Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 1993, Vol. 19, NO.3,253-266 BASIC FAMILY THERAPY SKILLS, IV: TRANSGENERATIONALTHEORIES OF FAMILY THERAPY Thorana S. Nelson Utah State University Gabriella Heilbrun Purdue University Charles R. Figley Florida State University This paper focuses on the basic skills and competencies of transgenerational approaches to family therapy, the fourth report of a program of research surveys by the Basic Family Therapy Skills Project. In the first survey, a panel of family therapy educators listed the most critical or basic skills or competencies of beginningfamily therapistswith a transgenerationalorientation. In the third survey, selfselected respondents rated these items according to degree of importance for beginningfamily therapists. Rankings of the items according to mean scores of the Likert responses indicate that transgenerationalfamily therapy skills are founded in theory and can be identified behaviorally. The most important skills are those that use the self of the therapist to understand and utilize transgenerationalfamily therapy skills for both therapist and clients. Also listed are skills that many raters deemed “generic’’ rather than specifically related to transgenerational family therapy. Other findings and their implicationsfor the future training of family therapists are discussed. Although the paper is intended for family therapy educators interested in their colleagues’ ideas about critical skills in trans-generational family therapy, theorists and clinicians may also find it useful. INTRODUCTION Transgenerational theories of family therapy are typically associated with the works of Murray Bowen (Bowen, 1978), Ivan Boszormenyi-Nagy (e.g., Boszormenyi-Nagy & Krasner, 1986), James Framo (Framo, 1982), and Don Williamson (e.g., Williamson, 1981). Family therapy texts include these approaches among the major family therapy theories. These theorists use the terms transgenerational,intergenerational,and multigenerational as well as family systems theory to classify their theories, each term having its own particular Thorana S. Nelson, PhD, is Associate Professor of Family and Human Development and Director of the Marriage and Family Therapy Program, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322-2905. Gabriella Heilbrun is a doctoral student in Family Studies, Purdue University, 1269 Family Research Institute, West Lafayette, IN 47907. Charles R. Figley, PhD, is Professor of Family Therapy, School of Social Work, and Director, Interdivisional PhD Program in Marriage and Family Therapy, MlT Clinic, Sandels Building, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 30306-2033. July 1993 JOURNAL OF UARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY 253 connotation. While we claim no prejudice, for the purposes of this paper, the term transgenerational is used. Family therapy texts are often unclear as to the methods for translating transgenerationaltheory into practice. Behavioral skills are not always evident or easily inferred from the abstract concepts of the theories. Transgenerationalmodels of family therapy are similar in that they (a) value historical information, @) believe in the influence of the past on the present (and the future), and (c) strive to accomplish more than simple symptom reduction. These approaches are systemic in that they conceptualize emotional pain as arising out of interactional, human systems, primarily families of origin. Psychic dynamics dwell within the context of interactions,relationships,and myths (value and belief systems). These models focus on family-of-origin and transgenerationaldynamics as the unit of analysis. The models differ in the particular language used (e.g., loyalties, personal authority, or differentiation) and the particular clients seen in therapy (an individual, a family, or subsets of a family). But how do the transgenerationalfamily therapy approachestranslate to actual training? More specifically,what are the basic, fundamental skills or competencies of those who practice this approach? TransgenerationalFamily Therapy Skills According to the Manual on Accreditation (Commission on Accreditation for Marriage and Family Therapy Education [COAMFTE]; 1988), students in AAMFT accredited programs are expected to begin seeing clients early in their programs. For many students, particularly those with no prior counseling experience, this can be a highly stressful situation. From the perspective of Bowen’s (1978) theory, the ensuing anxiety and emotional intensity can inhibit thinking and thus diminish therapy for both the clients and the therapist. Bowen (1978) stresses that intervention emanates primarily from the differentiated, calm therapist rather than from technique. This requires a focus on the self of the therapist as a crucial component of training. Students attracted to the concepts of transgenerational therapy do not always wish to wait for their self-work to be complete before using the ideas with clients; simultaneousself-workand therapy training could enhanceboth processes. Therefore, an understandingof some of the basic skills and competenciesof transgenerationalfamily therapy, empirically derived, could be used to guide the training and self-exploration of beginning family therapists. The skills could also serve as valuablemarkers when assessingtrainees for their readiness to advance as therapists or as evidence that they need more training or selfwork. In addition, if research is to uncover some of the truths of transgenerationaltherapy, abstract as they are, we must have operational definitions of the skills used in therapy. Identification of the skills associated with transgenerational therapy will assist in both outcome and process research. The Basic Family Therapy Skills Project The Basic Family Therapy Skills Project (BFTS) was established in 1987 to begin the process of meeting the need for an empirically identified set of basic skills for beginningfamily therapists(Figley & Nelson, 1989). We recruited a large group of experiencedfamilytherapy educators to identify and rate a set of basic skills. By first identifying the skills through the eyes of those who teach and practice them and, with their help, reducing the list to the most essential, the list can then be used simultaneously in research on effective therapy and in training. Through a recursive process, the list can then be modified over time with additional study and application experiences. 254 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY July 1993 METHODOLOGY Sample Participants were recruited from two lists that, together, represented an identifiable group of experiencedprofessional educatorsin the field of family therapy: AAMFTApproved Supervisorsand AFTA members. Lists of 1234Approved Supervisorsand 903 AFTA members were obtained in late 1987. After reducingthe lists by 245 to remove duplications,invitations were sent to 1892 potential participants. The invitations outlined the purpose of the study and the criteria for participation (willingness to respond to the surveys and recent experience with beginning level trainees). A total of 744 (39%)invitations were returned, many indicatingthat the respondent was not eligible or able to participatein the study. A final list of 688 (36% of original 1892) volunteers was included in the study. The criteria for inclusion in the study were strict. This reduced the eligible pool considerably since many supervisors work with trainees after they have finished graduate school and their initial experiences with families in therapy. The number of AAMFT Approved Supervisors and AFTAmembers who were not eligibleor who were eligible and did not respond is not known. However, we make no claims that this is a random or representativesample. Our purposewas to generate a useful list of basic skills. Therefore, we considered the 688 respondents to be our sampling pool for identifying the most salient skills. A series of survey questionnaires was sent to the study participants. The first survey, conducted in early 1988, requested the respondents’ demographicinformation and nominations of both generic (theory-free) and theory-specific family therapy skills essential for beginning family therapists, that is, the important entry level skills. Volunteers were informed that they would be requested to respond to several questionnaires in what could be considered a modified Delphi study (Dalkey, 1969). In such a study, exploratory in nature with limited generalizability,qualitative rather than quantitative results are the initial focus. To receive qualitative data from such a large number of respondents is both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, researcherscan be more confident that data are comprehensiveand representative of a field. On the other hand, temptations to quantify the results and do finegrained analyses with concomitant conclusions are overwhelming. Such was the nature of this study. The reader is cautioned regarding the accuracy of such conclusions as generalizable to family therapy educators as a whole. Although we can assume that members of the professional organizations used in this study are, perhaps, the most serious educators, interested