Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To see translations of this article…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

When there are translations of the current article, you will see a flag/pennant icon next to the title, like this: 2015-11-06_11h14_24 For example:

2015-11-06_11h09_55

Click on it and you will see a bibliographic list of papers that are published translations of the current article. Note that when no published translations are available, you can also translate an article on the fly using Google translate.

 

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

Hurst, D.M. (1995). Toward A Definition Of The Term And Concept Of Interaction. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 43:521-537.

(1995). Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 43:521-537

Toward A Definition Of The Term And Concept Of Interaction

David M. Hurst

The topic of interaction in the clinical psychoanalytic situation has never before been addressed directly by a panel at the American Psychoanalytic Association. The format, clearly and effectively introduced by chair Melvin Bornstein, consisted of three papers in the morning, those of Evelyne Schwaber, Joseph Sandler, and Jerome Oremland, which were then discussed by Arnold Richards. After the formal presentations, the panel attempted to interact with the audience. The format was repeated in the afternoon with papers by Dale Boesky, Jay Greenberg, and Arnold Goldberg.

With the exception of Greenberg, whose clinical vignette anchored his discussion of theoretical, technical, and semantic aspects of the topic and was referred to often by other panelists, clinical material was in too short supply. In spite of this, the panel managed to convey the similarities and differences of its members' points of view.

Bornstein, who conceived, organized, and moderated the panel, seized everyone's attention by stating that everything in psychoanalysis can be reduced to interaction. Major concepts, formulations, models, and strategies, he asserted, are derived from the interaction between analyst and patient in the analytic relationship. The profound psychic experiences of patient and analyst are the result of their mutual interaction, the humanistic core of psychoanalysis.

But the meaning of interaction in psychoanalysis remains ambiguous and controversial.

[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.