Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
PEP-Easy Tip: To save PEP-Easy to the home screen

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

To start PEP-Easy without first opening your browser–just as you would start a mobile app, you can save a shortcut to your home screen.

First, in Chrome or Safari, depending on your platform, open PEP-Easy from pepeasy.pep-web.org. You want to be on the default start screen, so you have a clean workspace.

Then, depending on your mobile device…follow the instructions below:

On IOS:

  1. Tap on the share icon Action navigation bar and tab bar icon
  2. In the bottom list, tap on ‘Add to home screen’
  3. In the “Add to Home” confirmation “bubble”, tap “Add”

On Android:

  1. Tap on the Chrome menu (Vertical Ellipses)
  2. Select “Add to Home Screen” from the menu

 

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

Friedman, R.C. Downey, J.I. (1995). MacIntosh Study Faulted. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 43:304-305.

(1995). Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 43:304-305

MacIntosh Study Faulted Related Papers

Richard C. Friedman, M.D. and Jennifer I. Downey, M.D.

December 5, 1994

Houston MacIntosh's “Attitudes and Experiences of Psychoanalysts in Analyzing Homosexual Patients” (JAPA 42:4) discussed the results of a thirteen-item questionnaire administered to a convenience sample of 285 psychoanalysts. Subjects reported their analytic experiences with 1,215 homosexual patients. MacIntosh's study has important limitations, particularly in the area of research design.

Our first concern is that the study confounds political and scientific issues. Participants were recruited with a letter suggesting that their responses could help counter ideas fostered by Richard Isay that most psychoanalysts are poorly educated about homosexuality and negatively biased toward homosexual patients. This personalized appeal must have affected who chose to participate in the study and who declined.

A second problem is MacIntosh's failure to define what he meant by homosexual orientation. There is considerable disagreement in our field about how patients' sexual orientation should be classified, especially when they have experienced overt bisexual fantasy or engaged in bisexual activity. This problem in research design could have been avoided had homosexual orientation been defined in the questionnaire.

Third, MacIntosh states that “23 percent of homosexual patients in analysis change to heterosexuality” (p. 1203). Since this is based on the treating analysts' memory and judgment, with no systematic follow-up, it cannot be considered genuine observation. To reliably assess the rate of conversion would require reports from third-party evaluators and/or the patients themselves at an interval after the analyses had ended. Without this, the patients' desire to please the analyst, the analysts' incomplete information, and failure to assess behavioral change as lasting over time render these data pseudofactual. MacIntosh suggests that his data replicate findings reported in the well-known Bieber study. However, Bieber et al. did not assess sexual orientation change on follow-up either. In fact, the psychoanalytic literature on sexual orientation change contains to date no adequately designed scientific studies.

Finally,

[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.