Can Analysts Agree? The Problems of Consensus and the Psychoanalytic Mannequin: I. A Proposed Solution

Abstract

Psychoanalysis, plagued by lack of demonstrable consensus on clinical formulations, is as much endangered by overinflated agreement from stereotypical dynamic formulas: tests of psychoanalytic hypotheses derived from any such formulations may therefore rest on questionable foundations. The problems that give rise to artifactual overagreement or failure to reach agreement are here traced in earlier empirical psychoanalytic research. Review reveals that although new and inventive empirical strategies (applied in the last two decades) achieve adequate success in the area of agreement, they demonstrate little headway in ruling out that stereotypy may underlie such consensus. The present investigation offers a solution for testing agreement in complex clinical psychoanalytic propositions, in a way that sets up a “test of the mannequin”: that is, whether stereotypical assumptions about the patient's dynamics are overridden (revised) by the specific character of a given patient's narrative. The mannequin concept introduces a new and epistemically crucial consideration in the making of psychodynamic formulations and is relevant to both empirically controlled and clinical contexts of observation and formulation. No psychoanalytic paradigm, whether classically ego-psychological, self-psychological, control-mastery, or object-relational, escapes this problem.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bellak, L. & Smith, B. (1956). An experimental exploration of the psychoanalytic process. Psychoanal. Q., 25:385–414.

Caston, J. (1980). Manual on how to diagnose the plan. Bull. Zion Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 4:31–55.

Caston, J. (1986). The reliability of the patient's unconscious plan. In The Psychoanalytic Process: Theory, Clinical Observations, and Empirical Research, ed. J. Weiss & H. Sampson . New York: Guilford Press, pp. 241–256.

Crits-Christoph, P. ; Luborsky, L. ; Dahl, L. ; Popp, C ; Mellon.J. & Mark, D. (1988). Clinicians can agree in assessing relationship patterns in psychotherapy. Arch. Gen. Psychiat., 45:1001–1004.

Dahl, H. (1983). On the definition and measurement of wishes. In Empirical Studies of Psychoanalytical Theories, ed. J. Masling . Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press, pp. 1:39–68.

Dewitt, K. N. ; Kaltreider, N. ; Weiss, D. S. & Horowitz, M. J. (1983). Judging change in psychotherapy. Arch. Gen. Psychiat., 40:1121–1128.

Edelson, M. (1984). Hypothesis and Evidence in Psychoanalysis. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.

Edelson, M. (1988). Psychoanalysis: A Theory in Crisis. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.

Gill, M. M. & Hoffman, I. (1982). A method for studying the analysis of aspects of the patient's experience of the relationship in psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 30:137–167.

10.

Glymour, C. (1974). Freud, Kepler, and the clinical evidence. In Philosophical Essays on Freud, ed. R. Wollheim & J. Hopkins . Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 12–31.

11.

Horowitz, L. M. , Inouye, D. & Siegelman, E. Y. (1979). On averaging judges' ratings to increase their correlation with an external criterion. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol., 47:453–458.

12.

Horowitz Rosenberg, S. E. ; Ureno, G. ; Kalehzan, M. B. & O'Halloran, P. (1989). The psychodynamic formulation, consensual response method, and interpersonal problems. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol., 57:599–606.

13.

Horowitz, M. (1979). States of Mind. New York: Plenum.

14.

Jones, E. (1985). Psychotherapy Process Q-Sort. Unpublished manual, Univ. California, Berkeley.

15.

Jones & Windholz, M. (1990). The psychoanalytic case study: toward a method for systematic inquiry. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 38:985–1015.

16.

Levine, F. & Luborsky, L. (1981). The core conflictual relationship theme method: a demonstration of reliable clinical inferences by the method of mismatched cases. In Object and Self: A Developmental Approach, ed. S. Tuttman , C. Kaye & M . Simmerman. New York: Int. Univ. Press, pp. 501–526.

17.

Luborsky, L. (1977). Measuring a pervasive psychic structure in psychotherapy: the core conflictual relationship theme. In Communicative Structures and Psychic Structures, ed. N. Freedman & S. Grand . New York: Plenum, pp. 501–526.

18.

Peterfreund, E. (1983). The Process of Psychoanalytic Therapy: Models and Strategies. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.

19.

Seitz, P. (1966). The consensus problem in psychoanalytic research. In Methods of Research in Psychotherapy, ed. L. A. Gottschalk & A. H. Auerbach . New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, pp. 209–225.

20.

Strupp, H. H. , Chassan, J. B. & Ewing.J. A. (1966). Toward the longitudinal study of the psychotherapeutic process. In Methods of Research in Psychotherapy, ed. L. A. Gottschalk & A. H. Auerbach . New York: Appleton Century-Crofts, pp. 361–400.

21.

Wallerstein, R. S. (1986). Psychoanalysts as a science: a response to the new challenges. Psychoanal. Q., 55:414–451.

22.

Weiss, J. , Sampson, H. & Mt. Zion Psychotherapy Group (1986). The Psychoanalytic Process: Theory, Clinical Observations, and Empirical Research. New York: Guilford Press.