Family Adaptability and Cohesion Scale

Family Adaptability and Cohesion Scale [1]

Based on the Circumplex model. Revised version includes six subscales: two assess the mid-ranges of adaptability and cohesion, and four assess the extremes (rigid, chaotic, disengaged, and enmeshed).

Overview

Acronym:

FACES IV

Authors:

Olson, D.H., Gorall, D., & Tiesel, J.

Citation:

Olson DH, Gorall DM, Tiesel JW. FACES-IV package: Administration. Minneapolis, MN: Life Innovations, Inc; 2006.

Contact Information:

Contact information:
Life Innovations, Inc
c.o FACES IV
P.O. Box 190
Minneapolis, MN
55440-0190
Phone: 1-800-331-1661 or 1-651-635-0511
Fax: 651-636-1668
E-mail: cs@facesiv.com [2]

Cost - $95 FACES IV package with unlimited use; $75 for students

Cost:

Cost Involved

Copyrighted:

Yes

Domain Assessed:

Health

Parenting

Services and Systems

Subcategories of Domains Assessed:

Family cohesion and flexibility. Used to help identify problem v. non-problem family systems.

Age Range:

12 and up

Measure Type:

General Assessment

Measure Format:

Questionnaire

Information Provided:

Areas of Concern/Risks

Clinician Friendly Output

Strengths

Other Information Provided:

(1) Percentile scores - for research and clinical work; can be plotted on summary profile (2) Ratio scores - balanced v. unbalanced; cohesion ratio, flexibility ratio, total cirumplex ratio (generally used for research) (3) Dimension scores - plotting cohesion and flexibility and circumplex model - should not be used for research

Administration

Reporter Type:

Self

Periodicity:

N/A - a longitudinal study would show whether the measure can capture changes over time (Marsac & Alderfer, 2010)

Response Format:

5-point scale: 1= Does not describe our family at all 2=Slightly describes our family 3= Somewhat describes our family 4= Generally describes our famly 5= Describes our family very well

Sample Items:


Domains	Scales	Sample Items
Balanced Cohesion	Balanced	Family members are supporting each other during difficult times
Balanced Flexibility	Balanced	My family is able to adjust to change when necessary
Unbalanced Cohesion	Disengaged	Family members seem to avoid contact with each other when at home
Unbalanced Cohesion	Enmeshed	We spend too much time together
Unbalanced Flexibility	Rigid	There are strict consequences for breaking rules in our family
Unbalanced Flexibility	Chaotic	Our family feels hectic and disorganized
Family Communication	N/A	Family members are able to ask each other for what they want
Family Satisfaction	N/A	Your family's ability to cope with stress

Materials Needed:

Paper/Pencil

Testing Stimuli

Training

Training to Administer:

Other

Training to Interpret:

Other

Other Training to Administer and Interpret:

Familiarity w/administration, scoring guidelines & interpretation

Parallel or Alternate Forms

Parallel Forms:

Alternate Forms:

Different Age Forms:

Altered Version Forms:

Psychometrics

Clinical Cutoffs:

Reliability:


Type:	Statistics	Min	Max	Avg
Test-Retest		0.83	0.93
Internal Consistency	alpha	0.65	0.81	n/a
Inter-rater
Parallel/Alternate Forms	t-tests & correlation	r=0.12	r=0.46	n/a

Number of Test-Retest Days:

3 weeks (21 days)

References for Reliability:

Test-retest reliability: More info would be valuable (Marsac & Alderfer, 2010) Internal consistency: Appropriate for research but may not be ready for clinical use (Franklin, Streeter, & Springer, 2001) Inter-rater reliability: Further analysis across family members needed (Marsac & Alderfer, 2010) Olson (2011) NOTE: See end of document for full references.

Content Validity Evaluated:

Yes

References for Content Validity:

Franklin, Streeter, & Springer (2001). Marsac & Alderfer (2010). Olson (2011).

Construct Validity Evaluated:

Yes

Construct Validity:


Validity Type	Not known	Nonclincal Samples	Clinical Samples
Convergent/Concurrent		Yes	Yes
Discriminant		Yes
Sensitive to Change	X
Intervention Effects	X
Longitudinal/Maturation Effects	X
Sensitive to Theoretically Distinct Groups	X
Factorial Validity		Yes

References for Construct Validity:

Franklin, Streeter, & Springer (2001). Marsac & Alderfer (2010). Olson (2011).

