A common ground in clinical discussion groups
Intersubjective resonance and implicit operational theories
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 8973158 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Ricardo Bernardi (Santiago Vázquez 1140, Montevideo, 11300, Uruguay, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2017 |
| Volumen | 98 |
| Número | 5 |
| Páginas | 1291-1309 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2017-03-20 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | The International Journal of Psychoanalysis (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0020-7578 • E-ISSN: 1745-8315 |
| Editorial | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/1745-8315.12633 |
| PMID | 28317133 |
| OpenAlex | W2601981471 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 15 |
| Referencias citadas | 19 |
Clinical discussion groups based on the Three-Level Model for Observing Patient Transformations (3-LM) enable us to reflect on the clinical common ground shared by psychoanalysts who have different theoretical frameworks. The very existence of this common ground is controversial. While analysts such as Wallerstein support it, others, like Green, think it is just a myth. In their 2005 controversy Wallerstein and Green proposed an observation procedure that might clarify this matter. This procedure bears great similarity to the one used by clinical discussion groups that apply the 3-LM. The study of numerous theoretically heterogeneous groups that use this model shows that communication is possible in crucial areas. We may thus conclude that a partial and dynamic common ground exists. At a phenomenological level, certain fragments of material produce a shared resonance that enriches clinical understanding for the whole group. Communication is also possible with regard to the conceptualization of patient changes, although some controversial issues persist at this level. Finally, at the level of theoretical explanations, divergences concerning abstract theories do not prevent a fertile interaction among 'in vivo' personal implicit theories. The latter give rise to the actual operational frameworks underlying participants' approach to clinical problems
Cognitive psychology · Common ground · Conceptualization · Epistemology · Similarity (geometry · Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Mental Health and Psychiatry · Philosophy · Psychology · Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications · Social Psychology
Change across a completed analysis assessed using a modified Three-Level Model
Agreements and differences between psychoanalysts with regard to changes observed during a treatment. A quantitative exploration using the Three-Level Model (3-LM)
The “three-level-model for clinical observation” (3LM) – A supplement to modules in psychoanalytic training? Experiences from the Frankfurt Psychoanalytic Institute
Commentary on Bruce Fink’s “On the value of the Lacanian approach to analytic practice”
Transformation and Interpretation
Clinical Evidence, Triangulation of Perspectives, and Contextualization. Part 2
Clinical Evidence, Triangulation of Perspectives and Contextualization. Part 1
Incommensurability between paradigms, revolutions and common ground in the development of psychoanalysis
Discussion of ‘Ending Analysis
Qualitative multi-centered study
Psychoanalytic identity in vivo
Field theory
Thin-skinned or vulnerable narcissism and thick-skinned or grandiose narcissism
Debates in psychoanalysis
Stance, Set, Transference
The Uses of Argument
Grounding in communication.
The structure of scientific revolutions
The Concepts of Vínculo and Dialectical Spiral
Unconscious phantasy and its conceptualizations
Clinical theory at the border(s)
Towards a better use of psychoanalytic concepts
Transformations in dreaming and characters in the psychoanalytic field
Psychoanalysis
The need for true controversies in psychoanalysis
On becoming a psychoanalyst
What kind of discipline is psychoanalysis
Psychoanalytic controversies
Recent theoretical convergences in psychoanalysis and their epistemological importance
Doublethinking Our Way to “Scientific” Legitimacy
The Social Construction of What
| Obras citantes distintas | 15 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 1,88 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2018 - 2026 (9) |
| Velocidad de citación | current |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 15 |