Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To see statistics of the Most Popular Journal Articles on PEP-Web…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

Statistics of the Most Popular Journal Articles on PEP-Web can be reviewed at any time. Just click the “See full statistics” link located at the end of the Most Popular Journal Articles list in the PEP Section.

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

Bram, A.D. Yalof, J. (2015). Quantifying Complexity: Personality Assessment and Its Relationship with Psychoanalysis. Psychoanal. Inq., 35S(Supplement):74-97.

(2015). Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 35S(Supplement):74-97

Quantifying Complexity: Personality Assessment and Its Relationship with Psychoanalysis

Anthony D. Bram, Ph.D. and Jed Yalof, Psy.D.

The fields of personality assessment and psychoanalysis have an entwined history and share much in common, notably an appreciation of the importance of understanding a person with complexity and depth, including the role of unconscious (or implicit) psychological processes. Personality assessment (or diagnostic psychological testing) offers a complement to psychoanalysis’ primarily idiographic approach by integrating it with a nomothetic one; that is, applying quantitative methods to determine in what ways and to what extent a person is similar or different relative to normative data. It is surprising, then, that contemporary psychoanalysts are largely unfamiliar with the field of personality assessment and seldom refer their patients for evaluation to assist with diagnostic formulation and treatment planning. In this article, we offer practicing analysts (1) a general description of the ways that testing can assist diagnostically, (2) an introduction to categories of psychological tests that sample functioning under varying conditions or from different vantage points, (3) a survey of assessment research that has provided empirical validation of key psychoanalytic concepts, (4) a window into the assessment process as it is applied clinically, and (5) cases to illustrate when and to what benefit analysts might consider referrals for testing. Examples include use of testing in instances when a new patient reports a history of repeated treatment failures; when patient and analyst are embroiled in a protracted impasse; and when a fine-tuned assessment of analyzability is warranted.

[This is a summary excerpt from the full text of the journal article. The full text of the document is available to journal subscribers on the publisher's website here.]

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.