Criterion Validity Evaluated:

Yes

Criterion Validity:


	Not Known	Not Found	Nonclinical Samples	Clinical Samples	Diverse Samples
Predictive Validity:	X
Postdictive Validity:

References for Criterion Validity:

Predictive Validity: Future research should examine this (Marsac & Alderfer). Concurrent Validity: Family therapists from AAMFT who described 4 unbalanced scales as accurately representing 4 unbalanced areas (Olson, 2011). Examined correlations between domains on the following scales and those on FACES-IV: McMaster Family Assessment Device, Family Satsfaction Scale, Perceived Collective Family Efficacy Scale, Perceived Parental Self-Efficacy Scale, Revised Children’s Report of Parental Behavior Inventory, Self-Report Family Inventory, Social Support Behavior Scale, and Multi-Problem Screening Inventory (Franklin et al., 2001; Marsac & Alderfer, 2010; Olson, 2011). Franklin, Streeter, & Springer (2001) Marsac & Alderfer (2010) Olson (2011)

Translations

Languages:

English

Translation Quality:


Language:	Translated	Back Translated	Reliable	Good Psychometrics	Similar Factor Structure
1. Spanish (Rivero, Martinez-Pampliega & Olson, 2010)	X	X	X	X	X
2. Italian (Baiocco, Cacioppo, Laghi, & Tafa, 2013; Loriedo, Nuovo, & Visani, 2013)	X	X	X	X	X
3. Greek (Koutra, Triliva, Roumeliotaki, Lionis, & Vgontzas)	X	X	X	X	X
4. Hungarian (Mirnics, Vargha, Toth, & Bagdy, 2010)	X		X	X	X

Population Information

Population Used for Measure Development:

Modified convenience & snowball sample recruited from junior-level family systems and diversity university course in major midwestern metropolitan area over 1 year period - 469 usable data; 15% family members; avg. age = 28; range: 18-59; 2/3 single and female; 1/3 married; 80% Caucasian, 7% Asian American, 6% African American, 2% Hispanic, 2% Native American

For Specific Population:

Military and Veteran Families

Populations with which Measure Has Demonstrated Reliability and Validity:

Medical Trauma

Other Populations:

Pediatric oncology - internal consistencies valid, evidence of construct validity, recommend more research prior to use w/ families of children w/ cancer and/or other chronic illnesses; enmeshed & rigid subscales may need further development (Marsac & Ald

Use with Diverse Populations:


Population Type:	1	2	3	4	5	6

Pros & Cons/References

Pros:

Most of the subscales have good discriminant validity, excluding the Disengaged and Chaotic subscales which are relatively highly correlated (r = .60; Franklin et al., 2001). The Cohesion subscale does a particularly good job assessing factors involved in the Circumplex Model (Franklin et al., 2001). Appropriate for use in nomothetic research (Franklin et al., 2001)

Cons:

Disengaged & Chaotic domains not entirely independent (Franklin et al., 2001) Additional research or tweaking of the measure is needed before using with clinical populations (Franklin et al., 2001) Internal consistency has been found to be as low as .65 (Marsac & Alderfer, 2010)

References:

Baiocco, R., Cacioppo, M., Laghi, F., & Tafa, M. (2013). Factorial and construct validity of FACES IV among Italian adolescents. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 22, 962-970. doi: 10.1007/s10826-012-9658-1 Franklin, C., Streeter, C. L., Springer, D. W. (2001). Validity of the FACES IV Family Assessment Measure. Research on Social Work Practice 11, 576-596. Koutra, K., Triliva, S., Roumeliotaki, T., Lionis, C., & Vgontzas, A. N. (2013). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Greek Version of the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales IV Package (FACES IV Package). Journal of Family Issues, 34, 1647-1672. doi: 10.1177/0192513X12462818 Loriedo, C., Nuovo, S. D., & Visani, E. (2013). FACES-IV: Italian reliability and validity. 1-16. Marsac, M. L., & Alderfer, M. A. (2010). Psychometric Properties of the FACES-IV in a Pediatric Oncology Population. Journal of Pediatric Psychology 36, 528-538. Olson, D. (2011). FACES IV and the Circumplex Model: Validation Study. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 37(1), 64-80. Rivero, N., Martínez-Pampliega, A., & Olson, D. H. (2010). Spanish Adaptation of the FACES IV Questionnaire: Psychometric Characteristics. The Family Journal 18, 288-296. Mirnics, Z., Vargha, A., Toth, M., & Bagdy, E. (2010). Cross-cultural applicability of FACES IV. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 21, 17-33.

Developer of Review:

Haley Miles-McLean, Clinical Research Assistant

Last Updated:

Tuesday, April 22, 2014