Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Metatheory and Family Studies

  • Chapter
Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods

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

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

Access this chapter

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 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adams, B. N. (1988). Fifty years of family research: What does it mean? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alcoff, L. (1988). Cultural feminism versus post-structuralism: The identity crisis in feminist theory. Signs, 13, 405–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Aldous, J., & Hill, R. (1967). International bibliography of research in marriage and the family, 1900–1964. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, J. C. (1982). Theoretical logic in sociology (Vol. 1). Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aponte, H. J. (1985). The negotiation of values in therapy. Family Process, 24, 323–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, R. P. (1970). Theories of social change. Chicago: Markham.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Auerswald, E. H. (1985). Thinking about thinking in family therapy. Family Process, 24, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avis, J. M. (1985). The politics of functional family therapy: A feminist critique. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11, 127–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bane, M. J. (1976). Here to stay: American families in the twentieth century. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Bartels, R. (1970). Marketing theory and metatheory. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayer, A. E. (1982). A bibliometric analysis of marriage and family literature. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 527–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Berardo, F. M. (1980). Decade review: Family research 1970–79. Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berardo, F. M., & Shehan, C. L. (1984). Family scholarship: Reflection of the changing family? Journal of Family Issues, 5, 577–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernal, G., & Ysern, E. (1986). Family therapy and ideology. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12, 129–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, J. (1958). Areas for research in family studies. Sociology and Social Research, 42, 406–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Bogue, D. J. (Ed.) (1974). The basic writings of Ernest W. Burgess. Chicago: Community and Family Study Center, University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, A. (1990). Contemporary families: Looking forward, looking back. Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bopp, M. J., & Weeks, G. R. (1984). Dialectical metatheory in family therapy. Family Process, 23, 49–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Broderick, C. B. (1971a). A decade of family research and action. Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Burgess, E. W. (1926). Topical summaries of current literature: The family. American Journal of Sociology, 32, 104–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, E. W. (1947). The family and sociological research. Social Forces, 26, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, A., Bottomley, G., & Jools, P. (Eds.) (1983). The family in the modern world. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burr, W. R. (1973). Theory construction and the sociology of the family. New York: Wiley-Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burr, W. R., & Leigh, G. K. (1983). Famology: A new discipline. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 467–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Carter, E., & McGoldrick, M. (Eds.) (1980). The family life cycle: A framework for family therapy. New York: Gardner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavan, R. S. (1948). Discussion. American Sociological Review, 13, 132–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Christensen, H. T. (Ed.) (1964a). Handbook of marriage and the family. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Colapinto, J. (1979). The relative value of empirical evidence. Family Process, 18, 427–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Cole, S. (1979). Age and scientific performance. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 958–977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, S. (1980). The sociological method: An introduction to the science of sociology (3rd ed.). Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, R. (1989). Sociology: Proscience or antiscience? American Sociological Review, 54, 124–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, J. C. (1982). A brief introduction to epistobabble. Family Therapy Networker, 6, 27–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges: Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dell, P. F. (1982). Beyond homeostatsis: Toward a concept of coherence. Family Process, 21, 21–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Doherty, W. J. (1986). Quanta, quarks, and families: Implications of quantum physics for family research. Family Process, 25, 249–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Draper, T. W., & Marcos, A. C. (Eds.) (1990). Family variables: Conceptualization, measurement, and use. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Duhl, B. S. (1986). Outstalking the wild questions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12, 31–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edge, D. (1979). Quantitative measures of communication in science: A critical review. History of Science, 17, 102–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. N. (1989). The family realm: A future paradigm or failed nostalgia? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 816–818.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrmann, W. (1957). A review of family research in 1956. Marriage and Family Living, 19, 279–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A., & Doorbar, R. R. (1952). Recent trends in sex, marriage and family research. Marriage and Family Living, 14, 338–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falicov, C. J. (Ed.) (1988). Family transitions: Continuity and change over the life cycle. