L27$2
! I$%67#_!=>!!G!F%B**#B30%_!Q>![+,,d^>!L27$2! '(A?-":@,-"B"LA _!],_!+\gEP,+ >! The facial affective behaviour informs others of current emotions and evokes responses that shape social interactions, influences relationship satisfaction, and as we assumed, adjustment to traumatic events. H&2*Y#! We videotaped 15 clinical interviews with traumatized patients in comparison to a healthy control group (absence of mental/psychiatric disorder according to ICD-10). :*#'*#Y2! As well as the FM inpatients, the traumatized did not show a reduction of overall facial expression nor a reduced frequency of facial affects in comparison to the healthy controls. The control group, however, showed significantly more “genuine joy”, the traumatized patients significantly more “anger”. We concluded that this indicates the importance of distance regulating interaction patterns of traumatized patients. Within a clinical dyadic patient-therapist setting, anger could lead to an unconscious relationship-pattern “object go away!”. In the countertransference of the therapist anger affects could enhance insufficient empathy, missing exploration of the traumatic event to the point of unconscious aversion of which the therapist has to become aware. G$#.1/.!
Prof. A. Kirsch, University of Heidelberg
4'20&&;443&&32D.2E&&F&&19.3;&&2;.1.40&&GHIJ&&F& PVQ
Made with FlippingBook HTML5