諮商師幽默技術使用意圖與當事人反應暨諮商師補償性措施之探討

Exploring the Intentions of Counselors' Use of Humor, Clients' Reactions to Humor, and Counselors' Compensatory Measures

研究目的：本研究乃在探討諮商師幽默技術使用意圖與當事人反應兩者之間關係，以及諮商師如何因應幽默技術使用後當事人非預期反應。研究方法：本研究係採歷程研究設計，資料蒐集以質性研究之深入訪談法，並採雙訪談員分別與諮商師和當事人進行訪談。研究結果：幽默技術使用段落，諮商師多數意圖能有效引發當事人預期反應。至於諮商師技術使用意圖與當事人反應不一致情形有二類，其一為當事人反應內容，不全然反映出諮商師技術使用意圖；其二乃當事人反應內涵超越諮商師技術使用意圖。幽默技術使用後，諮商師會根據幽默技術使用之類型與意圖，判斷當事人反應是否為非預期行為。無論該反應有利或有礙諮商進行，諮商師將在技術使用類型與意圖引導下執行補償性措施。研究結論：諮商師幽默技術使用意圖與當事人反應具有高度關聯性。其次，諮商師幽默技術使用後之補償性措施，乃基於幽默技術使用之類型與意圖。

Purpose: This study explored counselors’ intentions when using humor and clients’ reactions to that humor, and the ways in which counselors adjusted to the clients’ nonpredictive responses as a result of the humor. Methods: A process research design and two datasets were used in this study. One dataset consisted of materials from 7 sessions of individual counseling, and the other was collected through interviews with the counselor and the client by two trained interviewers. Content analysis through interview context was used as the method of data analysis. Results: Analysis revealed that the counselor’s use of humor could have multiple intentions. It could be related to the topic of the counseling, a substitute for general counseling skills, intended to regulate the counseling atmosphere, or to adjust the client’s emotions. Humor could have a multifaceted impact on the client and the counseling process, including on the cognition, emotion, and behavior of the client, or on the counseling atmosphere or process. Most of the counselor’s intentions in using humor resulted in stirring up the client’s predictive reactions. There were two categories of inconsistency between the counselor’s intentions and the client’s reactions. First, the client’s reactions did not reflect the counselor’s intention; second, the client’s reactions were more than the counselor’s intentions. After using humor, the counselor would use the type of humor and his or her own intention to assess the client’s reaction as to whether the reaction was predictive or not. If the reaction was not predicted by the counselor, the counselor would compensate for the client according to the type and the intention of the humor, no matter whether the reaction would promote or harm the counseling process. Conclusions: The intention of counselor in using humor was highly related to the client’s reaction. The counselor would repair situations damaged by his or her own miscalculation of the client according to the types of humor and the original intention in using humor.