Infant Behavior & Development 30 (2007) 60–62

Introduction

Emergent family systems

Systems theory was first introduced as a scientific framework in the 20th century. Some of the first research applyingsystems theory to the study of families was the work of Bateson, Jackson, Haley, and Weakland (1956) who beganto study the functioning of families with mentally ill family members. In Bateson et al.’s work on schizophreniccommunication they pointed out that it was not just the communication patterns of the schizophrenic (the identifiedpatient) that were unusual; rather, families of schizophrenics as systems used unusual patterns of communication.

Although Bateson et al.’s theory that distorted communication patterns in families caused schizophrenia was notsupported, this early work on the family as a unit of study paved the way for the work of family therapists, mostnotably Murray Bowen, Jay Haley, Don Jackson and Salvador Minuchin. The principles of systems theory that thesepractitioners embraced were the notions of wholeness: that systems, in this case families, are organized wholes withinterdependent elements, homeostasis: that there is stability in patterns of family interaction, and these patterns areoften resistant to change, and circularity: that the patterns in family systems are bi-directional, or circular rather thanlinear. Thus it is not simply the parent who affects the child, but also the child who affects the parent. These theorists alsohighlighted the fact that family systems are composed of subsystems such as the marital relationship, the parent–childrelationship, and the sibling relationship. The work of these family systems theorists was extremely influential fortherapists working with mentally ill patients, because no longer was the focus of therapeutic interventions just on theindividual, the “identified patient”, but rather on the whole family.

Thus systems theory changed clinical practice in psychology and psychiatry in very profound ways. Interestingly,however, research in developmental psychology was a bit slower to embrace systems principles. In 1985 a now classicissue of Child Development focused on the family as a system with a call-to-arms introductory piece by PatriciaMinuchin in which she outlined the ways in which systems theory had influenced family therapy and the potentialimplications for researchers studying parent–child interaction. In that special issue there were articles that representedsome of the first attempts by developmental psychologists to study families as systems including articles by Belsky,Dunn, Elder, Grotevant, Sroufe and others. Since that seminal 1985 issue, developmental and child clinical psychologistshave made important progress towards embracing a systems approach in their research. In this special issue of InfantBehavior and Development we present four empirical articles that clearly embody principles of family systems theoryin their focus on emergent family systems.

All four of the articles in this special issue have common elements. For example, all four of the papers emphasizethe importance of bi-directionality, or reciprocal influences, that is, all of these investigations examine the possibleinfluences of the child on her parents as well as of the parents on the child. Likewise, all four of these investigationsare longitudinal, use multiple methods, and all involve observations of children and families in multiple contexts.

In the McHale and Rotman (2007) investigation they examined prenatal expectations of family processes andhow they were related to subsequent coparenting relationship quality from 3 to 30 months. Mothers’ and fathers’prenatal expectancies and the differences between their parenting beliefs predicted later coparenting quality, referredto as “solidarity”. Prenatal expectations predicted coparenting solidarity for some families even through 30 months.Interestingly, however, in some families, infants’ temperamental characteristics were equally or more influential forcoparenting solidarity than parents’ prenatal expectancies. This investigation is notable for its four assessments overtime (prenatal, 3, 12 and 30 months), with coparenting assessed using multiple measures and in multiple contextsat each time point, an approach which likely aided McHale and Rotman in demonstrating stability in coparenting

0163-6383/$ – see front matter © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.11.006

Introduction / Infant Behavior & Development 30 (2007) 60–62 61

solidarity across time. This paper represents the most in-depth longitudinal study of the development of coparentingconducted to date.

Like McHale and Rotman, Schoppe-Sullivan, Mangelsdorf, Brown, and Sokolowski’s (2007) investigation also useda longitudinal design to uncover factors affecting early coparenting relationship quality. Both investigations includedexamination of infant temperament and its potential influence on the coparenting relationship. Schoppe-Sullivan et al.examined the contributions of prebirth marital quality and infant temperament to coparenting quality at 3.5 monthspostpartum. They found that couples with high marital quality showed optimal coparenting behavior even when facedwith a temperamentally challenging infant, whereas couples with low marital quality showed nonoptimal coparentingbehavior when parenting a temperamentally challenging infant together. These findings are consistent with the modeloutlined by Crockenberg and Leerkes (2003) that predicts that family adaptation will vary as a function of both parents’psychological preparedness and child characteristics.

In Crockenberg, Leerkes, and Lekka’s (2007) paper in the current issue they examined explanatory pathways betweenprenatal marital aggression and infant withdrawal from novelty in the context of mother–child interaction, an arguablymaladaptive aspect of early emotion regulation. They found that prenatal marital aggression interacted with a numberof variables to predict infant withdrawal at 6 months of age. These variables included aspects of child temperamentindicating high reactivity to novelty, exposure to marital arguments, and the extent of fathers’ caregiving. Importantly,there was evidence that negative maternal behavior did not mediate the relation between marital aggression andinfant withdrawal—in fact, there was evidence for a direct association between marital aggression and early emotionregulation. These results extend work by Cummings, Zahn-Waxler, and Radke-Yarrow (1981) documenting that evenyoung infants are sensitive to anger between family members.

Just as child characteristics can affect children’s emotional regulation in response to family stress, Mills-Koonceet al. (2007) demonstrate that maternal characteristics (including individual differences in physiological reactivity)can affect mothers’ capacities to respond sensitively to challenging infants. Using a relatively large, ethnically andeconomically diverse sample, Mills-Koonce and his colleagues conducted a process-oriented analysis of relationsbetween mother–child interaction across multiple contexts at 6 months and attachment security at 12 months. Consistentwith prior research, mothers of securely attached infants were more sensitive than mothers of avoidant infants. Contraryto their prediction, sensitivity decreased for all mothers whose infants were highly negative, a direct effect of childcharacteristics unlike the more nuanced effects observed in the other papers in this issue. However, given the high levelof poverty in this sample (53 percent low income), these mothers were likely at high risk for parenting difficulties,especially when faced with temperamentally challenging infants (Crockenberg & Leerkes, 2003). Interestingly, despitethis apparent main effect of child temperament, the results of the Mills-Koonce et al. investigation indicate that motherswho are developing insecure–avoidant relationships with their children may experience unique challenges in their abilityto respond sensitively to their children. In particular, these mothers were less sensitive when their infants were highlynegative and mothers were unable to respond with effective emotion regulation.

In sum, these four papers all represent important advances in the applications of systems principles to the studyof early family development. All of these investigations are noteworthy for their multiple assessments across time,multiple methodologies, and their inclusion of an examination of child characteristics.

In 1985 Minuchin called upon developmental researchers to embrace family systems principles in their research. Thearticles in this issue highlight how influential systems principles have been over the past 20 years. When researchersread Minuchin’s paper they may have thought that such research would be difficult to undertake, and none of theresearchers whose work is presented in this issue would say that such work is easy. However, over time more andmore developmental researchers have embraced systems principles in their research, and in doing so have furtheredour understanding of child and family development.

References

Bateson, G., Jackson, D. D., Haley, J., & Weakland, J. H. (1956). Towards a theory of Schizophrenia. Behavioral Science, 1, 251–264.Crockenberg, S., & Leerkes, E. (2003). Infant negative emotionality, caregiving, and family relationships. In A. C. Crouter & A. Booth (Eds.),

Children’s influence on family dynamics: The neglected side of family relationships (pp. 57–78). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Crockenberg, S. C., Leerkes, E. M., & Lekka, S. K. (2007). Pathways from marital aggression to infant emotion regulation: The development of

withdrawal in infancy. Infant Behavior and Development.Cummings, E. M., Zahn-Waxler, C., & Radke-Yarrow, M. (1981). Young children’s responses to expressions of anger and affection by others in the

family. Child Development, 52, 1274–1282.

62 Introduction / Infant Behavior & Development 30 (2007) 60–62

McHale, J. P., & Rotman, T. (2007). Is seeing believing? Expectant parents’ outlooks on coparenting and later coparenting solidarity. Infant Behaviorand Development.

Mills-Koonce, W. R., Gariepy, J., Propper, C., Sutton, K., Calkins, S., Moore, G., et al. (2007). Infant and parent factors associated with earlymaternal sensitivity: A caregiver-attachment systems approach. Infant Behavior and Development.

Minuchin, P. (1985). Families and individual development: Provocations from the field of family therapy. Child Development, 56, 289–302.Schoppe-Sullivan, S. J., Mangelsdorf, S. C., Brown, G. L., & Sokolowski, M. S. (2007). Goodness-of-fit in family context: Infant temperament,

marital quality and early coparenting behavior. Infant Behavior and Development.

Sarah C. Mangelsdorf ∗University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States

Sarah J. Schoppe-SullivanThe Ohio State University, United States

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 217 333 1350.E-mail address: smangels@ad.uiuc.edu (S.C. Mangelsdorf)