Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T23:21:38.427Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Roles and Relationships

from Part V - Coding Schemes for Interaction Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2018

Edited by
Elisabeth Brauner ,
Margarete Boos  and
Michaela Kolbe
Elisabeth Brauner
Affiliation:
Brooklyn College, City University of New York
Margarete Boos
Affiliation:
University of Göttingen
Michaela Kolbe
Affiliation:
ETH Zürich
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis , pp. 612
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Primary Sources

Humbad, M. N., Donnellan, M. B., Klump, K. L., & Burt, S. A. (2011). Development of the Brief Romantic Relationship Interaction Coding Scheme (BRRICS). Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 759–769. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025216CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Secondary Sources

Burt, S. A., Wildey, M. N., & Klump, K. L. (2015). The quality of the interparental relationship does not moderate the etiology of child conduct problems. Psychological Medicine, 45, 319–332. doi:10.1017/S003329171400138XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caughlin, J. P., Huston, T. L., & Houts, R. M. (2000). How does personality matter in marriage? An examination of trait anxiety, interpersonal negativity, and marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 326–336. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.78.2.326CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chow, C. M., & Ruhl, H. (2018). Congruity of observed social support behaviors and couple relationship quality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 62–71. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, A., Eldridge, K., Catta-Preta, A. B., Lim, V. R., Santagata, R. (2006). Cross-cultural consistency of the demand/withdraw interaction pattern in couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 1029–1044. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00311.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, A., & Heavey, C. L. (1990). Gender and social structure in the demand/withdraw pattern of marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 73–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.1.73CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fincham, F. D., & Beach, S. R. H. (2006). Relationship satisfaction. In Vangelisti, A. L. & Perlman, D. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships (pp. 579–594). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grych, J. H., Seid, M., & Fincham, F. D. (1992). Assessing marital conflict from the child’s perspective: The Children’s Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale. Child Development, 63, 558–572. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1992.tb01646.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heyman, R. E. (2004). Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System (RMICS). In Kerig, P. K. & Baucom, D. H. (Eds.), Couple observational coding systems (pp. 67–93). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Julien, D., Markman, H. J., & Lindahl, K. M. (1989). A comparison of global and microanalytic coding systems: Implications for future trends in studying interactions. Behavioral Assessment, 11, 81–100. doi:10.1007/BF00962701Google Scholar
Labreton, J. M., Burgess, J. R. D., Kaiser, R. B., Atchley, E. K., & James, L. R. (2003). Variance hypothesis and interrater reliability and agreement: Are ratings from multiple sources really dissimilar? Organizational Research Methods, 6, 80–128. doi:10.1177/1094428102239427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174. doi:10.2307/2529310CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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. doi:10.2307/350547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, R. L., & Tolman, A. O. (1990). The Marital Interaction Coding System – Global (MICS-G): A global companion to the MICS. Behavioral Assessment, 12, 271–294.Google Scholar
Wildey, M. N., Donnellan, M. B., Klump, K. L., & Burt, S. A. (submitted). Using multiple methods to evaluate associations between externalizing psychopathology, personality, and relationship quality: A replication and extension. Journal of Personality Disorders.Google Scholar
Ericson, P. M., & Rogers, L. E. (1973). New procedures for analyzing relational communication. Family Process, 12, 245–267. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.1973.00245.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Escudero, V., & Rogers, L. E. (2004). Analyzing relational communication. In Rogers, L. E. & Escudero, V. (Eds.), Relational communication: An interactional perspective to the study of process and form. (pp. 3–21). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Friedlander, M. L., & Heatherington, L. (1989). Analyzing relational control in family therapy interviews. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 139–148. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.36.2.139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, L. E., & Farace, R. V. (1975). Relational communication analysis: New measurement procedures. Human Communication Research, 1, 222–239. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00270.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayers, J., & Miura, S. Y. (1981). Construct and predictive validity of instruments for coding relational control. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 45, 159–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateson, G. (1979). Mind and nature: A necessary unity. New York, NY: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
