This analysis investigates how accusations are formed and responded to in couples therapy, revealing key interactional strategies used by spouses.
Accusations are common social actions found in couples conflict episodes. Drawing from video-recorded couples therapy sessions, we examine a corpus of couples accusation-response sequences in order to answer the following questions: How are offences (e.g., accusations/blame/reproach) formulated in couples therapy talk, how does the accused spouse resist or deny the offensive action and how does the therapist intervene in the offence-response sequences? Two methods are used to investigate these interactional practices. Conversation analysis (CA) is used to identify the sequential organization of these offence-response sequences and, in particular, the defensive moves used by the male spouse to resist the offensive action. Argumentation analysis (AA) from the perspective of the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) is used to reconstruct and evaluate argumentative sequences of accusation and responses (e.g., counter-reproach, justification, and acceptance of responsibility) particularly focusing on argumentation schemes. By integrating these approaches, we were able to reveal a couple’s argumentative practices from both an interactional and content dimension.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Muntigl et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: