Welcome Oliver to the list. The FAP listserve is just starting up, and
none of us have really started using it consistently yet, so apologies
about no one replying to you. Hopefully we will get more active and this
listserve will become useful.

My students and I have been having lots of discussions about how to
conduct FAP research lately, and they encouraged me to post some of
these thoughts on this list. Hopefully this will generate discussion. If
no one responds Im quitting this listserve. (just kidding)

I am becoming more and more strident about the necessity of remaining
behavior analytic in this research. To me, the key is idiographic
assessment, conceptualization, and measurement of CRBs and how they
change over the course of therapy. I am slowly seeing a model for what
this research should involve. This of course is what Glenn has been
working on for several years now, so what I write below will be quite
redundant with Glenns work. Im summarizing it here because Im really
interested in a program of research that systematically addresses the
various themes important to FAP, and Im just now starting to see how
all the pieces that Glenn has been working on fit together.

1. Case conceptualization and FAP assessment to determine CRBs. There
are several research questions here.

a. First, are there classes of CRBs? Glenn has made an attempt to come
up with these with the FIAT interview. The FIAT ended up classifying
CRBs into five potential categories (assertiveness, bi-directional
communication, conflict, disclosure, and emotional expression). More
loosely, I know in some FAP writings by Bobs lab CRBs have been
classified into three categories (intimacy, avoidance, and cognitive).

b. Second, can some sort of interview be developed to reliably identify
such classes? Again, Glenn has already worked on this, but unfortunately
my labs brief, initial attempts to use his system in a reliable way
failed rather badly, so work has to be done in this area. But it seems
doable. For example, once an interview is created, two people could
independently interview the same person to see if the same CRBs result,
or two people could watch the same interview and we would see if these
two raters would come up with the same CRBs.

2. Once CRBs can be reliably identified, can they be operationalized in
a way that allows for weekly measurement? Measurement would have to be
of both in-session CRBs and corresponding outside problems.

a. Glenns FAPRS system is meant to measure the occurrence of the CRBs
in session. Unlike the FIAT, where I see room for some improvement, I
think the FAPRS is pretty close to perfect, as long as it can be
established that raters can use it reliably. I know Glenn has already
studied this and right now we are trying to learn the system and test
out reliability between us and Glenn.

b. The FIAT is designed to measure corresponding out of session
problems. In our lab, weve been trying to use a form of the FIAT to
track problems that we identified idiographically with two current
clients, and it has been very difficult. Weve been hoping to establish
a stable baseline in these problems over several weeks before
implementing the interventions, in classic A-B design fashion, but it
has been extremely frustrating because the clients arent reporting the
problems reliably, so the baselines are unstable.

3. Once CRBs can be reliably identified, and both in session CRBs and
corresponding out of session problems can be reliably measured, we can
put the whole thing together, and try to show a relationship between the
occurrences of in session CRBs (identified with a reliable interview and
measured with a reliable observer-based system), contingent therapist
responding to CRBs (measured with reliable observer-based system) and
corresponding out of session problems (reported reliably by the clients
using the FIAT or a similar diary card system). Glenn has already worked
on half of this equation  using lag analysis to show a relationship
between in session CRBs and in session therapist responding, but I dont
know if he has also added in the statistical relation to changes in out
of session problems.

Thats the program. Any comments or thoughts are welcome.

--
Jonathan W. Kanter, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor and Clinic Coordinator
Department of Psychology
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
P.O. Box 413
Milwaukee, WI 53201
Office: Garland Hall 238C
(414) 229-3834