Cecil, D. W., & von Friederichs-Fitzwater, M. (2004). Relational control in physician-patient interaction. In Rogers, L. E. & Escudero, V. (Eds.), Relational communication: An interactional perspective to the study of process and form (pp. 179–195). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Erchul, W. P. (1978). A relational communication analysis of control in school consultation. Professional School Psychology, 2, 113–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairhurst, G. T. (2004). Organizational relational control research: Problems and possibilities. In Rogers, L. E. & Escudero, V. (Eds.), Relational communication: An interactional perspective to the study of process and form (pp. 197–215). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Friedlander, M. L. (1993). Does complementarity promote or hinder client change in brief therapy? A review of the evidence from two theoretical perspectives. The Counseling Psychologist, 21, 457–486. doi:10.1177/0011000093213010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedlander, M. L., Siegel, S. M., & Brenock, K. (1989). Parallel processes in counseling and supervision: A case study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 149–157. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.36.2.149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedlander, M. L., Wildman, J., & Heatherington, L. (1991). Interpersonal control in structural and Milan systemic family therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 17, 395–408. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.1991.tb00909.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaul, R., Simon, L., Friedlander, M. L., Heatherington, 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. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.1991.tb00908.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heatherington, L. (1988). Coding relational control in counseling: Criterion validity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 41–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heatherington, L., & Friedlander, M. L. (1987). Family Relational Communication Control Coding System. Unpublished manuscript. Williams College, Williamstown, MA.Google Scholar
Heatherington, L., & Friedlander, M. L. (1990). Complementarity and symmetry in family therapy communication. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 261–268. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.37.3.261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heatherington, L., & Friedlander, M. L. (2004). From dyads to triads, and beyond: Relational control in individual and family therapy. In Rogers, L. E. & Escudero, V. (Eds.), Relational communication: An interactional perspective to the study of process and form (pp. 103–129). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Muñiz de la Peña, C., Friedlander, M. L., Escudero, V., & Heatherington, L. (2012). How do therapists ally with adolescents in family therapy? An examination of relational control communication in early sessions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 339–351. doi:10.1037/a0028063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, L. E. (1979). Relational communication control coding manual. (Available from L. E. Rogers, Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112).Google Scholar
Rogers, L. E., & Escudero, V. (Eds.) (2004a). Relational communication: An interactional perspective to the study of process and form. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Rogers, L. E., & Escudero, V. (2004b). Relational communication patterns in marital interaction. In Rogers, L. E. & Escudero, V. (Eds.), Relational communication: An interactional perspective to the study of process and form (pp. 83–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Rogers, L. E., & Millar, F. (1979). Domineeringness and dominance: A transactional view. Human Communication Research, 5, 238–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, S. M., Friedlander, M. L., & Heatherington, L. (1992). Nonverbal relational control in family communication. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 16, 117–139. doi:10.1007/BF00990326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strong, S. R., Hills, H. I., Kilmartin, C. T., DeVries, H., Lanier, K., Nelson, B. N., … Meyer, C. W. III, (1988). The dynamic relations among interpersonal behaviors: A test of complementarity and anticomplementarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 789–810. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.798CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal basis of psychiatry. New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
Tracey, T. J., Heck, E. J., & Lichtenberg, J. W. (1981). Role expectations and symmetrical/complementary therapeutic relationships. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 18, 338–344. doi:10.1037/h0088384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiles, W. B. (1992). Describing talk: A taxonomy of verbal response modes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Anderson, T., Knobloch-Fedders, L., Stiles, W. B., Ordonez, T., & Heckman, B. D. (2012). The power of subtle interpersonal hostility in psychodynamic psychotherapy: A speech acts analysis. Psychotherapy Research, 22, 348–362. doi:10.1080/10503307.2012.658097CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bales, R. F. Personality and interpersonal behavior. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970.Google Scholar
