of family communication. Communication Research, 17, 421–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Frentz, T. S. (1995). The unbearable darkness of seeing. Presidential address to the Southern States Communication Association, April 7,1995, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  77. Friedlander, M., & Heatherington, L. (1989). Analyzing relational control in family therapy interviews. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 261–268.Google Scholar
  78. Gage, R. B. (1988). An analysis of relational control patterns in abusive couples. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Seton Hall University, South Orange, NJ.Google Scholar
  79. Galvin, K. M. (1979). Social simulation in the family communication course. Communication Education, 28, 68–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Galvin, K. M. ( 1992, October). Teaching the family communication course: Ethical issues. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Communication Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  81. Galvin, K. M., & Brommel, B. J. (1982). Family communication: Cohesion and change (1st ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
  82. Galvin, K. M., & Brommel, B. J. (1996). Family communication: Cohesion and change ( 4th ed. ). New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  83. Galvin, K., & Wilkinson, C. (1980). Family communication as an applied area. Journal of the Illinois Speech and Theatre Association, 34, 1–8.Google Scholar
  84. Gaul, R., Simon, L., Friedlander, M. L., & Cutler, C. (1991). Correspondence of family therapists’ perceptions with FRCCCS coding rules for triadic interactions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 17, 379–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Gelles, R. J. (1974). The violent home. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  86. Gilgun, J. F., Daly, K., & Handel, G. (1992). Qualitative methods in family research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  87. Goldberg, J. H., & Goldberg, A. A. (1976). Family communication. Western Speech Communication, 40, 104–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Gotcher, J. M. (1993). The effects of family communication on psychological adjustment of cancer patients. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21, 176–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Handel, G. ( 1994, November). Family Worlds and the qualitative tradition in family research. Paper presented on the panel, Gerald Handel on Family Worlds and qualitative family research. National Communication Association annual convention, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  90. Heatherington, L., & Friedlander, M. (1990). Complementarity and symmetry in family therapy communication. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 261–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Heavey, C. L., and Layne, C., & Christensen, A. (1993). Gender and conflict structure in marital interaction: A replication and extension. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 16–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Heintz, K. E. (1992). Children’s favorite television families: A descriptive analysis of role interactions. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 36, 443–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Hess, R., & Handel, G. (1959). Family worlds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  94. Huston, T. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (1995). How parenthood affects marriage. In M. A. Fitzpatrick & A. L. Vangelisti (Eds.), Explaining family interactions (pp. 147–176 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  95. Infante, D. A., Sabourin, T. C., Rudd, J. E., & Shannon, E. A. (1990). Verbal aggression in violent and nonviolent marital disputes. Communication Quarterly, 38, 361–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Jorgenson, J. (1989). Where is the “family” in family communication?: Exploring families’ self-definitions. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 17, 27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Kantor, D., & Lehr, W. (1975). Inside the family. New York: Harper Colophon Books.Google Scholar
  98. Katriel, T., & Philipsen, G. (1981). “What we need is communication”: “Communication” as a cultural category in American speech. Communication Monographs, 48, 301–317.Google Scholar
  99. Kelley, D. ( 1992, October). Reflections on the ethics of teaching the family communication course. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Communication Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  100. Kieren, D. K., & Doherty-Poirier, M. (1993). Teaching about family communication and problem-solving: Issues and future directions. In M. E. Arcus, J. D. Schvaneveldt, & J. J. Moss (Eds.), Handbook of family life education, vol. 2 Practice of family life education, pp. 155–179. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  101. Knapp, M. (1993). Editor’s introduction to L. Stafford and C. L. Bayer, Interaction between parents and children. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  102. Knapp, M. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (1996). Interpersonal communication and human relationships ( 3rd ed. ). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  103. Krokoff, L. J. (1990). Hidden agendas in marriage: Affective and longitudinal dimensions. Communication Research, 17, 483–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Larzelere, R. E., & Klein, D. M. (1987). Methodology. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 125–155 ). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Leach, M. S., & Braithwaite, D. O. (1996). A binding tie: Supportive communication of family kinkeepers. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 24, 200–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Lewis, R. A., & Lin, L. (1996). Adults and their midlife parents. In N. Vanzetti & S. Duck (Eds.), A lifetime of relationships (pp. 364–382 ). Albany, NY: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  107. Long, B. W., & Grant, C. H. (1992). The “surprising range of the possible”: Families communicating in fiction. Communication Education, 41, 89–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Long, R. ( 1992, October). Teaching the family communication course: Ethical issues. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Communication Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  109. Markman, H. J., Duncan, W., Storaasli, R. D., & Howes, P. W. (1987). Understanding major mental disorder: The contribution of family interaction research. In K. Hahlweg & M. J. Goldstein (Eds.), The Family Process Press Monograph Series (pp. 266–289 ). New York: Family Process Press.Google Scholar
