Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology pp 2096–2098Cite as

McMaster Family Assessment Device

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:

Synonyms

FAD; Family assessment device; MFAD

Description

The McMaster Family Assessment Device (MFAD; Epstein et al. 1983) is a 60-item self-report instrument intended to evaluate a number of aspects of family relationships based on the McMaster model of family functioning (Epstein et al. 1993). Items are phrased to denote both effective (e.g., “We feel accepted for what we are.”) and problematic family functioning (e.g., “We don’t get along well together.”). Respondents rate how well each statement describes their family; response options include strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. Items are reverse scored as needed, such that higher scores indicate poorer family functioning. In addition to a General Functioning Index, the MFAD generates scores on six dimensions (problem solving, communication, roles, affective responsiveness, affective involvement, and behavioral control).

Historical Background

Although often used as an outcome instrument, the MFAD was developed...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   899.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   1,099.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References and Readings

  • Barney, M. C., & Max, J. E. (2005). The McMaster family assessment device and clinical rating scale: Questionnaire vs interview in childhood traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 19(10), 801–809.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boterhoven de Haan, K. L., Hafekost, J., Lawrence, D., Sawyer, M. G., & Zubrick, S. R. (2015). Reliability and validity of a short version of the general functioning subscale of the McMaster family assessment device. Family Process, 54(1), 116–123.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, M. S., & Smith, D. S. (1999). Psychological correlates of outcome following rehabilitation from stroke. Clinical Rehabilitation, 13(2), 129–140.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, N. B., Baldwin, L. M., & Bishop, D. S. (1983). The McMaster family assessment device. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9, 171–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, N. B., Bishop, D., Ryan, C., Miller, I. W., & Keitner, G. I. (1993). The McMaster model view of healthy family functioning. In F. Walsh (Ed.), Normal family processes (pp. 138–160). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, R. L., Bishop, D. S., Matlock, A. L., Stranahan, S., Halar, E. M., & Noonan, W. C. (1987a). Predicting post-stroke family function: A continuing dilemma. Psychological Reports, 60, 691–695.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, R. L., Bishop, D. S., Matlock, A. L., Stranahan, S., Smith, G., & Halar, E. M. (1987b). Family interaction and treatment adherence after stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 68, 513–517.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, E., & Carr, A. (2015). Systematic review of self-report family assessment measures. Family Process. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Josie, K. L., Peterson, C. C., Burant, C., Drotar, D., Stancin, T., Wade, S. L., et al. (2008). Predicting family burden following childhood traumatic brain injury: A cumulative risk approach. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 23(6), 357–368.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kreutzer, J. S., Gervasio, A. H., & Camplair, P. S. (1994). Patient correlates of caregivers’ distress and family functioning after traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 8(3), 211–230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, A. K., Keitner, G. I., & Dealey, J. (2015). The family assessment device: An update. Family Process, 54(1), 82–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, I. W., Epstein, N. B., Bishop, D. S., & Keitner, G. I. (1985). The McMaster family assessment device: Reliability and validity. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11(4), 345–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridenour, T. A., Daley, J. G., & Reich, W. (1999). Factor analyses of the family assessment device. Family Process, 38(4), 497–510.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zarski, J. J., DePompei, R., & Zook, A. (1988). Traumatic head injury: Dimensions of family responsivity. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 3(4), 31–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Education, University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA

    James H. Baños

Authors
  1. James H. Baños
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James H. Baños .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA

    Jeffrey S. Kreutzer

  2. Kessler Foundation, Pleasant Valley Way, West Orange, NJ, USA

    John DeLuca

  3. Independent Practice, Wynnewood, PA, USA

    Bruce Caplan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Baños, J.H. (2018). McMaster Family Assessment Device. In: Kreutzer, J.S., DeLuca, J., Caplan, B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_1994

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation