Translational Family Science and Forgiveness: A Healthy Symbiotic Relationship?
| Author | Frank D. Fincham |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12277 |
| Published date | 01 October 2017 |
| Date | 01 October 2017 |
F D. F Florida State University
Translational Family Science and Forgiveness:
A Healthy Symbiotic Relationship?
This article explores how translational fam-
ily science might be instantiated by consider-
ing research on forgiveness in close relation-
ships. Relevant historical context is provided to
traverse ground in multiple disciplines in an
attempt to avoid repetition of past errors. The
translational science continuum (T1 to T4) is
considered and specic examples of each type
of translation are outlined. A set of explicitly
stated implications are offered in the course of
the analysis. These implications speak to lessons
that can be learned for translational family sci-
ence from the examination of forgiveness in a
relationship context as well as mandates for for-
giveness research that become apparent when
research on this construct is viewed through the
lens of translational family science. The poten-
tial for a healthy symbiotic relationship between
translational family science and researchon for-
giveness in relationships is explored.
Some historical context claries why attention
to translational family science is propitious,
especially given its central focus on family
well-being (Grzywacz & Allen, 2017). At
the turn of the 20th century, concern among
social reformers about the increasing number
of families experiencing deleterious social
and economic conditions gave rise to the sci-
entic study of families (Christensen, 1964).
Department of Child & Family Sciences, Sandels Build-
ing 225, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida
32306-1491 (fncham@fsu.edu).
Key Words: Forgiveness,marriage, translational science.
The American Sociological Society focused
its 1908 conference on “problems of inter-
personal relations in the family” (Burr, Hill,
Nye, & Reiss, 1979, p. 40), and by the time
a multidisciplinary professional association of
researchers and practitioners was established
in 1938 (National Council on Family Relations
[NCFR]), some 800 articles on the family had
been published in scientic journals (Aldous
& Hill, 1967). Several major intellectual tradi-
tions helped shape the scientic study of fami-
lies, including symbolic interactionism, family
sociology, psychiatry, family therapy, develop-
mental psychology, learning theory, and clinical
psychology (Gottman, 1979; Jacob, 1987). A
historical account from the perspective of fam-
ily science per se makes clear the pivotal role
played by practitioners in developing the inter-
disciplinary study of families (see Hamon &
Smith, 2017; Hamon & Smith, 2014; Hollinger,
2002; NCFR Task Force, 1988). Since its
inception, then, the scientic study of families
has reected concern about the well-being of
families and this ongoing interest is shown by
the contribution of disciplines such as psychia-
try, family therapy, and clinical psychology to
understanding families.
Given these circumstances, it is common
for those who study families to consider what
models of translational science taking root in
other disciplines seeking to improve human
well-being can offer to the family eld. There-
fore, in the present article, I explore how a
translational science perspective might be
applied to an emerging area of research: for-
giveness in close relationships. In doing so,
584 Family Relations 66 (October 2017): 584–600
DOI:10.1111/fare.12277
Translational Family Science and Forgiveness 585
implications for the realization of a transla-
tional family science are highlighted, as are
the ways in which this exercise might advance
understanding of forgiveness. It is hoped that
the dialectical relationship that emerges, in
which forgiveness scholarship informs and is
informed by translational family science, will
itself instantiate what it means to engage in
translational family science.
P: P H
C
As noted by Grzywacz and Allen (2017),
there has been pervasive adoption of trans-
lational science models since the emergence
of the term. Although new terminology has
arisen, the motivation behind it is some-
what older as reected in such ideals as the
scientist-practitioner model in clinical psy-
chology. Formally adopted at the Boulder
Conference in 1949, the scientist-practitioner
or Boulder model was designed to integrate
science and practice by training psychologists
in both endeavors. Concerns about the failure
to effectively bridge science and practice soon
emerged (see Frank, 1984), and it behooves
family scientists to learn from such efforts as we
examine what translational science has to offer.
Implication 1. Constructing an effective trans-
lational family science requires avoiding the
pitfalls previously encountered at the interface
of science and practice and building on training
and execution models that have emerged in other
areas of translational science (e.g., Ameredes
et al., 2015; Gonzales, Handley, Ackerman, &
O’Sullivan, 2012; Rubio et al., 2010).
The present exploration of translational fam-
ily science also takes place in the context of a
long-standing and ongoing examination of the
eld of family science. Despite the early orga-
nizational success and accumulated literature
noted earlier, in the 1980s, the status of the
eld as a discipline was questioned when it was
argued that the study of families “depends for
explanatory power on other disciplines” (Davis,
1984, p. 1; but see Burr, 1985, for a response).
Prompted by circumstances that “created an
‘identity problem’ in the family eld,” Burr and
Leigh (1983, p. 467) defended the disciplinary
status of the eld and labeled the discipline
famology (Bailey & Gentry, 2013, provided a
contemporary analysis of how the family eld
meets Burr and Leigh’s criteria for a discipline).
A newsletter subsequently announced the estab-
lishment of a task force for the development of
a family discipline (Burr, 1984), and within a
few years family science was dened as “the
eld where the primary goals are the discovery,
verication and application of knowledge about
the family” (NCFR Task Force, 1988, p. 98).
The training of family scientists was also later
addressed (Ganong, Coleman, & Demo, 1995),
but concerns about the multiplicity of disci-
pline and department names has persisted (Hans,
2014). This has led to the recent warning that
“without a clear and shared identity and nomen-
clature, the eld seems likely to fade” (Gavazzi,
Wilson, Ganong, & Zvonkovic, 2014, p. 335)
and the creation of the NCFR Task Force on the
Future of Family Science, formed in 2014, man-
dated to consider “questions about the name of
the eld. .. and expanding the reach and impact
of the eld to strengthen families” (NCFR, The
Future of Family Science Task Force, 2014,
p. 1). My examination of forgiveness and trans-
lational science has an important implication for
this context, and hence I turn directly to it.
F
In this article, the eld of forgiveness research
is used as a model to instantiate translational
family science. This eld provides a good exem-
plar because forgiveness is an inherently inter-
personal construct central to family functioning
that, like the eld of family science, seeks to inte-
grate the sciences of discovery and practice. As
I turn the focus of this article to forgiveness, I
begin by clarifying the nature of this complex
construct.
Although forgiveness is a “goal commonly
advocated by all of the world’s long-standing
religions” (Thoresen, Luskin, & Harris, 1998,
p. 164), scientic research on forgiveness largely
began to emerge in the 21st century. Only ve
studies on forgiveness were published before
1985 (Worthington, 1998), and an annotated
bibliography on forgiveness in 1998 contained
46 studies (McCullough, Exline, & Baumeister,
1998). However, the exponential growth of the
eld since then continues unabated, and today
hundreds of empirical studies exist on forgive-
ness.
Because it is a complex construct, consider-
able effort was expended initially on dening
forgiveness, and disagreements permeated the
To continue reading
Request your trial