Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Hypothesization in Family Therapy

•Download as PPTX, PDF•
•
Shari Tess Mathew
Shari Tess Mathew

This document discusses the concept and use of hypothesizing in family therapy. It defines a hypothesis as an unproved assumption used as a starting point for investigation and change, not truth. In family therapy, the therapist forms a pre-session hypothesis based on family information to organize the session. The hypothesis is continually tested and may be disproven, requiring a new hypothesis. Well-formed hypotheses should pertain to symptoms, how the family maintains them, and why they sought therapy. Hypothesizing helps therapists focus their attention and make sense of complex family dynamics.

1 of 16
Hypothesizing in Family Therapy Shari Tess Mathew NIMHANS, Bangalore 11.11.2014
Introduction  Concept of hypothesizing officially introduced as a tool of therapy- In an article by Selvini Pallazoli et. al. (1980)  One of the most important contributions of MILAN School of Family Therapy
Definition  Hypothesis, in the Greek etymon means "that which is under ”  According to the Oxford Dictionary, hypothesis is "a supposition made as a basis for reasoning, without reference to its truth; as a starting point for an investigation."  Experimental science- An unproved supposition tentatively accepted to provide a basis for further investigation, from which a verification or refutation can be obtained.  It’s a statement introducing differences, namely setting facts in order, in response to a specific problem.
HYPOTHESIZING  Family therapy session always begins with the therapist possessing a certain amount of information concerning the family  Formulation based upon the information the therapist possesses regarding the family he is interviewing  FT session is organised around the hypothesis  Establishes a starting point for investigation  Verification of the validity  If proven false, the therapist must form a second hypothesis based upon the information gathered during the testing of the first.  The goal of therapeutic hypotheses is change, not truth.
Value of the Hypothesis in General  The hypothesis, as such, is neither true nor false- only more and less useful  Even an hypothesis that proves to be false contributes information in that it eliminates a certain number of variables that until that moment had appeared possible.  The essential function of the hypothesis consists of furnish a new information, by which it will be confirmed, refuted, or modified.
Clinical Example  Family: A Divorced mother (37) and son (13)  Reason for consultation: Son difficult to control, rebellious, rude and prone to delinquent behaviour  Pre-Session Hypothesis: Behaviour of boy, a way to get father back to the family  During session: Hypothesis disproved  Second Hypothesis: Charming mother, perhaps had met another man, Boys behaviour as anger towards him – Was proved
Hypothesis should Pertain to:  What the person is trying to tell through the symptoms?  How the family is maintaining those symptoms ?  Why the family has turned up for Family Therapy now?
Value of the Hypothesis in the Family Interview  Hypothesis is formulated and tested in the FT session  Inner conversation of the therapist  Guaranteeing the activity of the therapist  Not to find a scientific explanation for the problems in the family; rather, to facilitate understanding (Sandler & Hulgus, 1989).  The Hypothesis Must be Systemic. Must include all components of the family, and must furnish with a supposition concerning the total relational function.
Hypothesis in the Family Interview  Hypotheses, suppositions tentatively accepted, help the therapist to focus on what seems most relevant at that moment.  To devote attention from chaotic stream  To make some sort of selection.  To organize all the confusing data attached to a symptom so as to make sense in the relationship context (Hoffman, 1981).  Continuous process of moving back and forth .
Hypothesis in the Family Interview  Simple connections between elements of observations, ideas, theories and so on.  The image that is painted in a hypothesis remains sketchy.  A hypothesis has some coherence and some direction, but it is not a “nice coherent, well-organized narrative, with everything in its place” (Shotter, 1993).  The therapist should adopt an “attitude of permanent vigilance” (Maturana & Varela, 1987, and constantly monitor his or her inner conversation.
Selection of Hypothesis  Not based on “ Is my hypothesis true?”  “Do my hypotheses connect sufficiently with the view of the family members so as to be useful to open space for the not-yet said?”  “Are my hypotheses constructive and respectful towards the family members?”
Characteristics of the Hypothesis  Since it is a statement, it is communication.  Since it introduces differences and sets facts in order, it is a map.  Since it is formulated in response , it is a proposed a solution for it.
Classes of Hypotheses ( Boscolo et al., 1987) A. Who is with whom in the family- tries to understand coalitions, alliances B. Explores the family’s premises and myths C. Focuses on communication –within and between
Conclusion  A hypothesis sometimes gives the therapist an illusion of mastery, predictability and control. The therapist needs this illusion to survive in the chaos of the family . A hypothesis is not a “nice coherent, well-organized narrative, with everything in its place”. A smooth hypothesis would be dangerous, because it would make the therapist blind for other possibilities or other perspectives. So what might appear as a weakness of a hypothesis, is in fact a benefit: it helps the therapist to keep an open mind toward the unique and unpredictable features of the context, and to the multiplicity of voices in the inner conversation.
References  Selvini, M. P., Boscolo, L., Cecchin, G., & Prata, G. (1980). Hypothesizing Circularity Neutrality: Three Guidelines for the Conductor of the Session. Fam Proc, 19, 3-12.  Rober, P. (2005). Constructive hypothesizing, dialogic understanding and the therapist’s inner conversation:. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 28, 467-478.  Bertrando, P., & Toffanetti, D. ( 2003 ). Persons and Hypotheses:The Use of the Therapist in the Hypothesising Process. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 24(March), 7-13.
Thank You

