Working on the future of group analysis – scientific exploration of efficacy, concepts, and neurobiological connections

Danilo Pešić
{"title":"Working on the future of group analysis – scientific exploration of efficacy, concepts, and neurobiological connections","authors":"Danilo Pešić","doi":"10.1177/05333164241247813","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article addresses the imbalance in research focus, highlighting a pronounced emphasis on research in the American context compared to the field of group analysis, which is underscored by the identification of two literature reviews. The discussion delves into Lorentzen’s research contributions and the introduction of Focus Group Analytic Psychotherapy. Diverse perspectives on research are presented, with Nitsun and Lorentzen advocating for its importance, while Dalal takes a critical stance. The text investigates discrepancies within key concepts of group analysis, specifically the social unconscious, with Nitsun critiquing an undue emphasis on its significance and questioning its practical relevance in group settings. The relationship between group analysis and neuroscience is explored, shedding light on the reinterpretation of certain concepts through a neuroscientific lens, notably examining the framework of the neurobiology of intergroup relations. Ultimately, the article emphasizes the necessity of believing in and validating the advantages of collective thinking.","PeriodicalId":166668,"journal":{"name":"Group Analysis","volume":"74 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05333164241247813","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article addresses the imbalance in research focus, highlighting a pronounced emphasis on research in the American context compared to the field of group analysis, which is underscored by the identification of two literature reviews. The discussion delves into Lorentzen’s research contributions and the introduction of Focus Group Analytic Psychotherapy. Diverse perspectives on research are presented, with Nitsun and Lorentzen advocating for its importance, while Dalal takes a critical stance. The text investigates discrepancies within key concepts of group analysis, specifically the social unconscious, with Nitsun critiquing an undue emphasis on its significance and questioning its practical relevance in group settings. The relationship between group analysis and neuroscience is explored, shedding light on the reinterpretation of certain concepts through a neuroscientific lens, notably examining the framework of the neurobiology of intergroup relations. Ultimately, the article emphasizes the necessity of believing in and validating the advantages of collective thinking.
致力于小组分析的未来--对功效、概念和神经生物学联系的科学探索
本文讨论了研究重点不平衡的问题,强调了与小组分析领域相比,美国背景下的研究明显受到重视,两篇文献综述的确定突出了这一点。讨论深入探讨了洛伦岑的研究贡献以及焦点小组分析心理疗法的引入。文中提出了不同的研究观点,尼特森和洛伦岑主张研究的重要性,而达拉勒则持批判立场。文中探讨了团体分析关键概念的差异,特别是社会无意识,尼特森对过分强调社会无意识的重要性提出了批评,并质疑其在团体环境中的实用性。文章探讨了群体分析与神经科学之间的关系,揭示了通过神经科学视角对某些概念的重新诠释,尤其是对群体间关系神经生物学框架的研究。最后,文章强调了相信和验证集体思维优势的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信