Dear Colleagues, I am a recently graduated M.A. student in clinical psychology at Columbia University and independently working on a project on meta-analysis of the relationship between transference interpretation and outcome in psychodynamic psychotherapy, with my two colleagues (at University of Texas at Austin, U.S.A and at Middle East Technical University, Turkey).
We are currently on a the phase of literature search and aiming at including unpublished works such as preprints, manuscripts, doctoral thesis, data collected but not yet published. In case you have such work, we will be waiting for your contribution!
The only criteria is the inclusion of patients with mental disorders except psychosis and pervasive developmental disorder, adolescents (older than 16 years old ) and adults, who have undergone a treatment that has a theoretical orientation of psychodynamic or psychoanalytic theory (e.g., Supportive-Explorative Therapy, Transference-Focused Psychotherapy, Alliance-Fostering Therapy).
Your contribution to our meta-analysis will be highly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Meltem Yilmaz
Best wishes on such a pertinent topic. I offer my clinical observations upon my 5 decades as a clinician.
The vast majority of clinicians like myself use a variety of approaches individualized for each patient/client.
Based on two large meta analyses on efficacy, we find that the working therapeutic alliance to predict 85% efficacy across many presenting issues.
Just search for psychotherapy efficacy for the citations.
Rich
Meltem Yilmaz - I have a very large literature on this, which I could make available. It is focussed, in the main, on the Continental literature - the German, French and Dutch debates since WWII. (Both at the theory level and the clinical level.) 100 pages, probably a lot more, under about 20 headings. It was once the basis for working through the relationship between critical theory (in the sense of the Frankfurt School) and psychoanalysis - from the practical side of things, i.e. from the perspective of the trauma literature and trauma therapy. (To the extent that the word 'therapy' is justified here.) I'm aware that if one puts it in the way that I have just done it sounds 'theoretical' rather than 'empirical' or 'evidence-based', as the psychologists and the medics like it, but that is not how this literature came into existence. This 'theory'/'evidence based therapy' opposition is itself a bone of contention, as you'll know, right through to the present.
It is a very large and very disparate topic that you have embarked on there ...
In my recent paper “PSYCHOANALYSIS AND PSYCHOANALYTIC PSYCHOTHERAPY IN UKRAINE DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC UNFOLDING: THE RESULTS OF PRACTITIONERS’ SURVEY” there is a finding on the relationship between the attention to the transference changing and certification status of psychoanalytic psychotherapists.
Thank you so much for your detailed answers. We will search and read all your recommendations.
What I have is a large data-base that was put together during the eighties and nineties, covering all aspects of the Psychoanalysis/psychology/therapy relationship, meaning that it covers the intense controversies of the time from both the theory side (which would result in the victory of the DSM ‘evidence-based medicine’ direction over the psychoanalysts), as well as the entire trauma literature from the clinical/practical/therapeutic side of things. At the moment it’s a PROCITE data-base, but it can be converted to other formats.
HEADINGS:
Psychoanalyses in general: 9530 items.
Literature put together as a result of a seminar at the Sigmund Freud Institut in Frankfurt: 566 items.
Freud - primary literature: 503 items.
ICODO*: 12876 items.
Psychoanalysis and Critical Theory: 7176 items.
Psychoanalysis and the Death Drive: 512 items.
Psychoanalysis - the Freud-Bashers: 32 items.
Psychoanalysis - the Freud/Moses debates: 25 items.
Psychoanalysis and history: 13 items.
Psychoanalysis and the sociology of the family: 18 items.
Psychoanalysis and Narcissism: 87 items.
Psychoanalysis in the Benelux coutries: 23 items.
Psychoanalysis and the ‘New Psychiatry’: 190 items.
Psychoanalysis and the Oedipus complex: 64 items.
Psychoanalysis and Philosophy: 84 items.
Psychoanalysis and Postmodernism: 2 items.
Psychoanalysis and its Rogue Gallery (Psychiatry during the Nazi period): 33 items.
Psychoanalysis and symbolism: 7 items.
Traumatisation and Identity: 440 items.
Traumatisation/Identity and the ‘Second Generation’: 1143 items.
The intergenerational transmission of trauma: 36 items
(I mention all this here, in this discussion, on the off-chance that anyone has any idea of how to make this data-base accessible online.)
[* ICODO stands for "Informatie- en Coödinatieorgaan Dienstverlening Oorlogsgetroffenen". ("Information and Co-ordination Body for Services to War Victims") http://www.oorlogsgetroffenen.nl/ This is the Dutch specialist institute set up during the sixties to examine the health consequences of the German occupation of The Netherlands - it was the consultative agency for the Dutch restitution legislation. (At the time this was one of the leading agencies in the world.) This is the bibliography from their library.]
Meltem Yilmaz - I do ponder this phrase of yours: "... meta-analysis of the relationship between transference interpretation and outcome in psychodynamic psychotherapy ..."
'Meta-analysis' suggests the kind of large-scale survey of the literature that has as goal the clarification of something. The word 'transference' stands in a particular epistemological tradition, that of psychoanalysis - that of 'outcome' (as in 'outcome studies') in a very different one. In my experience a project like this can come to grief simply because it is not realised from the outset that these underlying epistemological issues ('paradigm assumptions' - in the old Kuhn terminology) need to be dealt with in their own right. It's a controversy, and it's been ongoing for more than a century. Empiricism is one thing - hermeneutics something else. It's not an easy opposition to deal with, and if the initial assumption is: 'transference' and 'outcome' just stands for two different methods, all we have to do is compare them, then this is not going to go anywhere ...
Meltem Yilmaz - From the lack of response to my question, I get the impression that you are not aware that the scientific methodology presuppositions going into the DSM are quite different from the ones going into psychoanalysis. The term ‘meta-analysis’ comes from the mainstream natural science approach to everything, including research into psychology and the ‘within’ of things, i.e. into human subjectivity. The term ‘transference’ references an entirely different - i.e. an explicitly hermeneutic approach - to the question of human subjectivity. The point I was trying to draw your attention to still stands: if you are not aware of the history of your own field, then the whole idea of doing a ‘meta-analysis’ of outcome studies will be based on a simple terminological confusion. A bit of circular logic. It will lack all scientific credibility.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Higher Education
- Universities