  110. Markman, H. J., Floyd, E. J., Stanley, S. M., & Storaasli, R. D. (1988). Prevention of marital distress: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 210–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Markman, H. J., Jamieson, K. J., & Floyd, F. J. (1983). The assessment and modification of premarital relationships: Preliminary findings on the etiology and prevention of marital and family distress. Advances in Family Intervention, Assessment, and Theory, 3, 41–90.Google Scholar
  112. Markman, H. J., & Notarius, C. I. (1987). Coding marital and family interaction: Current status. In T. Jacobs (Ed.), Family interaction and psychopathology: Theories, methods, and findings, pp. 396–428. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  113. Markman, H. J., Renick, M. J., Floyd, F. J., Stanley, S. M., & Clements, M. (1993). Preventing marital distress through communication and conflict management training: A 4- and 5-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 1–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. McLeod, J. M., & Chaffee, S. R. (1972). The construction of social reality. In J. T. Tedeschi (Ed.), The social influence process. Chicago, IL: Aldine Atherton.Google Scholar
  115. Meadowcroft, J., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1988). Theories of family communication: Toward a merger of intersubjectivity and mutual influence processes. In R. P. Hawkins, J. M. Wiemann, and S. Pingree (Eds.), Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal processes (pp. 253–274 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  116. Miller, G. R. (1995). “I think my schizophrenia is better today,” said the communication researcher unanimously: Some thoughts on the dysfunctional dichotomy between pure and applied communication research. In K. N. Cissna (Ed.), Applied communication in the 21st century (pp. 47–55 ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  117. Miller, G. R., & Nicholson, H. E. (1976). Communication inquiry: A perspective on process. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  118. Miller, M. (1995). An intergenerational case study of suicidal tradition and mother-daughter communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23, 247–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Montgomery, B. (1992). Communication as the interface between couples and culture. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook vol. 15 (pp. 476–508 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  120. Mortensen, C. D. (1972). Communication: The study of human interaction. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  121. Noller, P., & Feeney, J. A. (1990). Attachment style and marital communication. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Personal Relationships. Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  122. Noller, P., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1993). Communication in family relationships. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  123. O’Donohue, W., & Crouch, J. L. (1996). Marital therapy and gender-linked factors in communication. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 22, 87–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. O’Hair, D., Kreps, G. L., & Frey, L. R. (1990). Conceptual issues. In D. O’Hair & G. L. Kreps (Eds.), Applied communication theory and research (pp. 3–22 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  125. Olson, D. H., McCubbin, H., Barnes, H. L., Larsen, A. S., Muxen, M. J., & Wilson, M. A. (1989). Families: What makes them work ( 2nd edition ). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  126. 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
  127. Osborn, M. (1990, January 17). The study of communication flourishes in a democratic environment. Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. B2–B3.Google Scholar
  128. Parsons, T., & Bales, R. E. (1955). Family, socialization, and interaction process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
  129. Pearlin, L. I., Mullan, J. T., Semple, S. J., & Skaff, M. M. (1990). Caregiving and the stress process: An overview of concepts and their measures. The Gerontologist, 30, 583–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Pearson, J. C. (1993). Communication in the family: Seeking satisfaction in changing times ( 2nd edition ). New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  131. Petronio, S. (1991). Communication boundary management: A theoretical model of managing disclosure of private information between marital couples. Communication Theory, 1, 311–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Petronio, S., & Bradford, L. (1993). Issues interfering with the use of written communication as a means of relational bonding between absentee, divorced fathers and their children. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21, 163–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Petronio, S., & Harriman, S. ( 1990, November). Parental privacy invasion: The use of deceptive and direct strategies and the influence on the parent-child relationship. Paper presented at the National Communication Association annual convention, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  134. Petronio, S., Reeder, H. M., Hecht, M. L., & Ros-Mendoza, T. M. (1996). Disclosure of sexual abuse by children and adolescents. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 24, 181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Pike, G. R., & Sillars, A. L. (1985). Reciprocity of marital communication. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2, 303–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Pingree, S., & Thompson, M. E. (1990). The family in daytime serials. In J. Bryant (Ed.), Television and the American family (pp. 113–127 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  137. Planalp, S. (1993). Communication, cognition, and emotion. Communication Monographs, 60, 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Query, J. L., & Flint, L. J. (1996). The caregiving relationship. In N. Vanzetti and S. Duck (Eds.), A lifetime of relationships (pp. 455–483). Albany, NJ: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  139. Raven, B. H., & French, J. R. P. Jr. (1956). A formal theory of social power. Psychological Review, 63, 181–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Reardon, K. K., & Rogers, E. M. (1988). Interpersonal versus mass media communication: A false dichotomy. Human Communication Research, 15, 284–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Reiss, D. (1981). The family’s construction of reality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  142. Ritchie, L. D., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1990). Family communication patterns: Measuring intrapersonal perceptions of interpersonal relationships. Communication Research, 17, 523–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Rogers, L. E. (1972). Dyadic systems and transactional communication in a family context (Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 33, 11A. (University Microfilms No. 73–12, 810).Google Scholar
  144. Rogers, L. E. (1989). Relational communication processes and patterns. In Rethinking communication, Vol. 2 (pp. 280–290). In B. Dervin, L. Grossberg, B. O’Keefe, & E. Wartella (Eds.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  145. Rogers, L. E., & Farace, R. V. (1975). Analysis of relational communication in dyads: New measurement procedures. Human Communication Research, 1, 222–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Rogers-Millar, L. E., & Millar, F. E. (1979). Domineeringness and dominance: A transactional view. Human Communication Research, 5, 238–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Rosenblatt, P. C. (1994). Metaphors of family systems theory: Toward new constructions. New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  148. Rosenfeld, L. B. ( 1992, October). Teaching the family course: Ethical issues. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Communication Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  149. Rosenfeld, L. B. ( 1994, November). Ethical considerations in assigning students to write personal narratives in a family communication course. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  150. Rosenfled, L. B., Bowen, G. L., & Richman, J. M. (1995). Communication in three types of dual-career marriages. In M. A. Fitzpatrick and A. L. Vangelisti (Eds.), Explaining family interaction (pp. 257–289 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  151. Sabourin, T. C. (1995). The role of negative reciprocity in spouse abuse: A relational control analysis. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23, 271–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Scarf, M. (1987). Intimate partners: Patterns in love and marriage. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  153. Schramm, W. (1997). The beginnings of communication study in America (S. Chaffee and E. Rogers, Eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  154. Shotter, J. (1993). Conversational realities: The construction of life through language. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  155. Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  156. Sillars, A. L. (1995). Communication and family culture. In M. A. Fitzpatrick and A. L. Vangelisti (Eds.), Explaining family interactions (pp. 375–399 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  157. Sillars, A. L., Burggraf, C. S., Yost, S., & Zietlow, P. H. (1992). Conversational themes and marital relationship definitions: Quantitative and qualitative investigations. Human Communication Research, 19, 124–154.Google Scholar
  158. Sillars, A. L., Pike, G., Jones, T. R., & Murphy, M. A. (1984). Communication and understanding in marriage. Human Communication Research, 10, 317–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Sillars, A. L., Pike, G. R., Jones, T. S., & Redmon, K. (1983). Communication and conflict in marriage. Communication Yearbook, 7, 414–429.Google Scholar
  160. Sillars, A. L., & Weisberg, J. (1987). Conflict as a social skill. In M. E. Roloff and G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research (pp. 140–171 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  161. Sillars, A. L., Weisberg, J., Burggraf, C. S., & Wilson, E. A. (1987). Content themes in marital conversations. Human Communication Research, 13, 495–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Sillars, A. L., Weisberg, J., Burggraf, C. S., & Zietlow, P. H. (1990). Communication and understanding revisited: Married couples’ understanding and recall of conversations. Communication Research, 17, 500–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Skill, T., Wallace, S., & Cassata, M. (1990). Families on prime-time television: Patterns of conflict escalation and resolution against intact, nonintact, and mixed-family settings. In J. Bryant (Ed.), Television and the American family (pp. 129–163 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  164. Sluzki, C., & Beavin, J. (1965). Simetna y complementaridad: Una definición operacional y una tipología de parejas. Acta Psiquicitrica y Psicologica de America Latina, 11, 321–330.Google Scholar
  165. Smith, M. J. (1988). Contemporary communication research methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  166. Smith, F. M., & Hawes, B. (1987). Early adolescents practice effective communication in the family setting: A curriculum unit. Journal of Vocational Home Economics Education, 6, 19–26.Google Scholar
  167. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Stafford, L., & Bayer, C. L. (1993). Interaction between parents and children. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  169. Stafford, L., & Daly, J. A. (1984). Conversational memory: The effects of recall mode and memory expectations on remembrances of natural conversations. Human Communication Research, 10, 379–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Stafford, L., Burggraf, C. S., & Sharkey, W. E. (1987). Conversational memory: The effects of time, recall mode, and memory expectancies on remembrances of natural conversations. Human Communication Research, 14, 203–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Stafford, L., & Dainton, M. (1995). Parent-child communication within the family system. In T. J. Socha and G. H. Stamp (Eds.), Parents, children, and communication: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 3–22 ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  172. Stafford, L., Waldron, V. R., & Infield, L. L. (1989). Actor-observer differences in conversational memory. Human Communication Research, 15, 590–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Stamp, G. H. (1994). The appropriation of the parental role through communication during the transition to parenthood. Communication Monographs, 61, 89–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Stamp, G. H., & Banski, M. A. (1992). The communicative management of constrained autonomy during the transition to parenthood. Western Journal of Communication, 56, 281–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Stamp, G. H., and Sabourin, T. C. (1995). Accounting for violence: An analysis of male spousal abuse narratives. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23, 284–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Steier, F., Stanton, M. D., & Todd, T. C. (1982). Patterns of tum-taking and alliance formation in family communication. Journal of Communication, 32, 148–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. Thomas, C. E., Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1995). Perceptions of deception, divorce disclosures, and communication satisfaction with parents. Western Journal of Communication, 59, 228–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. Turner, L. H., & West, R. (1998). Perspectives on family communication. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.Google Scholar
