Tomm K
Fam Process. 1987 Mar;26(1):3-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.1987.00003.x.
A clinical interview affords far more opportunities to act therapeutically than most therapists realize. Because so many of these opportunities remain outside the therapist's conscious awareness, it is useful to elaborate guidelines that orient his or her general activity in directions that are liable to be therapeutic. The Milan associates defined three such basic guidelines: hypothesizing, circularity, and neutrality. Hypothesizing is clear and easy to accept. The notions of circularity and neutrality have aroused considerable interest but are not as readily understood. These guidelines may be clarified and operationalized when reformulated as conceptual postures. This process is enhanced by differentiating a fourth guideline, strategizing, which entails the therapist's decision making, including decisions about how to employ these postures. This paper, the first in a series of three, explores these four interviewing guidelines. The other papers will appear in a subsequent issue. Part II will focus on reflexive questioning, a mode of inquiry oriented toward mobilizing the family's own healing capacity. Part III will provide a scheme for analyzing and choosing among four major types of questions: linear questions, circular questions, reflexive questions, and strategic questions.
临床访谈提供了比大多数治疗师意识到的更多的治疗机会。由于这些机会中有许多仍处于治疗师的意识之外，因此详细阐述一些指导方针是有用的，这些方针能引导他或她的一般活动朝着可能具有治疗作用的方向发展。米兰小组定义了三条这样的基本指导方针：假设、循环性和中立性。假设清晰且易于接受。循环性和中立性的概念引起了相当大的兴趣，但不太容易理解。当这些指导方针被重新表述为概念性姿态时，它们可能会得到澄清并可操作化。通过区分第四条指导方针——策略制定，这个过程得到了加强，策略制定需要治疗师进行决策，包括关于如何运用这些姿态的决策。本文是三篇系列文章中的第一篇，探讨这四条访谈指导方针。其他文章将在后续期刊上发表。第二部分将聚焦于反思性提问，这是一种旨在调动家庭自身治愈能力的询问方式。第三部分将提供一个方案，用于分析和在四种主要类型的问题中进行选择：线性问题、循环问题、反思性问题和策略性问题。
