文化心理劇：「景觀人，人觀景」用於變遷中的華人家庭關係議題

＂Seeing from the Scenes＂: A Psychodramatic Model for Resolving Familial Relational Conflicts in Contemporary Chinese Societies

10.3966/172851862019010054005

李御儂(Yunung Lee)；賴念華(Nien-Hwa Lai)

心理劇 ； 景中物 ； 創造力準則 ； 諮商本土化 ； 雙文化現象／困境 ； Bi-cultural phenomena/conflicts ； cannon of creativity ； indigenization of counseling psychology ； object in the scene (OIS) ； psychodrama

中華輔導與諮商學報

54期（2019 / 01 / 01）

123 - 157

繁體中文

本研究探究華人心理劇工作模式「景觀人，人觀景」處理當代華人家庭關係議題的歷程與果效。本模式聚焦於華人關係主義與西方個人主義並存的「雙文化現象／困境」：案主在諮商目標上，擺盪於「追求獨立自主」與「維持（家庭）關係和諧」兩端；在諮商歷程上，拉扯於自我肯認／表達和謹守華人人際原則（保有面子）之間。本研究將「景觀人，人觀景」模式運用於台北、中國華北、華中、西南地區等九個華人家庭心理劇單元，以任務分析法形成歷程闡述文本，再以雙向主題分析法頗析團體歷程與主角半結構深度訪談稿，以探究模式的歷程與果效。研究發現：（1）治療歷程上，景有助於（a）主角「安全地」自我揭露與宣洩情緒、（b）主角「有面子」地自我賦能、（c）「廣角」照見主角所處的社會系統與文化脈絡、（d）「具體真實」遷移治療中的矯治性經驗；（2）家庭關係上，景令主角（a）意識「華人社會文化」對家內關係的影響、（b）接受對角「人在脈絡中」的限制而轉化關係、（c）與「其他家人」關係不再受對角關係影響。根據以上結果與發現，本研究建議將諮商心理學「發展－脈絡觀」融入心理劇的「創造力準則」，俾使關係座落的地景生態得以在治療情境中現顯，以利評估，並以「景觀人，人觀景」為治療工具，暖化主角的自發性與創造力，突破本土諮商的雙文化困境，帶出對家庭關係的理解與轉化。

This study aimed to investigate the group process and effects of a Chinese indigenous psychodramatic model titled, ＂Seeing from The Scenes; Seeing from The Person＂. This model was invented to address and resolve relational issues within families arising from the Western-Chinese bi-cultural phenomena/conflicts in contemporary Chinese societies. The bi-cultural phenomena refer to clients 'struggles between pursuing individual independence and autonomy (modernity) and maintaining relational harmony (traditionality), resulting in their attempts to seek counseling and psychotherapy. Meanwhile, the bi-cultural conflicts emerge in the counseling process from clients' contradictory needs for self-disclosure and self-affirmation (individualism-oriented) and simultaneously to save face for selves and others (collectivism-oriented). Inspired by the ＂cannon of creativity＂ in psychodramatic theory, researchers developed a ten-step working model based on psychodrama's unique perspectives on time and space. The ten steps include theme choosing and scene setting, identifying the critical object in the scene (OIS), interviewing the protagonist who reversed to the OIS, having the OIS empower the protagonist, repetitive role reversals between the protagonist and the opposite party in the troubled relationship, concretizing the sociocultural messages, mirror, enacting new strategies, consolidating the corrective experiences, imprinting the new experiences in mind through pictures or mental images. The model was implemented in nine psychodramatic groups themed around family issues. Participants were recruited from faculty members and graduate students at four academic institutes across Taipei, central China, southwest China, and north China. An expert-researcher group was formed and consisted of the director of psychodrama, the observers, and the researcher teams to identify critical interventions and turning points of each psychodrama session in order to construct preliminary group process notes using analytical procedures based on task analysis. Two semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with each protagonist first to collect their experiences during the psychodrama process, and second to understand the perceived effects of the working model on family relationships one month afterward. Two-way thematic analysis was conducted with the group process notes and interview transcripts, which then revealed four themes on therapeutic process and three themes on the therapeutic outcomes in terms of bi-cultural conflict resolutions. The study found four therapeutic mechanisms emerging from the group process: (1) the OIS facilitated self-disclosure and emotional catharsis in a face-saving way; (2) the OIS contains and empowers the protagonists while protecting their faces/public-images; (3) the OIS offered a panoramic view to the systemic contexts protagonists were embedded in; (4) the OIS served as a concrete reminder that carried the corrective experiences from therapy to real lives. As for the therapeutic effects, the study revealed three respects of transformations perceived by the protagonists in relation to their family relationships: (1) the protagonists gained awareness of the impacts of the Chinese sociocultural forces impinged on their familial relationships; (2) the protagonists accepted that the specified family members were shaped and restricted by their socio-historical and cultural contexts and thereby took initiatives to change the interactive patterns; (3) the protagonists understood the distinctive conditions/contexts that gave rise to the current relational difficulties and became able to create new possibilities in their other relationships. Based on the research findings, the current study suggested Chinese psychodramatists incorporate the ＂development-contextual perspective＂ into the ＂cannon of creativity＂ to developed a more comprehensive, systemic model for case conceptualization, assessments and interventions formation which involves the client's person, relationships, and environment. Meanwhile, the current model served as a therapeutic tool to warm-up the spontaneity and creativity within the protagonists so that they can generate deeper understandings regarding familial relationships and develop adaptive strategies in resolving interpersonal conflicts resulted from the Chinese-Western cultural/value clash/confrontation.

1. 利翠珊, T. S.,蕭英玲, Y. L.(2008)。華人婚姻品質的維繫：衝突與忍讓的中介效果。本土心理學研究，29，77-116。
   連結：
2. 高旭繁, S. F.,陸洛, L.(2006)。夫妻傳統性／現代性的契合與婚姻適應之關聯。本土心理學研究，25，47-100。
   連結：
3. 陳秉華, P. H.,林美珣, M. H.,李素芬, S. F.(2009)。人我關係協調之伴侶諮商研究。教育心理學報，40(3)，463-488。
   連結：
4. 陸洛, L.(2003)。人我關係之界定—「折衷自我」的現身。本土心理學研究，20，139-207。
   連結：
5. 陸洛, L.(2011)。現代華人的雙文化自我與雙重陷落。本土心理學研究，36，155-168。
   連結：
6. 陸洛, L.,楊國樞, K. S.(2005)。社會取向與個人取向的自我實現觀：概念分析與實徵初探。本土心理學研究，23，3-69。
   連結：
7. 黃囇莉, L. L.(2001)。身心違常：女性自我在父權結構網中的“迷”途。本土心理學研究，15，3-62。
   連結：
8. 楊中芳, C. F(1999)。人際關係與人際情感的構念化。本土心理學研究，12，105-179。
   連結：
9. Appelbaum, S. A.(1973).Psychological-mindedness: Word, concept and essence.The International Journal of Psycho-analysis,54(1),35-46.
10. Blatner, A.(2000).Foundation of psychodrama: History, theory, and practice.New York, NY:Springer Publishing Company.
11. Chan, P. S.(1997).Inpatient group psychotherapy in Chinese patients.Singapore Medical Journal,38(1),19-21.
12. Chen, P. H.(2009).A counseling model for self-relation coordination for Chinese clients with interpersonal conflicts.Counseling Psychologist,37(7),987-1009.
13. Cheung, G.,Chan, C.(2002).The Satir model and cultural sensitivity: A Hong Kong reflection.Contemporary Family Therapy,24,199-215.
14. Cheung, Y. K.(2013).From the Satir model to the I Tao: Reconstructing family rules in a Hong Kong cultural context.The Satir Journal: Transformational Systemic Therapy,1,349-393.
15. Cooper, H.(Ed.),Camic, P. M.(Ed.),Long, D. L.(Ed.),Panter, A. T.(Ed.),Rindskopf, D.(Ed.),Sher, K. J.(Ed.)(2012).APA handbook of research methods in psychology, research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological.Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.
16. Dayton, T.(2005).The living stage: A step-by-step guide to psychodrama, sociometry, and experiential group therapy.Deerfield Beach, FL:Health Communications, Inc..
17. Dwairy, M.,Van Sickle, T. D.(1996).Western psychotherapy in traditional Arabicsocieties.Clinical Psychology Review,16(3),231-249.
18. Gergen, K. J.(2009).Relational being: beyond self and community.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
19. Hale, A. E.(1981).Conducting clinical sociometric explorations: A manual for psychodramatists and sociometrists.Illinois, IL:Royal Publishing Company.
20. Holmes, P.(Ed.),Karp, M.(Ed.),Watson, M.(Ed.)(1994).Psychodrama since Moreno: Innovations in theory and practice.London, England:Routledge.
21. Hwang, K. K.(2009).The development of indigenous counseling in contemporary Confucian communities.Counseling Psychologist,37(7),930-943.
22. Karp, M.,Holmes, P.,Bradshaw-Tauvon, K.(1998).The Handbook of Psychodrama.London, England:Routledge.
23. Kuo, B. C. H.,Hsu, W. S.,Lai, N.(2011).Indigenous Crisis Counseling in Taiwan: An Exploratory, Qualitative Case Study of an Expert Therapist.International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling,33(1),1-21.
24. Kwan, K. L. K.(2000).Counseling Chinese peoples: Perspectives of filial piety.Asian Journal of Counseling,7(1),23-41.
25. Kwan, K. L. K.(2009).Collectivistic conflict of Chinese in counseling: Conceptualization and therapeutic directions.The Counseling Psychologist,37,967-986.
26. Lai, N. H.(2011).Expressive Arts Therapy for Mother-Child Relationship (EAT-MCR): A novel model for intervening domestic violence survivors in Chinese culture.The Arts in Psychotherapy,38(5),305-311.
27. Lai, N. H.,Tsai, H. H.(2014).Practicing psychodrama in Chinese culture.The Arts in Psychotherapy,41,386-390.