enough in marriage and family therapy education to respond faithfully to our frequent and lengthy questionnaires,we all know what assumptions are. We hope that we are not so grandiose as to think that our study was intriguing enough to attract all interested people. A total of 429 (62%) completed questionnaires were returned, a very satisfying response. Nominated Items The response rate amazed us given the length of the questionnaire. It also resulted in an overwhelmingnumber of nominated items (frequently, a dozen or more per questionnaire). It was clear to us that there was considerableoverlap and redundancy. We therefore decided upon a qualitative method for determining a reasonable number of skills that would later be rated by the panel according to degree of importance for entry-level therapists. By using items nominated by those who identified themselves as primarily teachers/supervisors (rather than clinicians who supervise), we hoped to include the most salient and important July 1993 JOURNAL OF MARITALAND FAMILY THERAPY 255 skills. Items were sorted for both generic and theory-specific skills nominated by 208 respondentswho indicated their primary occupation as teacherhrainer. Each respondent also indicated a primary theoretical orientation for his/her own clinical practice, allowing us further to validate the theory-specific items. After sorting the theory nominations from the first survey, 77 skills emerged that were identified by the transgenerationalnominators as primarily related to transgenerationalfamily therapy. Many items emerged that could be considered personal attributes rather than behavioral skills. Although this did not meet with our initial conceptualizationsor purposes, it did fit within the conceptualizationsof the theories. We did not define “essential” or “basic” for our volunteers, wanting to give them as much freedom to respond as possible. We conjectured that many respondents nominated skills or traits that represented deficits or supervisee behaviors that had recently been frustrating for them. Others may have been more theoreticallyminded while they were nominatingthe items. In all cases, we wanted thepaneE to tell us what was most important for beginning level family therapists. Our theoretical biases (structural/strategic/transgenerationaland behavioral) also flavored the selection and wording of items. As much as possible, however, we attempted to reduce such bias by using the wordings of the nominators rather than attempting to interpret, extrapolate, or infer meaning. The second survey requested ratings for generic family therapy skills. For the third survey,the 688original volunteerswere asked to choose the theory-specificskills they would like to rate as appropriatefor beginning family therapists. They were given choices of structural, strategic (Haley, MRI, Milan), StructuraVstrategic,brief, behavioral, cognitive behavioral, functional,experiential,communications,sociallearning, educational,psychodynamic/ object relations, and transgenerational (Bowen, Framo, Nagy) family therapies. Bowen, Framo, and Nagy were suggested since they are the basic transgenerational theorists discussed in major family therapy texts. This was in no way meant to slight eminent theorists Don Williamson and Norman Paul. Many respondents chose more than one set of items to rate. The results of the ratings for the generic skills have been reported elsewhere (Figley & Nelson, 1989). The results of analyses of data received related to structural family therapy (Figley & Nelson, 1990) and strategic and brief family therapies (Nelson & Figley, 1990) have likewise been reported. Transgenerational Family Therapy Sample Description A total of 221 respondents requested the 77-item transgenerationalsurvey; 112 (51%) returned the survey and 103 (47%) were complete enough for analyses. Again, the response rate pleased us. The questionnaireswere lengthy and a number of people requested all 13 theories, a daunting package indeed, perhaps leading to decisions not to return them. Demographic information about the respondents is found in Table 1. The mean age of the sample was 46.2, half of whom were males. The sample was overwhelmingly white (95%). The degree most represented was the PhD (44.1%). Most of the sample (55.3%) identified themselves as primarily family therapists, with social workers and psychologists having substantial representation. Nearly one half of the sample (48.6%) indicated their primary professional identification as teacher/trainer/supervisor. A total of 27.5% of the respondents identified themselves as using a primarily transgenerational orientation in their clinical practices. Many others, however, included transgenerational family therapy as part of an integration of models. 