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fee, E. (1981). Is feminism a threat to scientific objectivity? International Journal of Women’s Studies, 4, 378–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Fiske, D. W., & Shweder, R. A. (Eds.) (1986). Metatheory in social science: Pluralisms and subjectivities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flax, J. (1987). Postmodernism and gender relations in feminist theory. Signs, 12, 621–643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foote, N. (1957). The appraisal of family research. Marriage and Family Living, 19, 92–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Freese, L. (1984). Cumulative problem solving in family sociology. Journal of Family Issues, 5, 447–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, S. (1986). The social organization of scientific knowledge. Sociological Theory, 4, 126–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galligan, R. J. (1982). Innovative techniques: Siren or rose. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 875–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Gergen, K. J. (1973). Social psychology as history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 309–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, J. (1972). Sociological theory construction. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1976). Classical social theory and the origins of modern sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 81, 703–729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gieryn, T. F. (1982). Relativist/constructivist programmes in the sociology of science: Redundance and retreat. Social Studies of Science, 12, 279–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Goldner, V. (1985). Feminism and family therapy. Family Process, 24, 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Gouldner, A. W. (1970). The coming crisis of western sociology. New York: Equinox Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosz, E. A. (1987). Feminist theory and the challenge to knowledges. Women’s Studies International Forum, 10, 475–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gubrium, J. F., & Holstein, J. A. (1990). What is family? Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurman, A. S. (1983). Family therapy research and the “new epistemology.” Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9, 227–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurman, A. S., & Kniskern, D. P. (Eds.) (1981). Handbook of family therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Halfpenny, P. (1982). Positivism and sociology: Explaining social life. London: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1986). The instability of the analytical categories of feminist theory. Signs, 11, 645–664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare-Mustin, R. T. (1986). The problem of gender in family therapy theory. Family Process, 26, 15–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Heiskanen, V. S. (1971). The myth of the middle-class family in American family sociology. The American Sociologist, 6, 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Hill, R. (1951). Review of current research on marriage and the family. American Sociological Review, 16, 694–701.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, R. (1955). A critique of contemporary marriage and family research. Social Forces, 33, 268–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, R. (1958). Sociology of marriage and family behaviour, 1945–56: A trend report and bibliography. Current Sociology, 7, 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Hill, R., & Hansen, D. A. (1960). The identification of conceptual frameworks utilized in family study. Marriage and Family Living, 22, 299–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Howard, R. L. (1981). A social history of American family sociology, 1865–1940. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Jurich, J. A. (1989). The family realm: Expanding its parameters. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 819–822.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Kain, E. L. (1990). The myth of family decline: Understanding families in a world of rapid social change. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaslow, F. W. (Ed.) (1990a). Voices in family psychology (Vol. 1). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaslow, F. W. (Ed.) (1990b). Voices in family psychology (Vol. 2). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, B. F. (1983). Aesthetics of change. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (1982). Feminism and science, Signs, 7, 589–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, D. M. (1980). Commentary on the linkages between conceptual frameworks and theory development in sociology. Sociological Quarterly, 21, 443–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Knorr-Cetina, K. D. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford, England: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, W. L. (1948). Sociologically established family norms and democratic values. Social Forces, 26, 451–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Komarovsky, M., & Waller, W. (1945). Studies of the family. American Journal of Sociology, 50, 443–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Lebow, J. (1984). On the value of integrating approaches to family therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 10, 127–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, D. N. (1989). Simmel as a source for sociological metatheory. Sociological Theory, 7, 161–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luepnitz, D. A. (1988). The family interpreted: Feminist theory in clinical practice. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Martindale, D. (1976). The romance of a profession: A case history in the sociology of sociology. Chicago: Adams.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Merton, R. K. (1967). On theoretical sociology: Five essays, old and new. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Mogey, J. (1969). Sociology of marriage and family behavior, 1957–1968: A report and bibliography. Current Sociology, 17, 5–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Morioka, K. (1981). Introduction: The development of family sociology in Japan. