F0*02(#!(#0!6B%:270!):!(#0!(#0%210B($7!$*(0%27($)*?!"#0! 1647#)2*2<4($7!90(#)&!$*!9)&0%*!&%066!
L%00&92*_!a>_!A26M4_!5>_!G!HB%Y$7#_!@>![+,,P^>!!"Z)!12(#Z246!()Z2%&6!M*)Z$*D!1647#)2*2<4($7!1%)7066>!;*!@>! A0BC$*D0%EF)#<030%_!=>R>!O%0#0%!G!i>!82*06(%$!['&6>^! 'B>#@B)($&@+*&S+),Aq&Z%,-"*(&"!&3%(%@#?-&)+& '(A?-"@+@BA()(O&p 11>!+,dE++^>!A)*&)*?!;*(0%*2($)*2!G!@26M$(_!F>![+,,d^!F0*02(#!(#0!6B%:270!):!(#0!(#0%210B($7!$*(0%27($)*q!"#0!1647#)2*2<4($7!90(#)&!$*! 9)&0%*!&%066>! N">#+@B&"!&,-%&/$%#)?@+&'(A?-"@+@BA,)?&/(("?)@,)"+O&JJO& -P..E-P\d> && , pp. 207 - >-001(3! The study introduces a multi-perspective approach to the data of the analytic situation, including impressions of the treating analyst, ratings of complete sessions by clinical judges using psychoanalytic criteria, and objective linguistic measures. Our basic hypothesis is that successful analytic treatment involves repeated instances of the referential process, which includes Arousal of an emotional experience in the session, a Symbolizing phase involving vivid narratives or descriptions and a phase of Reflection, in which new emotional meanings may be found. Computerized measures of the referential process were applied to 16 recorded and transcribed psychoanalytic sessions of the third year of an analysis of a female patient with a female analyst. The clinical evaluations represent the impressions of the treating analyst and those of analysts who listened to the tapes or read the transcripts. The ratings were based on qualities referred to by the abstract terms 'A' and 'Z' (Freedman, Lasky & Hurvich, 2003):‘A’ qualities are generally associated with productivity; Z qualities with disorganization. The 16 sessions were run through the DAAP program using Referential Process measures including the Weighted Referential Activity dictionary (WRAD), Refection (REF) and Disfluency (DF) dictionaries, several dictionaries representing categories of affect and sensory and somatic experience, and several derivative DAAP measures including covariations between pairs of variables. (See Measures of the Referential Process, ODR this edition for details of procedures.) Significant correlations with the difference score ‘A – Z’ were found in the expected direction, for several measures of patient speech, including Mean WRAD (r = .538, p < .05) and both the REF/WRAD (r = - .698, p < .01) and DF/REF (r = .523, p < .05) covariations. Results were also found for analyst speech and for the relation between analyst impressions and session language. @)15-1.*$#! The claim of this approach is that process research including multiple perspectives has the potential to unite the values of empirical research with a modern version of the psychoanalytic method. The results suggest that computerized referential process measures can be used on session transcripts to gain an overall sense of the productivity of the session. However the study covers only part of a year of a single analysis, so the results, while promising must be considered preliminary. Several studies involving other cases and different sampling procedures are under way applying this approach to other treatments and including outcome assessment. G$#.1/.\!
wbucci@optonline.net
4'20&&;443&&32D.2E&&F&&19.3;&&2;.1.40&&GHIJ&&F& PLN
Made with FlippingBook HTML5