The Epigenesis of the Family System as a Context for Individual Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, the concept introduced by Lyman Wynne, that the individual develops epigenetically within the family system, is discussed and validated with data from a study of the characteristics and relationships of 27 women with borderline personality disorder and their parents. Each stage of the epigenetic process is impaired in one way or another, adversely affecting subsequent stages. Early impairment of attachment-care-giving processes is at least partly attributable to a lack of empathic parenting; effective communication is married by family members' inability to experience or express feelings (alexithymia); this, in turn, makes it difficult to engage in joint family problem solving. Mutuality between family members does not occur in such a context, and there is an absence of intimacy between family members. These are often abusive family systems, with multiple abuse and intrafamilial sexual abuse more specifically directed at the daughter with BPD. The symptoms of the daughter can be understood systemically, as representing both predispositional characteristics and reactions to the family system. It is suggested that the epigenetic paradigm could be used to characterize the specific failure of developmental processes in many different disorders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".