Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To access to IJP Open with a PEP-Web subscription…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

Having a PEP-Web subscription grants you access to IJP Open. This new feature allows you to access and review some articles of the International Journal of Psychoanalysis before their publication. The free subscription to IJP Open is required, and you can access it by clicking here.

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

Schachter, J. (1997). Research In Psychoanalysis: Process, Development, Outcome. Edited by Theodore Shapiro and Robert N. Emde. Madison, CT: International Universities Press, Inc., 1995. 447 pp.. Psychoanal Q., 66:524-529.

(1997). Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 66:524-529

Research In Psychoanalysis: Process, Development, Outcome. Edited by Theodore Shapiro and Robert N. Emde. Madison, CT: International Universities Press, Inc., 1995. 447 pp.

Review by:
Joseph Schachter

The editors probably would have sold more copies of their book if they had changed its title, dropping the term “Research” and changing the title to Process, Development, Outcome in Psychoanalysis: Implications for Psychoanalytic Technique. Almost all the potential readers of this book are psychoanalytic clinicians, and clinicians' lack of interest in research findings remains a substantial problem for psychoanalysis. The clinician's point of view is stated baldly by Jacob Arlow. First, in traditional analytic style, the researcher's motivation is “analyzed.” Research is seen as “evidence of persistent doubt concerning the ‘truth’ of psychoanalytic findings, and … interest in such research represents an effort on the part of the researchers to repudiate some unacceptable knowledge about their own motivation, conscious or unconscious. In addition, there are special features of the analyst's inner experience while he is at work processing the patient's material that tend to render issues of empirical confirmation irrelevant or at least peripheral to his interests” (p. 143). Theodore Shapiro seconds this theme, questioning the relevance of research findings for his practice. Donald Spence takes the researchers to task: “Until the research literature begins to include more traditional clinical language and speaks to present-day clinical concerns, there is no reason why even the more curious clinician would want to read it” (p.

[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.