Table 2.
Summary of the characteristics of the identified adolescent-parent micro-coding schemes.
| Author | Name of scheme | Summary of codes | Made for adolescents? | History/theoretical background | Developed for specific population? | Tasks developed for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dishion et al. (52) | Family process code (FPC) | Behaviour groups represented by a 2 × 2 grid, one axis content (grouped by verbal, vocal, nonverbal, physical contact, and compliance behaviour; 9 positive, 9 negative, 7 neutral) and the other valence (Exuberant, Positive, Neutral, Negative, Unrestrained Negative, and Sad Affect). 25 codes. Event-baseda. | No—Developed for families | Developed by the Oregon Social Learning Centre group on the Family Interaction Coding System (FICS) by Reid (27). This was developed using observations of clinical families and social learning theory principles, particularly Patterson's (1982) coercive cycle (34). FICS is used with children only. This was revised into the Interaction Coding System (53) to use event-based, instead of timed interval coding, and into the Multidimensional Observations of Social Adjustment in Children (MOSAIC) (54). This was done after studying “functioning” families to better sample prosocial behaviour and behaviours shown in problem solving behaviour. MOSAIC codes were split into content, valence, activity and context. This was then reduced into the Family Process Code by reducing the behaviours and the FPC has been used with adolescents. | No | A range of tasks or unstructured settings |
| Dishion et al. (55) | Relationship process code (RPC) | Behavioural groups represented by a 2 × 2 grid, one axis content (grouped by verbal, nonverbal, physical) and the other valence (positive, neutral, negative). 13 codes. Event-based or time-sampling (15 s). | No—Developed for families and peer relationships | Developed from the FPC (see FPC for history) which was revised into the Interpersonal Process Code [Rusby et al. (56)] by eliminating less frequently occurring behaviours and behaviours that are difficult to code, as they require high levels of inference. | No | A range of tasks or unstructured settings |
| Dumas (57) | INTERACT | Five categories of codes (actor, behaviour, setting, adverb, and valence) combined according to specific syntactical rules to form discrete observation strings. Timing based. | No—Developed for families | Based on social learning theory principles of coercion and reciprocity, used to explain reinforcement of aggressive and depressive behaviour. | No | Unstructured and problem-solving tasks |
| Gottman & Krokoff (58), revised by Coan & Gottman (46) | The specific affect coding system (SPAFF) | Behaviour groups: Affect (based on verbal content, voice tone, context, facial expressions, gestures and body movement combined; 5 positive, 12 negative, 1 neutral). 18 codes. Timing-based (1 s with 3 s window). | No—Developed for families | Developed based on the Couples Interaction Scoring System [CISS; Gottman, 1979 (59)] and the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) (45) to include “gestalt” behavioural groups, which integrates multiple individual units of behaviour, including verbal content. Developed for adult romantic relationships and then applied to families. | No | Problem solving tasks |
| Hauser et al. (16) | Constraining & enabling coding system (CECS) | Verbal behavioural codes: two cognitive constructs (cognitive constrainers and cognitive enablers), two affective constructs (affective constrainers and affective enablers), and an interpersonal process construct (discourse change). Event based. | Yes | Developed based on theory on adolescent ego development, specifically the psychoanalytic work of Helm Stierlin (60), who was concerned with the ways in which family members inhibit adolescents who are attempting to individuate from the family. | No | “Revealed differences” paradigm (parent and adolescent complete a moral judgement test separately then their different responses are revealed and discussed) |
| Hops et al. (44) | Living in familial environments (LIFE) | 10 behavioural codes for affective content (e.g., happy and angry) and 27 codes for verbal content (e.g., validation and affection). Event based. | No—Developed for families | Social learning theory principles, with a focus on differentiating aggressive and depressive behaviour. Reviewed literature to identify behaviours which distinguished depressed and non-depressed individuals. Also included aggressive and prosocial behaviours. Used codes from the Marital Interaction Coding System [MICS; Hops et al. (61)], the MOSAIC, and the FICS. | Families of depressed mothers. | Problem-solving tasks |
| Jabson et al. (62) | Simple affect coding system (SACS) | Behaviour groups: Affect (tone, facial affect, and body posture and/or orientation.no verbal content). 5 domains (Positive affect (7), validation (4), anger/disgust (12), distress (13) and neutral (2). 38 total codes. Event-baseda. | No—Developed for families | Developed by the Oregon Social Learning Center (OSLC) group based on the work of Ekman et al. (FACS) and Gottman et al. (e.g., SPAFF) on emotional display. | No | Not specified |
| Notarius et al. (63) adapted by Aiken et al. (64), for adolescents | Codebook for marital and family interaction (COMFI) | Behaviour groups. 6 basic categories (Problem-solving facilitation (4), problem-solving inhibition (7), emotional validation (6), emotional invalidation (9), self-disclosure (2) and depressive statements (2)). 30 total codes. Event based. Everything said in the interaction is transcribed and utterances are divided into thought units and rated. | No—Developed for families and couples. | Developed by the marriage and family studies group. Integrates features of the Couples Interaction Scoring System (CISS); Affective Style [Doane et al. (65)] the MICS which is based on social learning theory principles (61); Weiss & Summers (66) and KPI [Hahlweg et al. (67)]. Developed so that affect, content and function are integrated into single codes | No | Problem-solving tasks |
| Peterson et al. (68) | Relationship affect coding systems (adolescent) coding manual (RACS) | Behaviour groups: 4 categories. Verbal behaviour, which includes 3 sub-categories: conversation (3), behaviour change (3) and vocal (1). Physical behaviour (3). Affect behaviour (5). “Off codes” (4). 19 total codes. Event based. | Yes | Built by combining the RPC (see RPC section for history) and the SACS (see SACS for history). Verbal codes from RPC reduced, affect codes expanded based on SACS. | No | Problem-solving tasks and all other discussion tasks included the Family Assessment Task; FAST Dishion & Kavanagh (69): including: planning an activity, parental encouragement of growth (e.g., academic growth), positive recognition of family members. |
| Robin & Foster (70) | Parent-adolescent interaction coding system—revised (PAICS-R) | Six verbal behavioural groupings: Commands/Put Downs, Defends/Complains, Problem Solution, Facilitates, Defines/Evaluates, and Talks. Event/Utterance based (but utterance defined as ongoing until the other person speaks) | Yes | Developed from the MICS, which is based on social learning theory principles and family systems theory. Specifically draws on behaviours which define the skills, communication style, and interaction patterns believed to determine resolution of parent-adolescent conflict (Robin, 1980) (71). | No | Problem solving tasks |
| Rodriguez et al. (72) | Contingency coding system (CCS) | Verbal behavioural groups based on utterances (8): reflection, reframe, expansion, disclosure, solicit, provision of information, imperative, and validation, plus other, un-codable and no code. Each utterance received a topic maintenance code (i.e., whether the mother “maintained” or “changed” the topic of conversation). Utterances did not receive multiple category codes (i.e., utterances could not be coded both as a reflection and solicit). Event/utterance based. | No—Developed for children and adolescents | Developed based on research regarding parents’ conversational discourse and management during their children's early language development, such as the use of repetitions, recasts, and expansions of children's speech (e.g., Fey et al. (73); Lasky & Klopp (74); Saxton (75)). | Child/ adolescent cancer patients | Conversations about cancer |
| Stubbs et al. (76) | The family and peer process code (FPPC) | Behaviour groups represented by a 2 × 2 grid, one axis content (grouped by verbal, vocal, nonverbal, physical contact, and compliance behaviour; 8 positive, 9 negative, 7 neutral) and the other valence (Happy, Caring, Neutral, Distressed, Aversive and Sad). 24 codes plus a withdrawal qualifier. Event-baseda. | No—Developed for families and peer relationships | The FPPC is a combination of the FPC, RPC and the Peer Process Code [PPC; Dishion et al. (77)] which was based on the FPC and includes additional codes relevant to peer interactions. | No | A range of tasks or unstructured settings |
a
Event based means once a behaviour is coded, for example when a parent smiles they will be coded as smiling until that changes i.e., codes are updated according to new “events”. In time-based approaches the behaviour is assessed within specific time windows, so at 2 s coded as smile, at 4 s if the parent is still smiling, they will again be coded as smiling.