Abstract

We designed this theory-building study to discover how split alliances are manifested in couple therapy. From an archival database, we selected four cases in which the partners’ self-reported alliances with the therapist were highly discrepant. An intensive analysis of each session was conducted to model the underlying therapeutic system based on interactional frequencies, a measure of interpersonal closeness, and identify alliance-related behaviors exhibited by clients and therapists using the multidimensional System for Observing Family Therapy Alliances. Results showed consistencies as well as variability across cases, largely reflecting the four (heterosexual) couples’ pre-disposing problems and relational characteristics. Spatial maps of each session reflected the unbalanced alliance perceptions in two of the four cases. Whereas behavioral indicators of clients’ engagement and emotional connection with their therapists varied widely, a problematic within-system alliance was observed in every case. Cross-blaming and discussion of an attachment injury were also observed across cases. While the therapists were largely engaging, affirming and supportive, in two split alliance sessions they displayed considerably more empathy for the male partner than the female partner. In many ways the results supported and extended the literature on alliances in general and split alliances in particular.

摘要

我们设计了这项建立理论的研究，以发现分裂联盟如何在夫妻治疗中表现出来。从档案数据库中，我们选择了四个案例，其中合作伙伴自我报告的与治疗师的联盟存在很大差异。对每个会话进行了深入分析，以根据交互频率、人际亲密程度的衡量标准对潜在的治疗系统进行建模，并使用多维家庭治疗联盟观察系统识别客户和治疗师表现出的与联盟相关的行为。结果显示病例之间的一致性和可变性，主要反映了四对（异性恋）夫妇的先决问题和关系特征。每个会话的空间图反映了四个案例中两个案例中不平衡的联盟感知。尽管客户参与度和与治疗师的情感联系的行为指标差异很大，但在每个案例中都观察到存在问题的系统内联盟。在案例中也观察到了对附件损伤的交叉指责和讨论。虽然治疗师在很大程度上参与、肯定和支持，但在两次分裂的联盟会议中，他们对男性伴侣的同情比对女性伴侣的同情要多得多。在许多方面，结果支持并扩展了关于一般联盟和特别是分裂联盟的文献。虽然治疗师在很大程度上参与、肯定和支持，但在两次分裂的联盟会议中，他们对男性伴侣的同情比对女性伴侣的同情要多得多。在许多方面，结果支持并扩展了关于一般联盟和特别是分裂联盟的文献。虽然治疗师在很大程度上参与、肯定和支持，但在两次分裂的联盟会议中，他们对男性伴侣的同情比对女性伴侣的同情要多得多。在许多方面，结果支持并扩展了关于一般联盟和特别是分裂联盟的文献。