  179. Vangelisti, A. L. (1991). The pedagogical use of family measures: “My, how you’ve grown!” Communication Education, 40, 187–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. Vangelisti, A. L. (1994). Family secrets: Forms, functions, and correlates. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 113–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  181. Vangelisti, A. L., & Banski, M. (1993). Couples’ debriefing conversations: The impact of gender, occupation, and demographic characteristics. Family Relations, 42, 149–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. Varallo, S. M., Ray, E. B., & Ellis, B. H. (1998). Speaking of incest: The research interview as social justice. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 26, 254–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Wartella, E., & Reeves, B. (1987). Communication and children. In C. R. Berger and S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 619–650 ). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  184. Watzlawick, P. (Ed.). (1964). An anthology of human communication: Text and tape. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.Google Scholar
  185. Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J., & Jackson, D. (1967). The pragmatics of human communication. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  186. Weitzman, J., & Dreen, K. (1982). Wife beating: A view of the marital dyad. Social Casework, 63, 259–265.Google Scholar
  187. Whitchurch, G. G. (1992). Communication in marriages and families: A review essay of family communication textbooks. Communication Education, 41, 337–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. Whitchurch, G. G. (1993). Designing a course in family communication. Communication Education, 42(3), 255–267.Google Scholar
  189. Whitchurch, G. G. ( 1994, November). Violent critical incidents in four types of violent interspousal relationships. Paper presented at the National Communication Association annual convention, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  190. Whitchurch, G. G. ( 1995, November). Overview of family communication research: Complexities and multi faceted characteristics. Paper presented at the Second Preconvention Conference on Family Communication, National Communication Association annual convention, San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
  191. Whitchurch, G. G., & Constantine, L. L. (1993). Systems theory. In P. Boss, W. Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. Schumm, and S. Steinmetz (Eds.), Source-book of family theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp. 325352 ). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  192. Whitchurch, G. G., & Pace, J. L. (1993). Communication skills training and interspousal violence. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21, 96–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  193. Whitchurch, G.G., & Rogers, L. E. ( 1993, November). Applications of the “Communication Systems School ”Palo Alto Model in family therapy and family communication. Paper presented at the National Communication Association annual convention, Miami, FL.Google Scholar
  194. Whitchurch, G. G., & Sharp, J. F. ( 1994, November). Student self-analysis of autobiographical narratives in the family communication course: An examination of the boundaries between family communication and therapy. Paper presented at the National Communication Association annual convention, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  195. Whitchurch, G. G., & Webb, L. M. (1995). Applied family communication research: Casting light upon the demon. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23(4), 239–246.Google Scholar
  196. Whitehead, A. N., & Russell, B. (1910–1913). Principia Mathematica,3 volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  197. Wilder, C. (1979). The Palo Alto Group: Difficulties and directions of the interactional view for human communication research. Human Communication Research, 5, 171–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  198. Williams, L., & Jurich, J. (1995). Predicting marital success after five years: Assessing the predictive validity of FOCCUS. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 21, 141–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  199. Wideman, H., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1986). Compliance-gaining in marital interaction: Power bases, processes, and outcomes. Communication Monographs, 53, 130–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  200. Wolff, L. O. ( 1990, November). Stories that shape us: Family narrative in the family communication course. Paper presented at the Preconvention Conference on Family Communication, National Communication Association annual convention, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  201. Wood, J. T. (1982). Communication and relational culture: Basis for the study of human relationships. Communication Quarterly, 30, 75–84. Wood, J. T. (1995). Relational communication; Continuity and change in personal relationships. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  202. Yerby, J., Buerkel-Rothfuss, N., & Bochner, A. P. (1995). Understanding family communication ( 2nd ed. ). Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gail G. Whitchurch
    • 1
  • Fran C. Dickson
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Communication StudiesIndiana University-Purdue University at IndianapolisIndianapolisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Human Communication StudiesUniversity of DenverDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations