遊戲治療新手之口語反應分析研究―以親子遊戲治療為訓練模式

Analysis of Child Play Therapy Beginner's Oral Response-Based Filial Therapy Training Program

10.6139/JTPT.2012.2.3

洪慧涓(Hui-Chuan Hung)；施玉麗(Yu-Li Su)

親子遊戲治療 ； 口語反應 ； 遊戲治療 ； filial therapy training model ； verbal responses ； play therapist

台灣遊戲治療學報

2期（2012 / 12 / 01）

43 - 64

繁體中文

本研究旨在探討親子遊戲治療的督導訓練模式，對高低技巧組大學層級遊戲治療新手之口語反應變化情形及學習經驗情形，再將這些新手實作的光碟片影像、文件和焦點團體訪談等資料，以內容分析的方式整理研究資料。根據研究目的與問題，發現如下：一、 高技巧組內共同表現較多的有益反應是「反應內容」。低技巧組內共同表現較多的反應是「追蹤行為」與「反應內容」。高低技巧組內表現較多的無益反應無共同性，而有個別性的差異。二、 高低技巧組間共同最明顯的有益反應是「追蹤行為」與「反應內容」；二組間共同最不明顯的反應是「反應感情」；二組間共同沒有出現的有益反應是「擴展意義」與「設限」，此涉及新手的能力與心態。高低技巧組間共同最明顯與次要明顯的無益反應不一，受個人能力、兒童特質與遊戲性質所影響；二組間共同最少出現的反應是「評斷與讚美」，是二組共同的正向反應。高低技巧組間的有益反應均多於無益反應，顯示二組能在遊戲單元中表現有益的反應幫助兒童。三、 高低技巧組認為兒童遊戲諮商訓練能促進個人接納跟隨者角色、重視關係並內化技巧及覺察力。

This study examines the changes in verbal responses and learning experiences in the filial therapy training model that was applied to high-skilled and low-skilled university-level consulting novices. Qualitative research methods are applied in this study for document analysis, focus group interviews, and an analysis of CD image analysis. We arrived at several conclusions through the purposes and problems of this study:1. The more common response by the high-skilled group was ”content response,” but ”tracking behavior” and ”content response” were more common for the low-skilled group. There was no commonness in the non-benefit response by high-skilled and lowskilled groups, but there were individual differences.2. The most apparent benefit responses were ”tracking behavior” and ”content response.” A non-apparent difference among these 2 groups is ”emotional response.” The common hidden benefit responses are ”extended meaning” and ”limit setting,” which can be referred to as the ability and mentality of novices. The major and minor apparent benefit responses were inconsistent and were affected by individual ability, children's characteristics, and the property of games. The least common response among the 2 groups is ”judge and praise,” which has a positive effect that was recognized by the 2 groups. Beneficial responses were both more than non-benefit responses among these 2 groups, indicating that both were able to enact positive responses for assisting children in the game section.3. Both high-skilled and low-skilled groups believe that the filial therapy training model can promote an individual toward accepting a follower role, thinking highly of relationships, and internalizing skills and observation.

1. 何美雪、高淑貞、洪慧涓(2005)。親子遊戲治療訓練對國小認輔教師遊戲治療知能影響之訓練探究。教育心理學報，37(1)，1-21。
   連結：
2. 洪淑雅(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄，國立高雄師範大學。
   連結：
3. Baggerly, J. N.(1999).Texas,University of North Texas.
4. Bratton, S. C.(1993).Texas,University of North Texas.
5. Brown, C. J.(2000).Texas,University of North Texas.
6. Chau, I. Y.-F.,Landreth, G. L.(1997).Filial therapy with Chinese parents: Effects on parental empathic interactions, parental acceptance of child and parental stress.International Journal of Play therapy,6(2),75-92.
7. Costas, M. B.(1998).Texas,University of North Texas.
8. Danger, S.,Landreth, G.(2005).Child-centered group play therapy with children with speech difficulties.International Journal of Play Therapy,14(1),81-102.
9. Garwood, M. M.(1999).Texas,University of North Texas.
10. Glover, G. J.(1996).Texas,University of North Texas.
11. Helker, W. P.,Ray, D. C.(2009).The impact child teacher relationship training on teachers' and aides' use of relationship-building skills and the effect on student classroom behavior.International Journal of Play Therapy,18(2),70-83.
12. Hilpl, K. A.(2001).Texas,University of North Texas.
13. Jones, L. D.(2002).Texas,University of North Texas.
14. Kao, S.-C.,Landreth, G. L.(1997).Evaluating the impact of child-centered play therapy training.International Journal of Play Therapy,6(2),1-2.
15. Landreth, G. L.(2002).Play therapy: The art of the relationship.New York:Brunner-Routledge.
16. Landreth, G. L.(1991).Play therapy: The art of the relationship.Muncie, IN:Accelerated Development.
17. Landreth, G. L.,Lobaugh, A. F.(1998).Filial therapy with incarcerated fathers: Effects on parental acceptance of child, parental stress, and child adjustment.Journal of Counseling & Development,76(2),157-165.
18. Rhine, T. J.(2000).Texas,University of North Texas.
19. Schaefer, C. E.(Ed.)(1993).The therapeutic powers of play.Northvale, NJ:Jason Aronson.
20. Tew, K. L.(1997).Texas,University of North Texas.
21. VanFleet, R.(1994).Filial therapy: Strengthening parent-child relationships through play.Sarasota, FL:Professional Resource Press.
22. 何長珠(1995)。應用遊戲治療於受虐兒的三個實例研究。輔導學報，18(1)，1-37。
23. 林美珠(2001)。親子遊戲治療訓練之個案研究：一位母親之改變歷程。花蓮師院學報，12，23-48。
24. 高淑貞(1998)。親子遊戲治療。台北:桂冠。
25. 高淑貞譯、Landreth, G. L.(1994)。遊戲治療：建立關係的藝術。台北:桂冠。
26. 連廷誥(2009)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。彰化，國立彰化師範大學。
27. 鄭如安、林妙容(2011)。寄養母親親子遊戲治療訓練團體之療效因子分析。台灣遊戲治療學報，1，173-220。
28. 鄭雅齡(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。花蓮，國立花蓮師範大學。
29. 魏渭堂(1999)。博士論文(博士論文)。彰化，國立彰化師範大學。

1. 曾慧瑩(2023)。遊戲治療實務入門經驗談。諮商與輔導，455，10-13。
2. 林子翔,刑志彬,王文秀(2021)。遊戲治療的追蹤行為、情感反映與設限。輔導季刊，57(2)，27-36。