Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To view citations for the most cited journals…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

Statistics of the number of citations for the Most Cited Journal Articles on PEP Web can be reviewed by clicking on the “See full statistics…” link located at the end of the Most Cited Journal Articles list in the PEP tab.


For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Mosher, P.W. (1998). Paul Mosher Replies. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 46(4):1328-1329.

(1998). Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 46(4):1328-1329

Paul Mosher Replies

Paul W. Mosher

September 9, 1998. Mark Leffert has raised two issues that are both interesting and significant, and I thank him for doing so.

The first is whether it was reasonable for me to use the word evolution to describe changes in psychoanalytic thought, as reflected in the journal literature, over the seven decades in question. If such an evolutionary process actually does exist, then a subsequent question would be whether the simple technique described in my brief note, based on the computation of the relative frequency of particular words in the literature over these decades, illustrates such a process.

I'm not the first person to suggest that the journal literature in psychoanalysis has followed an evolutionary course. Several authors, including a former editor of this journal, have described psychoanalytic thought as “evolving,” with the implication that our ideas have developed in an orderly way (Abend and Porder 1986; Blum 1987, 1989; Pines 1985). In fact, Blum (1973) once wrote that “the Journal represents and perpetuates our analytic activities and aspirations; it records and influences the evolution of psychoanalytic thought.” The term evolution is used quite a few times in the journal literature itself to describe change over time in psychoanalytic “thought,” “thinking,” “ideas,” and “theory,” as a simple search of the CD-ROM will reveal. Leffert himself concedes the validity of this concept (if not my invocation of it in the present instance) in the very passage in which he disagrees with me.

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2019, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.