256 JOURNAL OF M4RiT.M AND FAMILY THERAPY July 1993 Table 1 Transgenerational Family Therapy Demographic Description of Respondents (Mean age = 46.2; N = 103) Category Frequency % Sex Male Female Missing Ethnicity Caucasian Black Hispanic Other Missing Highest degree PhD MSW Master’s Other Doctorates MD MFT Missing Primary professional identity Family therapist Social worker Psychologist Minister Counseling psychologist Psychiatrist Professional counselor Nurse Other Missing Primary occupation Teacherttrained supervisor Clinical practitioner Administrator Researcher Other Missing Theories Transgenerational Other Missing - July 1993 51 51 1 50.0 50.0 97 1 1 3 1 95.1 1.o 1.0 2.9 45 25 13 14 4 1 1 44.1 24.5 12.7 13.7 3.9 1.0 57 13 12 4 3 2 2 1 7 2 55.3 12.6 11.7 3.9 2.9 1.9 1.9 1.o 6.8 1.9 49 47 3 1 1 1 48.0 46.1 2.9 1.0 1.o 45 38 20 44.0 37.0 19.0 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FMILY THERAPY 257 Ratings ’Process Respondentswere asked to rate each item in terms of its importanceon a 1-5 Likert scale, 1being very important as a transgenerationaltechnique for beginning family therapists and 5 being very unimportant as a transgenerationaltechnique. In addition to the Likert responses 1through 5, respondentswere given alternativechoices: (6) “inappropriatetransgenerational skill for a beginning therapist,” (7) “appropriate for a beginning therapist, but as a generic skill (not a transgenerational skill),” (8) “inappropriate for family therapy,” and (9) “don’t know what this means.” This last option was necessary since responses to our initial survey of generic skills indicatedthat many respondentshad not clearly understood their colleagues’ nominations. RESULTS Qualifications of the Sample While it would have been better to have an exclusive sample of transgenerationaltherapists, one half of the sample was composed of participants who were primarily teachers/ trainers of family therapy. Thus, it could be legitimatelyhypothesized that these family therapy educators were familiar with transgenerational family therapy concepts and issues in teachingbeginning-leveltherapists. This was so, even though they may not use this approach as their primary clinical orientation. To test this hypothesis, chi-square analyses of all questionnaire items were performed. A nonparametrictest was chosen since part of the data responseswere categorical. We wanted to be sure that the groups (transgenerationallyoriented therapists vs. other-oriented therapists) were not judged similar if they were indeed dissimilar, and so we took a conservative approach to the analyses. If 15%or more of the items were responded to differently at the p < .05 level, we would reject the hypothesis of similarity. The two groups were different at thep < .05 level for only 6 of the 77 items on the survey. Since this was less than 8%of the items, we believed it was due to chance. Items were then compared with the nominations of the remainder of the sample (non-teacher/trainers); this check revealed that the items nominated by the teacherbrainers were indeed complete and representative of those of the entire sample. Thus, the two groups were combined for further analysis. Analyses After examination for evenness of distribution of response choices, data were analyzed to determine the mean ratings for each of the 77 nominated skills using the Likert scale responses. Since response 3 of the Likert scale indicated indecision rather than importance, this response was removed from the Likert-scale analyses and included in a frequencies tabulation with choices 6 through 9. Thus choices 4 and 5 were recoded and means computed for the new four choices. The items were then rank ordered accordingto mean ratings. Table 2 lists the rank-ordered items that received Likert responses from at least 75%of the sample, their means and standard deviations, and tabulations for alternativesthat received more than 10preferences. The numbers listed in the “Wcolumn refer to the total number of respondents who answered one of the four choices on the Likert scale. Items for which at least one fourth of the sample selected an alternativeresponse rather than one of the four choices of the Likert scale are listed in Table 3 along with tabulations of the alternatives. (Rankings are the originals rather than renumbered for each table.) We suggest caution in interpreting the 258 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY July 1993 rankings of items receivingLikert responses from fewer than 75 respondents(approximately three fourths of the sample). Table 2 Transgenerational Family Therapy Skills Rank Ordered Means, Standard Deviations Items receiving Likert responses from >3/4 of the Sample Tabulations of non-Likert Responses Likert Responses 1- very important as a transgenerational technique for beginners 2 - somewhat important as a transgenerational technique 3 - unimportant as a transgenerational technique 4 - very unimportant as a transgenerationaltechnique for beginners Alternative Responses Inappropriate transgenerational skill for a beginning therapist Appropriate for a beginning therapist, but as a generic skill (not a transgenerational skill) Inappropriate for family therapy Don’t know what this means Original Rank 2 3 4 7 8 9 10 13 15 16 17 18 20 Item Understand own family of origin Recognize triangled relationships Awareness of own issues n(generic skill) = 26 Helping clients focus on change in self vs. changing others n(generic skill) = 17 Ability to stay out of triangles n(generic skill) = 14 Utilize historical data Do genograms Assist with detriangulation Clarify client’s personal sense of responsibility with family of origin Define relationships in the family n(generic skill) = 6 A basic ability to take an I-position n(generic skill) = 25 Keep boundaries clear between client and therapist n(generic skill) = 25 Coach clients in changing behaviors with family-of-origin members July 1993 N Mean SD 99 105 80 1.22 1.23 1.26 .49 .46 .59 87 1.33 .58 92 100 98 100 1.35 1.36 1.37 1.41 .54 .63 .71 .62 97 87 1.42 1.42 .63 .64 82 1.43 .86 79 1.43 .67 98 1.46 .73 JOcrRNAL OF MARITALAND FAMILY THERAPY 259 Original Rank Item 21 Take extended family history 23 Clarify relationships in family n(generic skill) = 18 24 Assess family loyalties 25 Motivate family members to work on their families of origin 27 Pinpoint transgenerational conflict 28 Use family of origin to assist clients in differentiating 29 Assess individual differentiation 30 Flexibility in separating from family n(generic skill) = 14 31 Assign tasks aimed at differentiation 32 Comfortable with consulting rather than “expert” role n(generic skill) = 21 33 Interpret past relationship to present behavior 35 Willingness to include expanded systems 36 Ask questions around redundancies of interactional patterns n(generic skill) = 10 37 Verbally distinguish between emotional and intellectual systems n(generic skill) = 16 40 Do not keep family secrets n(generic skill) = 15 41 Join with each family member n(generic skill) = 26 42 Reframe n(generic skill) = 21 45 Develop transgenerationalhomework tasks 46 Anticipate reactions to clients’ changes n(genenc skill) = 25 48 Psychoeducation for coping with emotional challenges of family of origin 49 Interrupt patterns n(generic skill) = 22 50 Desensitize family to past events 51 Role-model n(generic skill) = 23 53 Assign tasks aimed at unresolved grief 55 Use of insights n(generic skill) = 22 56 Defocus intense feelings during sessions 58 Use position reversals n(inappropriate for beginners) = 16 60 Knowledge of structural theory n(generic skill) = 14 260 N Mean SD 95 83 1.49 1.52 .89 .63 96 1.53 .75 105 99 1.55 1.57 .83 .77 98 95 77 1.57 1.58 1.65 .96 .88 .70 103 1.65 .81 75 1.68 .90 98 97 1.70 1.75 .95 -87 86 1.76 .99 90 1.80 .96 79 1.91 .94 78 1.92 1.18 82 1.94 1.02 96 76 2.02 2.03 1.04 1.01 84 79 2.07 2.08 1.05 1.08 77 77 2.08 2.10 .96 1.08 92 79 2.12 2.19 1.07 1.09 79 75 2.19 2.28 1.19 1.07 95 2.34 1.10 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMIL.YTHERAPY July 1993 Original Rank N Item Mean SD 94 2.37 1.23 89 2.38 1.15 79 2.39 1.22 84 77 2.45 2.45 1.25 1.14 84 2.79 1.24 79 3.05 1.23 77 3.26 1.26 ~ 62 Get family members present for therapy 63 Understanding of object relations theory n(generic skill) = 10 64 Expedite discussion of strong emotional feelings n(generic skill) = 15 66 Reconstruct the “child within” from familyof-origin information 67 Teaching skills n(generic skill) = 19 72 Sculpt n(inappropriate for beginners) = 11 75 Prescribe rituals n(generic skill) = 10 n(inappropriate for beginners) = 16 77 Work as a team in cotherapy n(generic skill) = 19 Table 3 Transgenerational Family Therapy Skills Items with fewer than 75 Likert Responses n(Alternative)>20%of sample Means, Standard Deviations Tabulations of non-Likert Responses Likert Responses 1- very important as a transgenerational technique for beginners 2 - somewhat important as a transgenerational technique 3 - unimportant as a transgenerational technique 4 - very unimportant as a transgenerational technique for beginners Alternative Responses Inappropriate transgenerational skill for a beginning therapist Appropriate for a beginning therapist, but as a generic skill (not a transgenerational skill) Inappropriate for family therapy Don’t know what this means Original Rank Item 1 Listen n(generic skill) = 57 5 Respect integrity of family’s values n(generic skill) = 32 July 1993 JOURI?’ Likert Responses Mean 49 1.10 SD 73 .62 N OF UARITALAND FAMILY THERAPY 1.33 .31 261 original Rank 6 Item Observant n(generic skill) = 48 11 Transcend feelings of one right perspec:tive n(generic skill) = 32 n(don’t know) = 11 12 Openness to consultative feedback n(generic skill) = 43 14 Begin to organize data n(generic skill) = 36 19 Self-observation n(generic skill) = 35 22 Aware of others’ emotional states n(generic skill) = 38 26 Empathy n(generic skill) = 50 34 Bringing the session to a close n(generic skill) = 69 38 Use of multidirectional partiality n(generic skill) = 57 39 Ability to integrate levels of theory n(generic skill) = 32 43 Willingness to allow silence n(generic skill) = 46 44 Assess alcohol-relatedproblems n(generic skill) = 48 47 Restrain advice giving n(generic skill) = 31 52 When in doubt, don’t [do something] n(generic skill) = 35 54 Deal with resistance n(generic skill) = 37 57 Goalsetting n(generic skill) = 40 59 Set a general contract n(generic skill) = 37 61 Process countertransference n(generic skill) = 23 65 Capacity for imaginary alternatives n(generic skill) = 26 68 Manners n(generic skill) = 37 69 Noninstrumentality n(generic skill) = 75 70 Comfortable with play n(generic skill) = 34 262 N Likert Responses Mean SD 60 1.33 .51 59 1.39 .59 61 1.39 .56 70 1.41 .69 48 1.44 .68 64 1.5 .71 57 1.56 .91 41 1.71 .64 39 1.9 66 1.91 .91 58 2.02 1.16 54 2.02 1.14 66 2.03 1.09 35 2.11 30 65 2.14 1.13 67 2.19 1.20 68 2.32 1.10 65 2.34 1.24 72 2.44 1.15 38 2.55 1.20 26 2.65 1.02 69 2.67 1.32 JOURNAL OF UARITALAND FAMILY THERAPY 1.1 July 1993 Original Rank Item 71 Organize symbolic experiences which resolve past traumas n(generic skill) = 18 73 Create metaphors n(generic skill) = 24 74 Use abstract formulations with supervisor n(generic skill) = 19 n(don’t know) = 24 76 Capacity for fantasy n(generic skill) = 25 N Likert Responses Mean SD 69 2.78 1.23 72 2.83 1.32 48 2.90 1.24 71 3.06 1.21 DISCUSSION Theory-basedSkills The results of this study appear to be consistent with established theory. Twenty-three of the itemswere clearlyrelatedto transgenerationaltheory,using termssuch as dem%nguZution, family loyalties, and object relations. Sixteen of these were ranked among the top 25 items listed in Table 2. The most important skill listed in Table 2 was “Understand own family of origin;” “Awarenessof ownissues” was rankedthird. This is in keepingwith transgenerational theories,which emphasizethe therapist’sunderstandingof hisher own self. It also highlights the opinion of the sample that the self of the therapist is important, not simply the behavior (e.g., “joining”). Four of the items in Table 2 related to issues of the therapist’s self, and all of them were in the top 25 ranked items receivingLikert ratings from more than three fourths of the sample. Similarly, many of the items were skill-oriented, but with theory as context. For example, “Assign tasks aimed at unresolved grief,” and “Helping clients focus on change in self vs. changing others” have transgenerational theoretical foundations. Differentiation of the therapist is crucial in transgenerationalfamily therapy; therapistswho get “hooked into their clients’ issues are likely to be ineffective. One item specifically addressed this issue: “Keep boundaries clear between client and therapist.” Generic Transgenerational Skills Many other highly rated skills were more general, such as “Role model” and “Clarify relationships in family” and are listed in Table 3. Interestingly, this survey results in fewer items related to personalitycharacteristicsthan our previous surveys (Figley &Nelson, 1989, 1990;Nelson & Figley, 1990), particularly the generic survey (Figley & Nelson, 1989). Over 36%(n = 28) of the items were considered generic by more than one fourth of the sample. This would suggest that generic skills used by transgenerational therapists are essential components of family therapy in general. From this list of nominated and ranked items, it appears that the client-therapist relationship with clear boundaries between a client and a therapist who is able to utilize the concepts of theory constitutes effective transgenerational therapy. July 1993 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY 263 Behaviorally Based Skills Given the abstract