Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To see who cited a particular article…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To see what papers cited a particular article, click on “[Who Cited This?] which can be found at the end of every article.

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

Gilmore, M.M. Nersessian, E. (2000). J. Allan Hobson and Edward Pace-Schott's Response Commentary by Margaret Gilmore and Edward Nersessian. Neuropsychoanalysis, 2(2):202-211.

(2000). Neuropsychoanalysis, 2(2):202-211

J. Allan Hobson and Edward Pace-Schott's Response Commentary by Margaret Gilmore and Edward Nersessian Related Papers

Margaret M. Gilmore, M.D. and Edward Nersessian, M.D.

For the second issue of Neuro-Psychoanalysis, Dr. J. Allan Hobson provided the target paper on the neuroregulation and neurophysiological processes of sleep and dreams. This target paper was followed by formal commentaries on the target paper prepared by three experts in the field of sleep and dreaming, Drs. M. Solms, A. Braun, and M. Reiser. As Hobson's paper and those respondent papers dealt not only with neurophysiological findings but also with aspects of Freud's psychological theory of dreams, the editors of the journal decided that a brief summary of Freud's dream theory would help orient those readers of the journal who might be less familiar with psychoanalytic concepts to the discussion. Therefore, they asked us to write a brief and somewhat simplified synopsis of Freud's psychoanalytic theory of dreams. The editors planned to place the synopsis as the first paper in the journal so that it could serve as a general orientation for the reader. However, at the urging of Dr. Hobson, who was concerned that readers might misread the summary as a target paper, the editors elected to place it at the end of the interchange, as an appendix.

We, the authors of the brief synopsis, were astonished that Hobson and Pace-Schott chose to give such prominence to our little summary in their response to the commentaries. Our surprise was partly the result of the fact that our summary was not prepared as a response to the commentary on Hobson's target paper, but only as an outline of Freud's theory.

[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 © 2020, 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.