No abstract

This article presents a qualitative research interview method informed by psychoanalysis, which can collect data beyond the subjective report of the participants. The method has been used to study acquisition of psychodynamic understanding and therapy technique among student therapists in psychology. Within the psychodynamic tradition, the subjective report of every person is viewed as potentially distorted by defense processes. Moreover, relational patterns in an interaction are viewed as significant data about the intrapsychic object relations of a person provided that the person is placed in a projective situation. Since common qualitative interview methods focus primarily on verbal data, such psychodynamic assumptions represent a methodological challenge. To collect a wider scope of data than merely the subjective report, a research interview has been developed based on a certain degree of projection, a psychoanalytic listening perspective, and the use of emotional expression in the interview relation as data. Subsequently, relational scenarios and incidences of defense processes in the research participants are inferred.

During the last two decades, the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) has attracted growing interest from psychoanalysts concerned with empirical research. The paper discusses the application of Crittenden's Dynamic‐Maturational AAI method for assessing the outcome of psychoanalysis. The aim is to demonstrate, through a case presentation, how therapeutic change can be expressed in the AAI. The pre‐ and post‐treatment interviews of one patient, having completed a four‐times‐a‐week psychoanalysis, are presented. It is demonstrated that the detailed discourse analysis of the AAI, based on transcribed tape‐recorded interviews, focuses subtle formal elements of language and speech reflecting dominant patterns of affect regulation and object relating. The AAI text analysis provides possibility for coding procedural memory as conveyed by the handling of the relationship to the interviewer, incorporating the dynamic relationship between researcher and subject and thus complying with a methodological prerequisite regarded by many psychoanalysts as necessary for capturing data that are relevant to psychoanalysis. On this background, the method emerges as promising for psychoanalytic outcome studies.

The aim of this study was to investigate aspects of nondisclosure in a sample of 55 student therapists, working within a group format of supervision. The study constituted one part of a larger study, with the other, parallel part addressing nondisclosure in supervisors. The participants were recruited from seven university-based training clinics in Norway and Denmark. The supervisees answered a questionnaire comprising 11 items about nondisclosure in supervision. The items were answered in a yes/no format, and the respondents were invited to provide examples and justifications for their answers to each item. The examples and justifications provided were analysed in accordance with Hill's guidelines for consensual qualitative research. The study confirmed significant nondisclosure by supervisees in a number of important areas. A high percentage found it difficult to talk about topics related to the supervisory relationship, fearing that they would hurt their supervisor or be met with criticism or interpretation. They were also reluctant to talk to their supervisors about professional matters, particularly related to the perceived incompetence of their supervisors and their expectancy of non-constructive criticism. They felt that their supervisors withheld feedback on their work, as well as advise on what to do, and would like more of this. Several of them thought of the lack of feedback as a conscious strategy helping the students to find out for themselves. A rather striking finding was that a high number of students experienced that the groups became more closed throughout the supervision, and blamed their supervisors for inadequate handling of the group process. This is an issue that needs further exploration.

Contemporary theories of dissociation and trauma for the most part have evolved outside of psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic writings have also been regarded as being in opposition to trauma-based notions of human psychopathology. The specific psychoanalytic contribution--the emphasis on unconscious conflict and meaning--is for the most part excluded from the discourse on dissociation, often resulting in a 'mechanic' conceptualisation of trauma. In this paper, based on clinical material, the author argues in favour of including conflict, unconscious intention and personal meaning in understanding the kind of dissociation we see in cases of multiple personality pathology. Textual analysis of letters written to the analyst illustrates how events of abuse are defensively elaborated. The author demonstrates that patterns of affect regulation and dominant object-relational strategies can be captured through analysis of the discourse structure. She focuses on how an organised character pattern, revealed mainly through narrative style and the analyst's countertransference, serves protective purposes as well as wish-fulfillment. She argues that dissociation in the form of multiple personalities may imply an active, strategic agent.

The aim of this study was to investigate aspects of nondisclosure in a sample of 30 psychotherapy supervisors, working within a group format of supervision of student therapists. The study constituted one part of a larger study, with the other, parallel part addressing nondisclosure in supervisees. The participants were recruited from seven university-based training clinics in Norway and Denmark. The supervisors answered a questionnaire comprising 12 items about feedback withheld by supervisors, supervisors' assumptions about supervisee nondisclosure, supervisors' assumptions about what students think that supervisors withhold, supervisors' use of indirect feedback, and changes in group climate with regard to openness over the course of the supervision. The questionnaire items were answered in a yes/no format, and the respondents were invited to provide examples and justifications for their answers to the individual items. The examples and justifications provided were analysed in accordance with Hill's guidelines for consensual qualitative research. The study confirmed willful and significant nondisclosure by supervisors in a number of important areas, with supervisors having a conscious attitude with regard to what they disclose. To a large extent, they modify their feedback based on assumptions about what will most benefit the individual supervisee's development. Supervisors assume that students act in much the same way, so as not to interfere with the supervisory process. The findings raise the question of whether the widespread cautiousness in terms of

Self-harm is associated with mental illness and suicide risk. The present study aims to increase knowledge of adolescent girls’ pathways into and out of self-harm. The participants were 19 girls, 13 to 18 years of age, who were strategically selected from an outpatient care unit. A naturalistic multiple case study was done with personal interviews. The interviews were analyzed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, and the capacity for “mentalization”—representation of behavior in terms of mental states—was measured with the Reflective Functioning Scale. The analysis of the topic “beginning self-harm” resulted in two meta-themes: (a) beginning self-harm as a way to handle difficult feelings and relational problems and (b) becoming influenced by peers to experiment with self-harm. The analysis of the topic “quitting self-harm” resulted in three meta-themes: (a) ambivalence toward help, treatment, and ending self-harm; (b) finding one’s own way of quitting self-harm; and (c) exploring self-harm together with the therapist. Three case stories illustrate variations in trajectories of change and capacity for mentalization. The findings suggest that self-harm may be a way of handling developmental challenges in autonomy and identity formation during adolescence. Adolescents need an opportunity to discover their own way of quitting self-harm. Variations in mentalization may provide for different pathways.

On the present theoretical arena of psychoanalysis, attachment theory has obtained increasing attention, especially from psychoanalysts interested in empirical research. This paper presents the controversies raised by Bowlby's theory, and discusses the relationship between attachment theory and psychoanalysis. Although Freud and Bowlby differ in their image of Man, ideas developed within attachment theory have parallels in those of psychoanalytic object relation theories, both with regard to the conceptualisation of motivation and the understanding of the origins of psychological disturbances. As regards therapy, the emphasis on the "emotional availability" of the analyst is highlighted. It is concluded that Bowlby's theory does not, however, contribute specifically to analytic technique. Bowlby's main concern is the interpersonal and traumatic origins of psychological disturbances, rather than the patient's fantasies and constructions of narratives.