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 12, i–xiii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mowrer, E. R. (1941). Recent trends in family research. American Sociological Review, 6, 499–511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins, N. C. (1973). Theories and theory groups in contemporary American sociology. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Nimkoff, M. F. (1948). Trends in family research. American Journal of Sociology, 52, 477–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Nye, F. I. (1988). Fifty years of family research, 1937–1987. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 305–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, F. I., & Bayer, A. E. (1963). Some recent trends in family research. Social Forces, 41, 290–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, F. I., & Berardo, F. M. (1966/1981). Emerging conceptual frameworks in family analysis. New York: Macmillan/Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Osmond, M. W. (1984). Feminist research and scientific criteria. Journal of Family Issues, 5, 571–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Pavalko, R. M. (1988). Sociology of occupations and professions (2nd ed.). Itasca, IL: Peacock.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Polanyi, M. (1964). Personal knowledge. New York: Harper Torchbooks.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Price, D. J. deS. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ralebipi, M. D. R. (Ed.) (1990). Inventory of marriage and family literature (Vol. XV-1988/89). Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Reskin, B. F. (1978). Scientific productivity, sex, and location in the institution of science. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 1235–1243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritzer, G. (1975). Sociology: A multiple paradigm science. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritzer, G. (1988). Sociological metatheory: A defense of a subfield by a delineation of its parameters. Sociological Theory, 6, 187–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritzer, G. (1991). Biography: A (still) underutilized metasociological method. Contemporary Sociology, 20, 10–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodman, H. (1980). Are conceptual frameworks necessary for theory building? The case of family sociology. Sociological Quarterly, 21, 429–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Rychlak, J. (1977). The psychology of rigorous humanism. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Shaw, M. E., & Costanzo, P. R. (1970). Theories of social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Small, W., & Griffith, B. C. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures: I: Identifying and graphing specialties. Science Studies, 4, 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Spiegel, J. P. (1954). New perspectives in the study of the family. Marriage and Family Living, 16, 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprey, J. (1988). Current theorizing on the family: An appraisal. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 875–890.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Stacey, J., & Thorne, B. (1985). The missing feminist revolution in sociology. Social Problems, 32, 301–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Storer, N. W. (1966). The social system of science. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Suppe, F. (1977). The structure of scientific theories (2nd ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sussman, M. B. (1968). Current state and perspectives of research on the family. Social Science Information, 7, 35–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sussman, M. B. (1986). The Charybdis of publishing in academia. Marriage and Family Review, 10, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Thomas, J. L. (1955). Theory and research in family sociology. American Catholic Sociological Review, 15, 104–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Thome, B., & Yalom, M. (1982). Rethinking the family: Some feminist questions. New York: Longmans.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Tomm, K. (1983). The old hat that doesn’t fit. Family Therapy Networker, 7, 39–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Touliatos, J., Perlmutter, B. F., & Straus, M. A. (Eds.) (1990). Handbook of family measurement techniques. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. H. (1982). The structure of sociological theory. (3rd ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Wallace, W. L. (Ed.) (1969). Sociological theory: An introduction. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, A. J., & Thompson, L. (1984). Feminism and family studies. Journal of Family Issues, 5, 545–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters, J. (1962). A review of family research in 1959, 1960, and 1961. Marriage and Family Living, 24, 158–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • Woodward, K. L., & Denworth, L. (1990). The order of innovation. Newsweek, May 21, 78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, L. C. (1983). Family research and family therapy: A reunion? Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy, 9, 113–117.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, 46556

    David M. Klein

  2. Child Development and Family Studies, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, 47907

    Joan A. Jurich

Authors
  1. David M. Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joan A. Jurich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Family Social Science, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, 55108, USA

    Pauline Boss  & William J. Doherty  & 

  2. Department of Sociology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, 30302, USA

    Ralph LaRossa

  3. School of Family Studies and Human Services, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, 66506, USA

    Walter R. Schumm

  4. Department of Sociology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA

    Suzanne K. Steinmetz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Klein, D.M., Jurich, J.A. (2009). Metatheory and Family Studies. In: Boss, P., Doherty, W.J., LaRossa, R., Schumm, W.R., Steinmetz, S.K. (eds) Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85764-0_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-306-44264-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-85764-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation