Systems Theory in Psychology
A Broad overview of a Systems approach to therapy
Reflection Questions
Am I able to zoom out and consider the broader influences that shape a person’s personality, beliefs, behavior? Does that give me more empathy?
What systems did I inhabit growing up and how did they impact me? What systems do I inhabit now?
Are there changes I can make at the systems level - family, church, workplace - that would have a major impact on my life?
What is the relationship between personal responsibility and the impact of one’s environment?
Concept Overview
A system is a set of interconnected parts that work together as a whole. The human body is a system. So is a family, a church, or a business. Systems develop their own internal dynamics and are always trying to find a state of equilibrium, also called homeostasis. Think of how our bodies adjust to keep things like temperature and blood sugar balanced. But maintaining equilibrium shouldn’t be confused with pursuing health, especially in human relational systems. Sometimes it just means people have settled into roles and rules that “work” in some way - until they don’t.
A systems approach to therapy prioritizes looking at the individual in context. Pathologies are often conceptualized as responses to one’s environment, as opposed to something inherent in the individual. In couples and family therapy, the system IS the client; the problem is the relational dynamic. Of course all parties contribute to the relational dynamic, so there is individual work to do. But it’s less about singling out a problem figure, and more about understanding the particular alchemy of the group.
Marriage and Family Therapy (LMFT) is the branch of education and clinical practice rooted in a systems approach, while Clinical Psychology (PsyD) and Professional Counseling (LPC) are typically rooted in historical psychoanalysis. But it is increasingly common for these streams to merge. Most modern therapists incorporate insights from a variety of modalities.
Deep Dive
A “systems” approach to psychology has its origin in the work of Karl Ludwig von Bertalanffy, an Austrian biologist who presented his General Systems Theory in the 1920s. He argued that because everything exists within a context of dynamic relationships, scientific understanding of any subject must take that context into consideration. This was seen as a correction the ever-increasing narrowing of scientific inquiry, which had become more and more specialized and tended to treat subjects as isolated, independent entities.
The impact of General Systems Theory on psychology began to show up in the 1950s and 1960s as analysis moved away from solely focusing on an individual’s internal world. Researchers and practitioners began to give more weight to the impact of a person’s environment - primarily their family - on their development and mental health. What emerged was a whole new branch of modalities that came to be known as Marriage and Family Therapy.
One of the major contributors to this new direction was Gregory Bateson, an anthropologist and social scientist who introduced the concept of cybernetics. Cybernetics studies communication within complex, self-regulating systems - the classic example being a home’s heating and cooling system. To self-regulate, a feedback loop is in place in which the system’s output becomes information to help it adjust and return to the balance it seeks. That balance is referred to as homeostasis, the internal and external equilibrium systems try to find and maintain.
Consider two other examples: an ecological system and the human body. If either experiences an imbalance or distress in one part of the system, it triggers a series of reactions in the other parts as the whole system attempts to re-establish homeostasis. Now consider how, in order to understand what’s happening with a salmon population, one needs to consider what’s happening upstream in the river and what’s happening with the bear population, and so on. Or to understand why a person’s white blood cells are low, a doctor must consider how the condition and interplay of various parts of the body are contributing.
A systems approach to therapy looks at similar dynamics at work in human relational systems, such as nuclear families, workplaces, or churches. A family will typically find an internal equilibrium, a “way of doing things”, with particular roles, narratives, and expectations. And as long as the system continues to produce some benefit for its parts while keeping discomfort within tolerable levels, it continues to hum along.
But a functional system isn’t necessarily a healthy one. Consider how certain economic systems “work,” yet are rife with inequality and exploitation. Thus, maintaining homeostasis shouldn’t be confused with pursuing health.
This brings us to the work of Murray Bowen, who began articulating his theory in the 1950s. Bowen focused on the way anxiety - a sort of catch-all term for Bowen - moves through a family system, like an electrical charge passing through the closest available conduit. Picture how one sheep on the edge of a herd getting spooked leads to that anxiety rippling through the rest. A sheep 100 yards away is then impacted by something it didn’t experience firsthand.
In addition to introducing the concept of triangulation, Bowen’s most impactful contribution to the field has been his theory of enmeshment and differentiation. Lindsay C. Gibson, author of Adult Children of Emotionally Immature Parents, offers a helpful definition of enmeshment. She writes, “In enmeshment … two emotionally immature people seek their identity and self-completion through an intense, dependent relationship (Bowen 1978). Through this enmeshed relationship, they create a sense of certainty, predictability, and security that relies on the reassuring familiarity of each person playing a comfortable role for the other. If one person tries to step out of the implicit bounds of the relationship, the other often experiences great anxiety that’s only eased by a return to the prescribed role.”
Bowen pointed out how this overly dependent type of relationship shows up in families. The family’s particular “way of doing things” becomes rigid, while boundaries disappear. Individuals abandon their selfhood to serve the homeostasis of the system, and the system itself becomes the primary emotional unit, dictating the emotional state of the individuals. Consider how this works in political groups.
In contrast, differentiated individuals are able to retain their selfhood - thoughts, feelings, desires - while maintaining connection to others. In Bowenian thought, differentiation is positive and should be pursued. However, differentiated people are a threat to enmeshed systems and often face rejection. Consider the first person in a family system who goes to therapy and starts to ask questions about internal dynamics. This person will often find the system turning on them unless they “get over it” and allow the system to return to the homeostasis it has been operating in.
Other major contributors to the field include Virginia Satir and Salvador Minuchin, founder of Structural Therapy, as well as Jay Haley and Cloe Madanes, founders of Strategic Therapy. The common thread that runs through their modalities is the notion that negative symptoms in a family system typically serve some function that can only be understood in context. In other words, it’s likely that a child’s change in behavior isn’t just the result of them being inherently defiant, but rather a response to dynamics in their environment. For example, the child may be subconsciously acting out to get care in the only way they now how, or pull attention from someone else in the family. Thus, the system is really the client, and change must occur within the context of relational dynamics.
As these theories evolved, awareness of systems expanded to the societal and historical levels. Even Bowen listed Societal Emotional Process as one of his eight core concepts. But it was Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory (1979) that truly codified this way of thinking. Bronfenbrenner’s theory envisions a developing child in the center of concentric circles that represent various systems, from one’s immediate environment - family, friends- to broad cultural and political forces. Again, consider how different this conceptualization of pathology is than Freud’s focus on an individual’s subconscious.
A systems approach to therapy continues to evolve and merge with more individualistic modalities. Today it is not uncommon for clinicians to blend elements of Bowen Family Systems Theory, for example, with CBT skills.