Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:16:47.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Objectivity in psychoanalytic judgements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2018

R. Peter Hobson ,
Matthew P. H. Patrick  and
John D. Valentine
R. Peter Hobson*
Affiliation:
Developmental Psychopathology Research Unit, Tavistock Clinic and University College, London
Matthew P. H. Patrick
Affiliation:
Developmental Psychopathology Research Unit, Tavistock Clinic and University College, London
John D. Valentine
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, Surrey
*
Prof R. Peter Hobson. Developmental Psychopathology Research Unit, Adult Department, Tavistock Clinic, 120 Belsize Lane, London NW3 5BA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

There is widespread scepticism concerning the reliability and validity of psychoanalytic judgements of patient–therapist transactions. We predicted that (a) in reviewing the initial part of 14 videotaped assessment interviews with borderline and dysthymic subjects, dynamic psychotherapists would agree in their ratings of psychoanalytically relevant characteristics of subjects' interpersonal relations; (b) inter-correlations among the ratings would conform with those expected from psychoanalytic descriptions of ‘paranoid-schizoid’ and ‘depressive position’ states of mind; and (c) these ratings would differentiate between borderline and dysthymic groups.

Method

Six trained psychotherapists who were blind to the design of the study, independently rated qualities of interpersonal relatedness during the first 30 minutes of each interview, on & 30-item ‘personal relatedness profile’

Results

There was satisfactory interrater reliability in judgements among the raters, and evidence that the items were interrelated. There was also & significant difference between the two subject groups.

Conclusions

It is possible to make reliable psychoanalytic judgements about qualities of interpersonal relatedness. Moreover, there is evidence that paranoid–schizoid and depressive positive aspects of psychological functioning do constitute & meaningful constellation of clinically grounded phenomena.

Type
Papers
Information
The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 173 , Issue 2 , August 1998 , pp. 172 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 The Royal College of Psychiatrists 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Psychiatric Association (1987) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd edn, revised) (DSM–III–R). Washington. DC: APA.Google Scholar
Auden, W. H. (1966) In memory of Sigmund Freud. In Collcted Shorter Poems. 1927–1957, pp. 166–170. London: Faber.Google Scholar
Barber, J. P. & Crits-Christoph, P. (1993) Advances in measures of psychodynamic formulations. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 574–585.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benjamin, L. S. (1974) Structural analysis of social behavior. Psychological Review. 81, 392–425.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. (1985) Decline and Fall of the Freudian Empire. New York: Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
Hartley, D. (1991) Assessing interpersonal behavior patterns using structural analysis of social behavior (SASB). In Person Schemas and Maladaptive Interpersonal Patterns (ed. Horowitz, M. J.), pp. 221–258. Chicago. IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Henry, W. P., Schacht, T. E. & Strupp, H. H. (1986) Structural analysis of social behavior: Application to & study of interpersonal process in differential psychotherapeutic outcome. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 27–31.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M. (1987) States of Mind (2nd edn). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M. (1991) Person Schemas and Maladaptive Interpersonal Patterns. Chicago. IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Klein, M. (1935) & contribution to the psychogenesis of manic-depressive states. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 16, 282–310.Google Scholar
Klein, M. (1946) Notes on some schizoid mechanisms. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 27, 99–110.Google Scholar
Luborsky, L. (1977) Measuring & pervasive psychic structure in psychotherapy: The core conflictual relationship theme. In Communicative Structures and Psychic Structures (eds Freedman, N. & Grand, S. S.), pp. 367–395. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Luborsky, L. & Spence, D. P. (1978) Quantitative research on psychoanalytic therapy. In Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change: An Empirical Analysis (eds Garrield, S. L. & Bergin, A. E.). pp. 331–368. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Luborsky, L., Crits-Cristoph, P. & Mellon, J. (1986) The advent of objective measures of the transference concept. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 54, 39–47.Google Scholar
Luborsky, L., & Crits-Cristoph, P. (1989) A relationship pattern measure: The core conflictual relatbnship theme. Psychiatry, 52, 250–259.Google Scholar
Patrick, M., Hobson, R. P., Castle, D., et al (1994) Personality disorder and the mental representation of early social experience. Development and Psychopathology. 6, 375–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sargent, H. D. (1961) Intrapsychic change: Methodological problems in psychotherapy research. Psychiatry, 24, 93–108.Google ScholarPubMed
Segal, H. (1973) Introduction to the Work of Melanie Klein. The International Psycho-Analytical Library, no. 91 (ed. Khan, M. M. R.). London: Hogarth.Google Scholar
Segal, H. (1979) Klein. Glasgow: Fontana/Coltins.Google Scholar
Westen, D. (1990) Towards & revised theory of borderline object relations: Contributions of empirical research. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 71, 661–693.Google ScholarPubMed
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.