Psychoanalysis and homosexuality: do we need a new theory?

No need exists, it is argued, for a new psychoanalytic theory of homosexuality. Certainly psychoanalysis should not be expected to generate such a theory using its own methodology alone. The preoccupation with producing such a theory avoids more important questions about psychoanalytic theory building raised by an examination of the long relationship between psychoanalysis and homosexuality. These questions concern the problems related to using psychoanalytic methodology (1) to construct categories (including the categories normal and abnormal), (2) to construct causal theory (the problems include the limitations of psychoanalytic developmental theory and a long-standing confusion between psychoanalytic developmental theory, psychoanalytic genetic reconstruction, and psychodynamics), and (3) to identify "bedrock." Finally, the question is addressed of what might be needed that is new in the psychoanalytic approach to homosexuality.

Patient-therapist match: revelation or resistance?

Patient-therapist match is a relatively new yet frequently invoked concept within psychoanalysis. Despite Freud's appreciation of the influence of the analyst's past to his or her work within the analytic setting, psychoanalysts have historically held varied opinions about the degree to which the analyst's personality and conflicts affect the analytic process. As analysis was reconfigured as a two-person system, attention focused on the fit between patient and analyst. The literature on patient-therapist match is reviewed, and the conclusion reached that this intuitively appealing concept suffers from a lack of rigorous definition and operationalization. Many authors invoke match in ways that imply that it is real, static, external to the domain of analytic inquiry, and unaffected by analytic process. In its present form, the concept of patient-therapist match obstructs rather than facilitates analytic exploration and obscures rather than clarifies what happens between analyst and analysand in psychoanalysis. By suggesting that match exists as a reality outside the domain of transference and countertransference, analysts may overlook the importance of psychoanalytic technique in creating a sense of match. Analysts may attribute stalemated or limited analyses to a bad match, rather than tenaciously exploring the transference-countertransference configurations that remain at the heart of analytic work.

Can we do psychoanalytic outcome research? A feasibility study.

Despite the widespread use of long-term psychodynamic treatments, methodologically rigorous outcome studies have not been conducted. The authors describe the results of a feasibility study designed to (1) investigate whether patients in psychodynamic treatment, including psychoanalysis, could be recruited and retained as research subjects, (2) determine patient and therapist compliance with self-report measures, rater-administered structured interviews and session audiotaping and (3) obtain pilot data on changes in these measures after one year of treatment. Nine patients entering psychoanalysis and fifteen entering psychodynamic psychotherapy were studied at baseline, six months and one year. Major findings were as follows: (1) recruitment rates were 27% (psychoanalysis) and 83% (psychotherapy), (2) all patients who remained in treatment remained in the research protocol, (3) drop-out rates among research participants and non-participants were equivalent, (4) current Axis I (usually affective or anxiety) disorders were found in over 60% of patients, (5) Axis II disorders in the absence of current Axis I disorders were rare, (6) despite a small number (N) of participants, significant positive change was demonstrated on a variety of measures after one year. Results suggest that it is possible to demonstrate a therapeutic effect of psychodynamic treatments, including psychoanalysis, but changing negative clinical perceptions of research is necessary if methodologically rigorous outcome studies are to be possible in the future.

Defense mechanisms and personality in depression.

There is a longstanding belief that personality represents a structure that is stable over time, and changes, if at all, very slowly. Nonetheless, clinical and empirical evidence suggests that in patients with some Axis I disorders, the rate of personality disorders using DSM criteria decreases after treatment, suggesting that personality as assessed by phenomenological systems is state-dependent. An alternative to the DSM phenomenological system of conceptualizing personality is the dynamic concept of character, that is, a predictable pattern of both adaptive and pathological defense mechanisms, and personality organization comprised of object relations, ego strengths, and superego development. Data from this study address the hypothesis that defense mechanisms and personality organization remain relatively stable in patients treated for Axis I disorders, irrespective of clinical improvement. Patients meeting DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder (MDD) entered randomized, controlled medication trials. Defensive functioning was evaluated with the Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ) [Bond et al., 1983: Arch Gen Psychiatry 40:333-338], and personality organization was assessed with the Inventory of Personality Organization (IPO; Clarkin et al., unpublished), both at baseline and at the completion of the clinical trial. Data were analyzed for whether an individual's pattern of defense mechanisms and personality organization were stable over time regardless of response to treatment of MDD. The question was also asked whether a predominant pattern of defense mechanisms or level of personality organization predicts response to treatment or dropout rate. Among treatment responders, nonresponders and drop-outs, baseline DSQ scores were similar except for "image-distorting" defenses, which were significantly more prevalent among drop-outs compared to responders (P = .016). Post-treatment DSQ values revealed a significant decrease in "maladaptive" defenses (P = .01) in the entire sample, while intermediate and "adaptive" defenses remained unchanged. This same pattern was found to hold true in treatment responders. When comparing treatment responders and nonresponders at the end of the trial, medication responders used significantly less "maladaptive" defenses than did nonresponders (P = .003), and had a significantly higher, or healthier level of "overall defensive functioning" (P = .04). Baseline and post-treatment IPO values did not show significant differences. Results of the study address the question of whether there are personality characteristics that are enduring and that can be appreciated irrespective of an Axis I disorder.

A match made in heaven? A pilot study of patient-therapist match.

The authors report on a study of patient-therapist match in 50 psychodynamic psychotherapy dyads. Sixty-six percent of patients and therapists agreed about the quality of the match, with 58% of patients and 56% of therapists reporting that the match was positive. Positive match correlated with positive patient and therapist assessments about the progress and process of therapy, but not with perceived similarity of personal characteristics. Patients' and therapists' perceptions about their similarities and differences from one another did not correlate. This study suggests it is both possible and important to gather data from both patient and therapist when studying match.

The definition and assessment of analytic process: can analysts agree?

Although analytic process (AP) is a core concept in psychoanalytic theory and practice and has emerged as an important variable in outcome studies, there is no consensus regarding its definition and operationalisation. This paper describes the development and validation of the Columbia Analytic Process Scale (CAPS), a rating scale developed to evaluate the presence or absence of AP in a single psychoanalytic session transcript for purposes of an outcome study. Definitions of interrater reliability and construct validity are reviewed and two studies designed to evaluate these important aspects of the CAPS are presented. The results demonstrate that the CAPS has adequate interrater reliability (kappa = .5). To establish construct validity the plan was to compare the CAPS rating of AP to clinical consensus. However, when a group of ten senior training and supervising analysts at Columbia were asked to rate five psychoanalytic session transcripts, no clinical consensus could be established. Statistical analysis of the pattern of the analysts' clinical ratings showed that the largest portion of the variance was accounted for by the error term of a two-way ANOVA. The implication of this finding is that the construct of AP itself is ill-defined. The results of this study suggest that the commonly used term AP has less consensually held meanings than analysts tend to believe; the impact of lack of definition of key terms on clinical and research pursuits within psychoanalysis is discussed.

Assessing outcome in psychoanalysis and long-term dynamic psychotherapy.

The efficacy of psychoanalysis and long-term psychotherapy remains a fundamentally unresolved issue for lack of methodologically sound studies. This article reviews the shortcomings of prior long-term treatment research, and presents a rationale and justification of the importance of more rigorous outcome studies. An emphasis on process research is premature when efficacy remains uncertain. The modern reconceptualization of psychotherapy in terms of hermeneutic theory is discussed in relation to the empirical model. Although historically the hermeneutic perspective has served to repudiate positivism, the hermeneutic and empirical (but not positivistic) approaches to understanding information actually share common priorities. The clearest of these is that the process is ultimately evaluated and validated by the produced effect. It is argued that the recasting of psychoanalytic technique and theory according to aesthetic and pragmatic principles is not inconsistent with contemporary outcome research paradigms so long as the professed treatment objective is clearly specified in verifiable terms. The specific methodologic problems involved in extending the successful short-term psychotherapy research model to psychoanalysis are discussed. An overview of the major components of the Columbia feasibility study currently underway is presented. Finally, a number of assessment domains-for which reliable and validated instruments exist-that are thought to be relevant to outcome are reviewed.

The analytic process: clinical and research definitions.

Though analytic process is a core concept in psychoanalysis, no consensus definition or reliable method of assessment currently exists. This paper reviews clinical definitions of analytic process and concludes that analytic process is comprised of free association, resistance, interpretation and working through. Psychoanalytic outcome research suggests that analytic process develops in only 40 per cent of analyses. Though the presence of analytic process is highly correlated with therapeutic benefit, significant numbers of analytic patients (50 per cent) achieve good outcome despite the fact that an analytic process never developed in treatment. A review of process research on the components of analytic process suggests that a variety of measures already exist for free association, resistance, and interpretation. As in the clinical literature, working through is less well defined and studied. Although several researchers have assessed analytic process using a variety of techniques, these clinically defined component measures of analytic process have not yet been synthesised into a comprehensive scale. Such a measure of analytic process would have the benefit of being easily applied to an adequate sampling of session material and would result in a judgement about the presence and quality of analytic process. A consensus definition and the development of a reliable method to assess analytic process will be of use in clinical, educational and research settings as well as in attempts to define and quantify psychoanalytic treatment.

Current psychotherapy research methodology applied to psychoanalysis : a feasibility study.

This paper describes a study to assess the feasibility of applying the methodology and instruments used in brief-term psychotherapy outcome research to long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy and psychoanalysis.