本文目的在於澄清遊戲治療與對賽遊戲治療之間的迷思,希望以鑑古知今的思維模式,重新整理遊戲的定義與分類。全文基調主要以梁培勇多年來的督導經驗為主,觀察到在目前實務界中,許多遊戲治療師因為對遊戲的觀念和分類的模糊不清,進而出現令人擔憂的遊戲治療實務工作面貌,也因而無法正確地藉由遊戲治療本身的療癒因子達到理想中的效果,造成事倍功半的結果。有鑑於此,我們在本文中提出下列兩點進行探討:一、在遊戲治療的相關書籍資料中,大多忽略了遊戲治療最基本的媒介「遊戲的定義」;因此,透過探討學者對於遊戲的分類,試圖從中整理出一些與遊戲現象有關的定義,然後再延伸出遊戲與對賽遊戲在特性上之不同,並延伸凸顯出兩者相對應治療取向之間的區別。二、梁培勇亦根據自己的實務經驗與督導反思,簡單的將遊戲分成自發性遊戲與結構式遊戲兩類;同時指出結構式遊戲與結構式遊戲治療之異同,提醒遊戲治療師在觀念上與實務操作上應仔細區辨。文末,我們亦希望遊戲治療師了解,不論是哪一種形式的遊戲,都只是溝通的媒介與橋梁,遊戲室裡最重要的工具是「遊戲治療師」,而最主要的決定因素是「兒童」。最後,在現代社會、環境與文化價值觀的變遷下,希望簡要的帶出一個相當值得深思的問題:「若遊療師本身缺乏遊戲能力,還能做遊戲治療嗎?」
We clarify the myth regarding play therapy and game-play therapy to rearrange the definition and classifications of play therapy. This study is based on the supervision experience of Pei-Yung Liang, who observed that numerous play therapists hold unclear theories regarding the differences between play therapy and game-play therapy, consequently developing incorrect interventions for children. According to this phenomenon, we discuss 2 points in this article. First, play therapists learn and discuss play therapy without knowing the basic concept of what play is. Therefore, we clearly define play by sorting various play form classifications, and discuss the diverse features of both play and games; second, Pei-Yung Liang proposes a new classification according to his experience and self-reflection of free play and structured play. He also compares the differences between structured play and structured play therapy, and recommends that play therapists increase their awareness of these differences.