More Related Content

Hypothesization in Family Therapy

  • 1. Hypothesizing in Family Therapy Shari Tess Mathew NIMHANS, Bangalore 11.11.2014
  • 2. Introduction  Concept of hypothesizing officially introduced as a tool of therapy- In an article by Selvini Pallazoli et. al. (1980)  One of the most important contributions of MILAN School of Family Therapy
  • 3. Definition  Hypothesis, in the Greek etymon means "that which is under ”  According to the Oxford Dictionary, hypothesis is "a supposition made as a basis for reasoning, without reference to its truth; as a starting point for an investigation."  Experimental science- An unproved supposition tentatively accepted to provide a basis for further investigation, from which a verification or refutation can be obtained.  It’s a statement introducing differences, namely setting facts in order, in response to a specific problem.
  • 4. HYPOTHESIZING  Family therapy session always begins with the therapist possessing a certain amount of information concerning the family  Formulation based upon the information the therapist possesses regarding the family he is interviewing  FT session is organised around the hypothesis  Establishes a starting point for investigation  Verification of the validity  If proven false, the therapist must form a second hypothesis based upon the information gathered during the testing of the first.  The goal of therapeutic hypotheses is change, not truth.
  • 5. Value of the Hypothesis in General  The hypothesis, as such, is neither true nor false- only more and less useful  Even an hypothesis that proves to be false contributes information in that it eliminates a certain number of variables that until that moment had appeared possible.  The essential function of the hypothesis consists of furnish a new information, by which it will be confirmed, refuted, or modified.
  • 6. Clinical Example  Family: A Divorced mother (37) and son (13)  Reason for consultation: Son difficult to control, rebellious, rude and prone to delinquent behaviour  Pre-Session Hypothesis: Behaviour of boy, a way to get father back to the family  During session: Hypothesis disproved  Second Hypothesis: Charming mother, perhaps had met another man, Boys behaviour as anger towards him – Was proved
  • 7. Hypothesis should Pertain to:  What the person is trying to tell through the symptoms?  How the family is maintaining those symptoms ?  Why the family has turned up for Family Therapy now?
  • 8. Value of the Hypothesis in the Family Interview  Hypothesis is formulated and tested in the FT session  Inner conversation of the therapist  Guaranteeing the activity of the therapist  Not to find a scientific explanation for the problems in the family; rather, to facilitate understanding (Sandler & Hulgus, 1989).  The Hypothesis Must be Systemic. Must include all components of the family, and must furnish with a supposition concerning the total relational function.
  • 9. Hypothesis in the Family Interview  Hypotheses, suppositions tentatively accepted, help the therapist to focus on what seems most relevant at that moment.  To devote attention from chaotic stream  To make some sort of selection.  To organize all the confusing data attached to a symptom so as to make sense in the relationship context (Hoffman, 1981).  Continuous process of moving back and forth .
  • 10. Hypothesis in the Family Interview  Simple connections between elements of observations, ideas, theories and so on.  The image that is painted in a hypothesis remains sketchy.  A hypothesis has some coherence and some direction, but it is not a “nice coherent, well-organized narrative, with everything in its place” (Shotter, 1993).  The therapist should adopt an “attitude of permanent vigilance” (Maturana & Varela, 1987, and constantly monitor his or her inner conversation.
  • 11. Selection of Hypothesis  Not based on “ Is my hypothesis true?”  “Do my hypotheses connect sufficiently with the view of the family members so as to be useful to open space for the not-yet said?”  “Are my hypotheses constructive and respectful towards the family members?”
  • 12. Characteristics of the Hypothesis  Since it is a statement, it is communication.  Since it introduces differences and sets facts in order, it is a map.  Since it is formulated in response , it is a proposed a solution for it.
  • 13. Classes of Hypotheses ( Boscolo et al., 1987) A. Who is with whom in the family- tries to understand coalitions, alliances B. Explores the family’s premises and myths C. Focuses on communication –within and between
  • 14. Conclusion  A hypothesis sometimes gives the therapist an illusion of mastery, predictability and control. The therapist needs this illusion to survive in the chaos of the family . A hypothesis is not a “nice coherent, well-organized narrative, with everything in its place”. A smooth hypothesis would be dangerous, because it would make the therapist blind for other possibilities or other perspectives. So what might appear as a weakness of a hypothesis, is in fact a benefit: it helps the therapist to keep an open mind toward the unique and unpredictable features of the context, and to the multiplicity of voices in the inner conversation.
  • 15. References  Selvini, M. P., Boscolo, L., Cecchin, G., & Prata, G. (1980). Hypothesizing Circularity Neutrality: Three Guidelines for the Conductor of the Session. Fam Proc, 19, 3-12.  Rober, P. (2005). Constructive hypothesizing, dialogic understanding and the therapist’s inner conversation:. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 28, 467-478.  Bertrando, P., & Toffanetti, D. ( 2003 ). Persons and Hypotheses:The Use of the Therapist in the Hypothesising Process. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy, 24(March), 7-13.

Editor's Notes

  1. Cybernetics is the science of communication and control in man and machine. In cybernetics systems are viewed as self-correcting , influenced in an ongoingway by feedback.