Cansler, D. C., & Stiles, W. B. (1981). Relative status and interpersonal presumptuousness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 459–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cape, J. D., & Stiles, W. B. (1998). Verbal exchange structure of general practice consultations with patients presenting psychological problems. Journal of Health Psychology, 3, 5–21. doi:10.1177/135910539800300101CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caro, I. (1993). Actos de habla de pacientes y terapeutas: Un análisis de la terapia lingüística de evaluación a través de los Modos de Respuesta Verbal [Patients’ and therapists’ speech acts: The linguistic therapy of evaluation analyzed through the Verbal Response Modes]. In Caro, I. (Ed.), Psicoterapia e investigación de procesos [Psychotherapy and process research]. Valencia, Spain: Promolibro (Colección de Psicología Teorética).Google Scholar
Caro, I., & Stiles, W. B. (1997). Vamos a traducir los MRV (let’s translate the VRM): Linguistic and cultural inferences drawn from translating a verbal coding system from English into Spanish. Psychiatry, 60, 233–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, R., Hill, C. E., Stiles, W. B., Friedlander, M. L., Mahrer, A. R., & Margison, F. R. (1987). Primary therapist response modes: Comparison of six rating systems. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 218–223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodman, G., & Dooley, D. (1976). A framework for help-intended interpersonal communication. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 13, 106–117. doi:10.1037/h0088322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henricks, W. H., & Stiles, W. B. (1989). Verbal processes on psychological radio call-in programs: Comparison with other help-intended interactions. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 20, 315–321. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.20.5.315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinkle, S., Stiles, W. B., & Taylor, L. A. (1988). Verbal processes in a labour/management negotiation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 7, 123–136. doi:10.1177/0261927X8800700203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meeuwesen, L. (Ed. and Trans.) (1984). Handleiding voor een taxonomie van verbale antwoordwijzen: Een beschrijving en bewerking van Stiles “Verbal Response Modes (V.R.M.)”. Vakgroep Klinische Psychologie, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Meeuwesen, L., Schaap, C., & van der Staak, C. (1991). Verbal analysis of physician-patient communication. Social Science & Medicine, 32, 1143–1150. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(91)90091-PCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, N. L., & Stiles, W. B. (1986). Verbal familiarity in American presidential nomination acceptance speeches and inaugural addresses (1920–1981). Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, 72–81. doi:10.2307/2786858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orlinsky, D. E., Grawe, K., & Parks, B. K. (1994). Process and outcome in psychotherapy – Noch einmal. In Bergin, A. E. & Garfield, S. L. (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (4th edn., pp. 270–376). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Shaikh, A., Knobloch, L. M., & Stiles, W. B. (2001). The use of a verbal response mode coding system in determining patient and physician roles in medical interviews. Health Communication, 13, 49–60. doi:10.1207/S15327027HC1301_05CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stiles, W. B. (1978a). Manual for a taxonomy of verbal response modes. Chapel Hill: Institute for Research in Social Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Stiles, W. B. (1978b). Verbal response modes and dimensions of interpersonal roles: A method of discourse analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 693–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiles, W. B. (1981). Classification of intersubjective illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 10, 227–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiles, W. B. (1986). Development of taxonomy of verbal response modes. In Greenberg, L. S. & Pinsof, W. M. (Eds.), The psychotherapeutic process: A research handbook (pp. 161–199). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Stiles, W. B., Lyall, L. M., Knight, D. P., Ickes, W., Waung, M., Hall, C. L., & Primeau, B. E. (1997). Gender differences in verbal presumptuousness and attentiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 759–772. doi:10.1177/0146167297237009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiles, W. B., & Shapiro, D. A. (1995). Verbal exchange structure of brief psychodynamic-interpersonal and cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 15–27. doi:10.1037//0022-006X.63.1.15CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stiles, W. B., Shapiro, D. A., & Firth-Cozens, J. A. (1988). Verbal response mode use in contrasting psychotherapies: A within-subjects comparison. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 727–733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stiles, W. B., Shuster, P. L., & Harrigan, J. A. (1992). Disclosure and anxiety: A test of the fever model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 980–988. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.980CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stiles, W. B., Walz, N. C., Schroeder, M. A. B., Williams, L. L., & Ickes, W. (1996). Attractiveness and disclosure in initial encounters of mixed-sex dyads. Journal of Social and Personal Relations, 13, 305–314. doi:10.1177/0265407596132009CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×