Group presentation Flashcards

1
Q

Differentiation of self
1. Strong self + 2. Emotional connection to family

  1. A person who Thinks, feels, behaves based on personal judgement, free from family influence
  2. Receptive to advice, makes independent choices
  3. Responsive vs. reactive
  4. Process vs. personality characteristics
A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Differentiation includes 2 dimensions

  1. Autonomy: self away from others
  2. Intimacy: emotional connection towards others
A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Clinical goals of differentiation (increase differentiation)

  1. Increase thinking choosing response vs. impulsive behavior patterns
  2. Increase ability to remain calm vs. repeating patterns of dealing with stress
A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

From dinner scene:

  1. Richard: high A low I: unable to emotionally connect with Frank
  2. Sheryl: high A low I: she’s trying to explain franks suicide with a mouth full of chicken
  3. Frank: less A low-medium I: wants to connect with olive with explanation
  4. Grandpa: high A low I: blowing nose during Franks suicide explanation
  5. Dwayne: high A low I: I hate everyone
  6. Olive: low A low-medium I: hugs and kiss Frank
A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

According to Bowen

  1. People tend to marry those with same level of differentiation
    - although one spouse may appear more differentiated
    - Frank
  2. Depending on whether children are involved in negative triangles, or spared, they may develop lower or higher levels of diff
A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

1 Buehler, Franck, Cook 2009

  1. Triangulation within parents marital conflict
  2. Triangulation is:
  3. As hypothesized, found support for - HIGHER internalizing problems (feelings of worthlessness, fear, anxiety) - HIGHER externalizing problems (lying, cheating, screaming) and GREATER perceived rejection from peers
  4. Evidence of risk on socioemotional health
  5. Confusing compromising positions
A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q
  1. Erdem and Safi (2018)
  2. Cultural expansiveness in Bowen and DOS
  3. Empirical support of cultural validity reflecting white values
  4. Lacking support and contrary findings in populations of South Korea, Italy, Japan, Thailand
  5. Failure to investigate the contructs of measures (FUSION, EMOTIONAL CUTOFF, I STATEMENTS, EMOTIONAL REACTIVITY) what they mean and are they relevant
  6. Ex western label of FUSION with SOLIDARITY
A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q
  1. Halevi and Idisis (2018)
  2. Explore DoS as a protective factor against vicarious traumatization, they found a NEGATIVE Association between vicarious traumatization and DOS
  3. Vicarious Traumatization = Empathic engagement with a clients traumatic experience: horrific descriptions of cruelty
  4. Post traumatic symptoms: Process over time, symptoms can be sudden, cumulative clients
  5. Symptoms: flashbacks, relationship problems, avoidance of life, decreased enjoyment of life
  6. DOS acts to help therapist have: -greater capacity to access ego resources, -clear flexible boundaries, -balance emotional and intellectual separation of self from client.
A

.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly