婚姻關係的信任修復與重建

Repairing and Rebuilding Trust in Marriage

10.6251/BEP.202103_52(3).0006

曾秀雲(Hsiu-Yun Tseng)；謝文宜(Wen-Yi Shieh)

信任修復 ； 信任重建 ； 婚姻關係 ； 親密信任 ； trust rebuilding ； trust repair ； marital relationships ； trust in intimate relationships

教育心理學報

52卷3期（2021 / 03 / 01）

619 - 642

繁體中文

外遇背叛是一種創傷的體驗。本研究想要瞭解華人女性留在婚姻關係中如何進行親密信任修復與重建，不同世代女性經歷性別政策的變化，性別結構的弱勢位置是否呈現世代差異。本研究設計採立意取樣，兼採滾雪球的方式，針對8位（3位60歲世代，5位40歲世代），歷經先生外遇，但仍然選擇繼續維持關係，且經歷親密信任修復與重建的太太進行半結構式深入訪談。首先，利用尺度技術邀請受訪者對伴侶、對自己、對關係進行信任評分，並於訪談時討論外遇前、外遇時及目前信任分數的變化。緊接著，嘗試從重新選擇與評估婚姻的承諾，強調以日常生活實踐付諸具體的行動重新磨合，創造親密信任修復與重建的契機，以及女性主體的世代差異4個部分進行討論。本研究從鉅觀社會規範與微觀個人資源的相對權力關係，提出3點觀察：1.理解先生改變的意願，有助於太太評估親密信任重建的意願。面對先生外遇的重新選擇與評估，太太不單只是個人的偏好與利益風險評估，亦考量關係與家族最大利益；2.親密信任修復與重建的意願與行為，不只是兩個人。重要的是，夫妻雙方必須以實際行動重新磨合，落實於日常生活中自我增能，改善自己與婚姻關係；3.熟齡女性歷經親密信任修復與重建經驗看見自我信任，而年輕世代伴隨著女性意識的覺醒，在情感表達與實踐性親密修復較為積極。

Being betrayed by a spouse having an affair is a traumatic experience. Some people choose to divorce, whereas some choose to stay in the marriage. For those who choose to stay, rebuilding trust becomes a critical challenge to overcome. When the trust in intimate relationships breaks down, relationships can be greatly damaged. Therefore, the ability to repair and rebuild trust is essential in couple relationships. This research aimed to explore the strategies that Han Chinese women in Taiwan use to repair and rebuild trust in their marriage after their husbands have affairs. The researchers were also interested in the existence of any cohort differences among the participants, especially after changes in the Volume of Kinship of the civil law that brings more gender equality in Taiwan like married women do not need to change her last name to her husband's. Using purposive sampling and snowballing methods, eight female participants were recruited. Three were in their sixties and five were in their forties. They all experienced their husbands having an affair and chose to stay in their marriages. In addition, they underwent the challenge of rebuilding trust in their marriages. The researchers first used three scaling questions that asked participants to rate their trust in their spouse, trust in themselves, and trust in their relationship at three different timepoints (before the affair, after the affair, and at present). The researchers discussed changes in the scores with participants during the interviews. Semistructured in-depth interviews were conducted to understand how participants faced the crisis of losing trust, reexamined their marriage, and reevaluated their commitment to their spouse and marriage, as well as what actions they took. Friedman's two-way analysis of variance by ranks was used to analyze the scores of the three scaling questions. The results revealed that the affairs seriously threatened the participants' trust in their spouses and relationships. Regarding trust in themselves, no evident change occurred in scores before the affair, after the affair, and at present. During the interviews, the researchers attempted to further clarify four aspects: (1) reevaluating marital commitment; (2) taking specific actions to rebuild the marriage; (3) creating opportunities to repair and rebuild intimate trust; and (4) examining cohort differences in female subjectivity in a patriarchal society. Regarding the reevaluation of marital commitment, the researchers first examined how the participants evaluated the costs and benefits of staying in or leaving the marriage, and their decision to stay was further investigated. One major reason was the wife's understanding of the affair and the husband's regretful attitude and willingness to return to the marriage. Another major reason was the wife's thoughts on marriage after the affair, such as (1) being unwilling to let go of her marriage and/or being unable to accept divorce; (2) returning to the original intention behind marrying her husband; (3) staying married for their children and family members; and (4) wishing for a good ending, which reflects the Chinese value of believing that harmony in a family brings success in all areas of life. Regarding specific actions to rebuild the marriage, the first was the husband's changes after the affair, such as (1) being willing to admit his mistakes and promising not to hide things or keep secrets from the wife; (2) exhibiting a sincere apologetic attitude and compensational behaviors such as additional participation in housework, expressions of love toward the wife, and spending more time with the family; (3) stopping the affair; and (4) actively changing his behaviors to demonstrate commitment to the marriage, such as coming home on time and calling home when there is any change in his schedule. Regarding the wives' changes after the affair, at the personal level they seemed to (1) choose to accept and express their own emotions; (2) exhibit more self-acceptance and self-acknowledgment; and (3) trust themselves again. At the relational level, they would (1) cease or avoid damaging attacks and blame toward their husband; (2) share their feelings more freely and treat their husband with kindness and tolerance; and (3) actively choose to trust their husband again. At the social level, they might (1) seek support from family and friends; (2) seek professional help; and (3) expand their social networks to distract themselves and gain resources. Regarding the creation of opportunities to repair and rebuild intimate trust, the couples (1) changed their original negative communication and interaction patterns; (2) expressed appreciation and thankfulness toward each other; (3) reframed what happened and found new meaning in the affair; and (4) chose to forgive and recommit to each other. Regarding cohort differences in female subjectivity in a patriarchal society, all participants expressed the importance of acknowledging and valuing their female subjectivity. They also emphasized the value of self-acceptance, self-acknowledgment, and self-empowerment. However, differences still existed between the older and younger generations. For the three participants from the older generation, their husbands had affairs that each lasted more than 10 years. Two participants actually signed divorce papers, but because their husbands did not agree they remained in the marriage. Both had careers and earned more than their husbands did, but because of the cultural value of being a faithful wife and mother and belief in not showing family scandal in public, they chose to save their family's face and remain in the marriage. Not much power equality existed in these three marriages. However, because the women's husbands were willing to return to the marriage and repair the relationships, the wives chose to exhibit acceptance, forgiveness, and tolerance toward their husbands, and they were able to rebuild trust in their marriage. The younger generation, because of their superior gender awareness, seemed to be more proactive in expressing their feelings and opinions. Among the five younger participants, three chose to get divorced after discovering the affair. Two of them later remarried the same man, and one was currently living with her ex-husband but had not registered to remarry. In regaining sexual intimacy after the affairs, the older participants seemed more passive and conservative; by contrast, the younger participants exhibited more interest in regaining sexual intimacy. Finally, the researchers proposed three suggestions for helping professionals: (1) when helping clients clarify the reasons for leaving or remaining in a marriage, professionals must help them not only consider personal costs and benefits but also examine the situation from the perspectives of family and culture; (2) regardless of whether a couple chooses to divorce or rebuild their marriage, professionals can help betrayed partners shift their focus from the betrayers to themselves. Rebuilding one's self-trust and understanding one's value and resources can help a betrayed individual to gain courage and power, which are helpful for communicating with a partner to rebuild trust in each other; (3) when helping couples rebuild their marriage after an affair, the present researchers believe that discussing sexual intimacy is beneficial in later stages. Taking cohort differences into consideration, helping couples talk about their needs, expectations, hesitation, and resistance in sexual intimacy can be helpful for rebuilding their marriages.

1. 王維邦, W.-P.,陳美華, M.-H.(2017)。非常規性實踐的性別化態度：男「性」特權、性別分工和婚家體制的角色。女學學誌：婦女與性別研究，40，53-105。
   連結：
2. 王慧琦, H.-C.(2014)。配偶外遇之寬恕研究：從妻子角度出發。臺大社會工作學刊，30，91-138。
   連結：
3. 古允文, H.-L.,劉香蘭, Y.-W.(2015)。台灣照顧分工的重組：兩個女性世代生命歷程的比較。女學學誌：婦女與性別研究，36，49-67。
   連結：
4. 利翠珊, T.-S.(2006)。華人婚姻韌性的形成與變化：概念釐清與理論建構。本土心理學研究，25，101-137。
   連結：
5. 吳相儀, H.-Y.,張聖翎, S.-L.,蕭舒謙, S.-C.,簡晉龍(2018)。感恩到幸福：從復原力探討感恩與心理健康之關係。教育心理學報，50(1)，83-106。
   連結：
6. 李怡青, I.-C.(2012)。權力基礎理論：權力定義與權力增生性。中華心理學刊，54(2)，203-217。
   連結：
7. 林怡君, Y.-C.,趙梅如, M.-R.(2007)。親密信任之內涵建構及量表編製。中華輔導學報，21，1-32。
   連結：
8. 孫頌賢, S.-H.,劉婷, T.(2015)。深情相擁：情緒取向未婚伴侶心理教育團體。教育實踐與研究，28(2)，213-242。
   連結：
9. 陳昭如, C.-J.(2013)。還是不平等：婦運修法改造父權家庭的困境與未竟之業。女學學誌：婦女與性別研究，33，119-170。
   連結：
10. 陳雲龍, Y.-L.(2017)。關係信任：中國人信任的實踐邏輯。本土心理學研究，48，167-230。
    連結：
11. 彭莉惠, L.-H.(2004)。女性婚外情慾的處境與蘊含。女學學誌：婦女與性別研究，18，39-107。
    連結：
12. 黃淑玲, S.-L.,李思賢, S.-H.,趙運植, Y.-C.(2012)。台灣人性態度與性價值觀分析：性別、世代與三種集群的差異。台灣性學學刊，18(1)，83-114。
    連結：
13. 鄭怡, Y.,林以正, Y.-C.(2016)。後悔與生活適應：自我關愛及自我批評之雙路徑中介效果檢驗。教育心理學報，48(1)，77-89。
    連結：
14. Abrahamson, I.,Hussain, R.,Khan, A.,Schofield, M. J.(2012).What helps couples rebuild their relationship after infidelity?.Journal of Family Issues,33(11),1494-1519.
15. Bird, M. H.,Butler, M. H.,Fife, S. T.(2007).The process of couple healing following infidelity: A qualitative study.Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy,6(4),1-25.
16. Blow, A.,Hartnett, K.(2005).Infidelity in committed relationships II: A substantive review.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy,31(2),217-233.
17. Dirks, K. T.,Kim, P. H.,Ferrin, D. L.,Cooper, C. D.(2011).Understanding the effects of substantive responses on trust following a transgression.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,114,87-103.
18. Fife, S. T.,Weeks, G. R.,Stellberg-Filbert, J.(2013).Facilitating forgiveness in the treatment of infidelity: An interpersonal model.Journal of Family Therapy,35(4),343-367.
19. Glass, S. P.(2003).Not just friends: Rebuilding trust and recovering your sanity after infidelity.Free Press.
20. Gottman, J.,Silver, N.(2012).What makes love last? How to build trust and avoid betrayal.Simon & Schuster.
21. Hendrick, C.(Ed.)(1989).Review of personality and social psychology.Sage.
22. Johnson, S. M.(2005).Broken bonds: An emotionally focused approach to infidelity.Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy,4(2),17-29.
23. Ku, E. K.(2020).‘Waiting for my red envelope’: Discourses of sameness in the linguistic landscape of a marriage equality demonstration in Taiwan.Critical Discourse Studies,17(2),156-174.
24. Rempel, J. K.,Holmes, J. G.,Zanna, M. P.(1985).Trust in close relationships.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,49(1),95-112.
25. Spring, J. A.,Spring, M.(1996).After the affair: Healing the pain and rebuilding trust when a partner has been unfaithful.Harper.
26. Tran, S.,Simpson, J. A.(2012).Attachment, commitment, and relationship maintenance: When partners really matter.The science of the couple
27. Weeks, G. R.,Fife, S. T.(2009).Rebuilding intimacy following infidelity.Psychotherapy in Australia,15(3),28-39.
28. Whisman, M.,Dixon, A.,Johnson, B.(1997).Therapists’ perspective of couple problems and treatment issues in couple therapy.Journal of Family Psychology,11(3),361-366.
29. Williams, K.(2011).A socio‐emotional relational framework for infidelity: The relational justice approach.Family Process,50(4),516-528.
30. 王怡文, Y.-W.(2007)。國立臺灣大學=National Taiwan University。
31. 楊中芳, C.-F.(2001).中國人的人際關係、情感與信任：一個人際交往的觀點.遠流=Yuan-Liou.
32. 董智慧, J.-H.(2009)。國立彰化師範大學=National Changhua University of Education。
33. 蕭英玲, Y.-L.(2003)。女性外遇：動機、發展歷程與態度。中華心理衛生學刊，15(4)，1-29。
34. 謝文宜, W.-Y.,曾秀雲, H.-Y.(2009)。以投資模型驗證台灣男女同志伴侶承諾維持。中華家政學刊，45，39-58。
35. 簡春安, T.-A.(1985)。外遇問題的階段分析處理策略。中華心理衛生學刊，2(2)，121-128。

1. 賴星華,方文熙(2022)。不同性別研究生生活壓力與愛情關係品質之相關性。家庭教育與諮商學刊，25，31-45。
2. (2024)。伴侶情緒表達矛盾對關係滿意度之影響：行動者與伴侶相依模式之探討。教育心理學報，55(4)，795-818。