28. Leung, S. A.,Chen, P. H.(2009).Counseling psychology in Chinese communities in Asia: Indigenous, multicultural, and cross-cultural considerations.The Counseling Psychologist,37,944-966.
29. Ma, J. L. C.(2011).Anorexia nervosa and family therapy in a Chinese context.Hong Kong:Chinese University Press.
30. Markus, H. R.,Kitayama, S.(1991).Culture and the Self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.Psychological Review,98,224-253.
31. McNamee, S.,Gergen, K. J.(1992).Therapy as social construction.London, England:Sage Publications.
32. Moreno, J. L.(1953).Who shall survive? Foundations of sociometry, group psychotherapy and sociodrama.Beacon, NY:Beacon House.
33. Moreno, J. L.,Fox, J.(1987).The essential Moreno: Writings on psychodrama, group method and spontaneity.New York, NY:Springer Publishing Company.
34. Moreno, Z. T.(2006).The quintessential Zerka: Writing by Zerka Toeman Moreno of psychodrama, sociometry and group psychotherapy.New York, NY:Routledge.
35. Moreno, Z.,Blomkvist, L. D.,Ruetzel, T.(2000).Psychodrama, Surplus reality and the art of healing.London, England:Routledge.
36. Nolte, J.(2014).The philosophy, theory and methods of J. L. Moreno: The man who tried to become God.New York, NY:Routledge.
37. Pascual-Leone, A.,Greenberg, L. S.,Pascual-Leone, J.(2009).Developments in task analysis: New methods to study change.Psychotherapy Research,19(4-5),527-542.
38. Sue, D. W.,Ivey, A. E.,Pedersen, P.(2009).A theory of multicultural counseling & therapy.Mason, OH:Cengage Learning.
39. Walsh, M. E.,Galassi, J. P.,Murphy, J. A.,Park-Taylor, J.(2002).A conceptual framework for counseling psychologists in schools.The Counseling Psychologist,5,682-704.
40. Yang, K. S.(2006).Indigenized conceptual and empirical analyses of selected Chinese psychological characteristics.International Journal of Psychology,41,298-303.
41. Yang, K. S.(2003).Methodological and theoretical issues on psychological traditionality and modernity research in an Asian society: In response to Kwang-Kuo Hwang and beyond.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,6,263-285.
42. 王行, H.,鄭玉英, Y. Y.(1994).心靈舞台—心理劇的本土經驗.台北=Taipei:張老師=Living Psychology Publisher.
43. 王智弘, C. H.(2013)。從文化理解到含攝文化理論之建構：從助人專業倫理雙元模型到研究倫理雙元模型。台灣心理諮商季刊，5(4)，vi-xii。
44. 周玉慧(2015)。婚姻家庭觀與夫妻互動。跨・文化學術研討會，台北=Taipei, Taiwan:
45. 袁信愛, H. A.(2002)。儒、道兩家的生死智慧。第六次儒佛會通論文集，台北=Taipei:
46. 高旭繁, S. F.(2008)。台北=Taipei，國立台灣大學心理學系=National Taiwan University。
47. 陳秉華, P. H.(2001)。華人「人我關係協調」之諮商工作架構。測驗與輔導，167，3511-3515。
48. 陸洛, L.(2008)。未來華人自我研究的瞻望。中國人的自我：心理學的分析，台北=Taipei:
49. 陶新華（編）, S. H.(ed.),吉沅洪（編）, Y. H.(ed.)(2016).心理創傷治療技術解析.中國重慶=China: Chongqing:重慶出版社=Chongqing Publishing.
50. 曾文星, W. H.(2004).文化與心理治療.香港=Hong Kong:中文大學出版社.
51. 黃光國, K. K.(2009).儒家關係主義：哲學反思、理論建構與實徵研究.台北=Taipei:心理出版社=Psychological Publishing Co., Ltd..
52. 楊中芳, C. F.(2001)。「婆」與「媳」都是「自己人」帶來的麻煩？。如何理解中國人：文化與個人論文集，台北=Taipei:
53. 楊中芳, C. F.(2001)。現代化、全球化、是與本土化對立的嗎？。如何理解中國人：文化與個人論文集，台北=Taipei:
54. 楊國樞（編）, K. S.(Ed.)(1992).中國人的價值觀—社會科學觀點.臺北=Taipei:桂冠圖書公司=Kuei-Kuan Publisher.
55. 葉光輝, K. H(1997)。親子互動的困境與衝突及其因應方式：孝道觀點的探討。中央研究院民族學研究所集刊，82，65-114。
56. 賴念華, N. H.(2015)。社會劇在華人文化人際議題中的運用。T&D 飛訊，206，1-21。
57. 賴念華, N. H.(2008)。Dorothy Satten 四張椅子之心理劇導劇歷程。中華團體心理治療，14(2)，9-21。

1. 黃光國,夏允中(2019)。開啟以儒釋道文化的修養諮商心理學理論語實徵研究：邁向自性覺醒的心理療癒。中華輔導與諮商學報，54，1-20。
2. 魏大紘,賴念華,張祐誠,張哲恩(2023)。文化心理劇對成員在孝道困境中親子互動的改變效益。中華輔導與諮商學報，66，123-158。
3. 張秀娟(2022)。論心理劇的角色交換之應用與效果。輔導季刊，58(3)，55-66。