nature of transgenerational concepts, it is quite interesting that so many items related to theory translate into behavioral skills. It is generallythought that transgenerational therapy flows from the differentiated, calm therapist and these characteristics are not easily operationalized. Therapistswho have trained primarily in these models are very clear themselves about what they do in therapy; their skills are evident to them. Graduate students in academic programs, however, often complain about the lack of clinical material in transgenerational literature. This survey indicates that beginning family therapists can indeed be introduced to clear (though theory-grounded) therapeutic skills. Implications Previously published analyses of structural, strategic, and brief family therapy (Figley & Nelson, 1990;Nelson & Figley, 1990)indicate that, for those theories, personality characteristics and in-therapy behaviors are critical for beginning family therapists. The results of the current analysis, in contrast, suggest several differences: (1)attention to the self of the therapist is central; (2) attention to the therapist’s family-of-origindynamics and how they relate to therapy is critical for transgenerational family therapists; and (3) attention to clearly theoretical concepts, the dynamics of therapy processes that exemplify them, and the techniques that flow from them is important. The translation of transgenerational family therapy into practice appears, from these data, to be more possible than is often inferred from family therapy texts: many behavioral skills emerged. While the panel nominated, rated, and effectively ranked transgenerational skills, at the same time they opened the world of empiricalresearch onto thepractice of transgenerationalfamily therapy. We now have a list of behaviors that can be defied. Training therapistscanbevideotapedand theirbehaviorscodedaccordingtothislist. Transgenerational therapy emanates from the center of the therapists and from theory. The results of this study indicate that transgenerational skills can be taught to and learned by beginners. Training programs that integrate transgenerational therapies into their teaching and practice should find these results encouraging. And while certain theorists, for example, strategic and brief, may find these ideas dull, students of family theory many find them intriguing and be encouraged to dialogue about theory and theories. The results of this research suggestthat training programswould do well to ground their students in theory. Results also indicate, for those using transgenerationaltheories,that work on one’s own family is crucial. This is important for programs to consider since this work can take many forms. Bowen coaching, for example,is usually considered less “therapeutic” than other forms of self-work. However, coaching is at least quasi-therapy; it uncovers personal issues and should be approachedwith caution within programs and kept separate from supervision of therapy. Most students of transgenerationaltheories, wishing to use the concepts in therapy, are open to and often eager for their own family-of-origin work. Others, however, may be more interested in using the ideas as an adjunct to other models. The list generated in this study does not give the field very much in terms of operational definitions of transgenerational theoretical concepts. For example, “assign tasks aimed at differentiation” assumes that the therapist already knows about and can recognize diff‘erentiation. In some ways, this list seems more appropriate for intermediate than for beginning family therapists who attend to their own family-of-origin work before conducting therapy. “Clarifying relationships”is a good thing to do. It is probably a complex skill, however, and 264 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY July 1993 deserves examination for splitting into learnable pieces. Others (e.g., Bray, Williamson, & Malone, 1984; Hovestadt,Anderson, Piercy, Fine, & Cochran, 1985) have worked on defining these concepts and their validation in the theories as well as researching their usefulness in family therapy. This study, however, has produced a list of therapeutic skills. We leave it to future studies to refine and further validate it. Limitations Nominators of the items in this survey were chosen from those who qualified as family therapy educators and supervisors, only a portion of whom are primarily practicing clinicians. It is possible that those who were primarily clinicians would have nominated items that were more relationship oriented; educators may be more attuned to theoretical and technical issues of transgenerational theories. However, these are our supervising colleagues who are entrustedwith educatingfuture family therapists. Thus, they should be familiarwith concepts and issues of the conduct of therapy. Additionally,they chose to nominate and rate skills related to transgenerationaltheories, and thus one could infer they have knowledge and interest in such skills. Respondents who rated the items, contributing to the mean rankings listed in Tables 2 and 3, were self-selected. Of the original 1892 invited to participate in the project, 1463did not respond; 1204 of them were either not eligible for the study or chose not to participate. Since this study’s purpose was to generate an initial list of skills, not produce a finely tuned measurement instrument,those who were eligible and responded were deemed the sampling pool. The preponderance of doctoral degree holders (57.8%)represented in the sample indicatesthat this group perhaps has studied theory and theoriesrather extensively. Approximately half were primarily teacherbrainers and half primarily clinicians. This indicates a balance which might not be representative of the field of family therapy in general. The findings, however, provide a consensus view of a group of highly committed professionals interested in contributing to the research and education of beginning family therapists. Had this list resulted from random sampling of clinicians as well as supervisors,it would be more generalizableto transgenerationaltherapy. The purpose of this study, however, was to generate empirically a list of skills useful for teachers and trainersof beginning family therapists. It is hoped that, after operationalizingthese skills and devising ways of evaluating them, a random sample of clinicians as well as educators can be used to test their validity. In conclusion, initial steps at empirically determining skills for such a diverse field are flawed. We believe, however, that our findings provide important directionsfor both educators and research and some interesting insights for practitioners. REFERENCES Boszormenyi-Nag, I., & Krasner, B. R. (1986). Between give and take. New York Brunner/Mazel. Bowen, M. (1978). Family therapy in clinicalpractice. New York Aronson. Bray, J. H., Williamson, D. S., & Malone, P. E. (1984). Personal authority in the family system: Development of a questionnaire to measure personal authority in intergenerational processes. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy , l o , 167-178. Commission on Accreditation for Marriage and Family Therapy Education. (1988). Manual on accreditation (rev. ed.). Washington, D C American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. Dakey, N. (1969). The Delphi method: An experinrental study of group opinion. Santa Monica, CA: July 1993 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY 265 RAND Corporation. Figley, C. R., & Nelson, T. S. (1989). Basic family therapy skills, I: Conceptualization and initial findings. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 15,349-365. Figley, C. R.,&Nelson, T. S. (1990).Basic family therapy skills, 11: Structural family therapy.Journal ofMarital and Family Therapy, 16,225-239. Framo, J. (1982). Elcplorations in marital and family therapy. New York Guilford. Hovestadt, A., Anderson, W., Piercy, F.,Fine, M., & Cochran, S. (1985). A family-of-origin scale. Journal ofMarital and Family Therapy, 11,287-298. Nelson, T. S., & Figley, C. R.(1990). Basic family therapy skills, 111: Brief and strategic schools of family therapy. Journal of Family Psychology,4,49-62. Williamson, D. S. (1981). Personal authority via termination of the intergenerational hierarchical boundary: A"new" stage in the family life cycle. J o m l ufMarital andFamily Therapy, 7,441452. Martin Rossman, MD & David Bresler, PhD JULY9-1 I , 1993 ----------PORTLAND, OR SEm 17-18,1993-------%N FRANCISCO, M ~8-10, u 1993-----WASHINGTON, Dc m u m - 3 1 1993 --ATLANTA, GA _ I - + Provides ropid, direct occess to unconsciousprocess, EARLY motivation & insight. FEE! REGISTRATION + Corn tible with all therapeutic approoches, including $195 brieKropies. (one month in odvonce) + Enhances ropport & empowers clients ond theropisk. + A deep?. o k t i v e , richly ossociotive, experiential opprooch. 16 CEU's Available For more information call t h e Academyfor Guided Imagery (a 1/800-726-2070 Ca 266 Call for information about our annual Hawaii conference. November 28-Decemkr 2, 1993 Visions of Health: Mind/Body Medicine Comer of Age JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY July 1993