Synonyms
FAD; Family assessment device; MFAD
Description
The McMaster Family Assessment Device (MFAD; Epstein et al. 1983) is a 60-item self-report instrument intended to evaluate a number of aspects of family relationships based on the McMaster model of family functioning (Epstein et al. 1993). Items are phrased to denote both effective (e.g., āWe feel accepted for what we are.ā) and problematic family functioning (e.g., āWe donāt get along well together.ā). Respondents rate how well each statement describes their family; response options include strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree. Items are reverse scored as needed, such that higher scores indicate poorer family functioning. In addition to a General Functioning Index, the MFAD generates scores on six dimensions (problem solving, communication, roles, affective responsiveness, affective involvement, and behavioral control).
Historical Background
Although often used as an outcome instrument, the MFAD was developed...
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References and Readings
Barney, M. C., & Max, J. E. (2005). The McMaster family assessment device and clinical rating scale: Questionnaire vs interview in childhood traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 19(10), 801ā809.
Boterhoven de Haan, K. L., Hafekost, J., Lawrence, D., Sawyer, M. G., & Zubrick, S. R. (2015). Reliability and validity of a short version of the general functioning subscale of the McMaster family assessment device. Family Process, 54(1), 116ā123.
Clark, M. S., & Smith, D. S. (1999). Psychological correlates of outcome following rehabilitation from stroke. Clinical Rehabilitation, 13(2), 129ā140.
Epstein, N. B., Baldwin, L. M., & Bishop, D. S. (1983). The McMaster family assessment device. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9, 171ā180.
Epstein, N. B., Bishop, D., Ryan, C., Miller, I. W., & Keitner, G. I. (1993). The McMaster model view of healthy family functioning. In F. Walsh (Ed.), Normal family processes (pp. 138ā160). New York: Guilford.
Evans, R. L., Bishop, D. S., Matlock, A. L., Stranahan, S., Halar, E. M., & Noonan, W. C. (1987a). Predicting post-stroke family function: A continuing dilemma. Psychological Reports, 60, 691ā695.
Evans, R. L., Bishop, D. S., Matlock, A. L., Stranahan, S., Smith, G., & Halar, E. M. (1987b). Family interaction and treatment adherence after stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 68, 513ā517.
Hamilton, E., & Carr, A. (2015). Systematic review of self-report family assessment measures. Family Process. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12200.
Josie, K. L., Peterson, C. C., Burant, C., Drotar, D., Stancin, T., Wade, S. L., et al. (2008). Predicting family burden following childhood traumatic brain injury: A cumulative risk approach. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 23(6), 357ā368.
Kreutzer, J. S., Gervasio, A. H., & Camplair, P. S. (1994). Patient correlates of caregiversā distress and family functioning after traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 8(3), 211ā230.
Mansfield, A. K., Keitner, G. I., & Dealey, J. (2015). The family assessment device: An update. Family Process, 54(1), 82ā93.
Miller, I. W., Epstein, N. B., Bishop, D. S., & Keitner, G. I. (1985). The McMaster family assessment device: Reliability and validity. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11(4), 345ā356.
Ridenour, T. A., Daley, J. G., & Reich, W. (1999). Factor analyses of the family assessment device. Family Process, 38(4), 497ā510.
Zarski, J. J., DePompei, R., & Zook, A. (1988). Traumatic head injury: Dimensions of family responsivity. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 3(4), 31ā41.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
Ā© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
BaƱos, J.H. (2018). McMaster Family Assessment Device. In: Kreutzer, J.S., DeLuca, J., Caplan, B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_1994
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_1994
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-57110-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-57111-9
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences