精神分析与评估:一个注重个案独特性的分层模型

G. Visentini, A. Blanc, L. Laufer
{"title":"精神分析与评估:一个注重个案独特性的分层模型","authors":"G. Visentini, A. Blanc, L. Laufer","doi":"10.1080/01062301.2019.1692621","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objectives: This article addresses the methodological controversies surrounding the issue of how to evaluate the psychotherapies. It proposes to identify the principles of an integrative and stratified model in order to report the results of analytical therapy (its efficacy) based on the very effectiveness of its processes. Thus, the uniqueness of the case is put at the center of the evaluation setting. Methods: Drawing on science studies, the authors engage in a reflexive exercise on the problem of psychoanalysis’ evaluation based on methodological questions raised in the field over time and current issues related to practice. Results: First, the regularly asserted opposition between the norms of analytical practice and those governing standard evaluation procedures is reinterpreted as the effect of a lack of intermediate epistemic patterns. Second, the fundamental principles of an integrative model are considered so as to translate and articulate a set of heterogeneous requirements into distinct strata. Discussion: Since psychoanalysis is fundamentally a case-by-case practice characterized by inequivalence and unexpectedness, its utmost aim is to use a type of effectiveness based on the singularity of the case. However, this does not prevent it from being evaluable provided that the epistemic levels of the evaluation are clearly differentiated.","PeriodicalId":346715,"journal":{"name":"The Scandinavian Psychoanalytic Review","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychoanalysis and evaluation: a stratified model focused on the uniqueness of the case\",\"authors\":\"G. Visentini, A. Blanc, L. Laufer\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01062301.2019.1692621\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Objectives: This article addresses the methodological controversies surrounding the issue of how to evaluate the psychotherapies. It proposes to identify the principles of an integrative and stratified model in order to report the results of analytical therapy (its efficacy) based on the very effectiveness of its processes. Thus, the uniqueness of the case is put at the center of the evaluation setting. Methods: Drawing on science studies, the authors engage in a reflexive exercise on the problem of psychoanalysis’ evaluation based on methodological questions raised in the field over time and current issues related to practice. Results: First, the regularly asserted opposition between the norms of analytical practice and those governing standard evaluation procedures is reinterpreted as the effect of a lack of intermediate epistemic patterns. Second, the fundamental principles of an integrative model are considered so as to translate and articulate a set of heterogeneous requirements into distinct strata. Discussion: Since psychoanalysis is fundamentally a case-by-case practice characterized by inequivalence and unexpectedness, its utmost aim is to use a type of effectiveness based on the singularity of the case. However, this does not prevent it from being evaluable provided that the epistemic levels of the evaluation are clearly differentiated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":346715,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Scandinavian Psychoanalytic Review\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Scandinavian Psychoanalytic Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01062301.2019.1692621\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Scandinavian Psychoanalytic Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01062301.2019.1692621","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要目的:本文探讨了围绕如何评价心理治疗的方法论争议。它建议确定一个综合和分层模型的原则,以便根据其过程的有效性报告分析治疗的结果(其功效)。因此,案例的唯一性被置于评价设置的中心。方法:在科学研究的基础上,作者对精神分析评估问题进行了反思性练习,该问题基于该领域长期以来提出的方法学问题和当前与实践相关的问题。结果:首先,分析实践规范和管理标准评估程序之间经常断言的对立被重新解释为缺乏中间认知模式的影响。其次,考虑一个综合模型的基本原则,以便将一组异质需求转换和表达到不同的层次。讨论:由于精神分析基本上是一种以不平等和不可预测为特征的个案实践,它的最大目标是使用一种基于个案独特性的有效性。然而,这并不妨碍它是可评估的,只要评估的认识水平是明确区分的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Psychoanalysis and evaluation: a stratified model focused on the uniqueness of the case
ABSTRACT Objectives: This article addresses the methodological controversies surrounding the issue of how to evaluate the psychotherapies. It proposes to identify the principles of an integrative and stratified model in order to report the results of analytical therapy (its efficacy) based on the very effectiveness of its processes. Thus, the uniqueness of the case is put at the center of the evaluation setting. Methods: Drawing on science studies, the authors engage in a reflexive exercise on the problem of psychoanalysis’ evaluation based on methodological questions raised in the field over time and current issues related to practice. Results: First, the regularly asserted opposition between the norms of analytical practice and those governing standard evaluation procedures is reinterpreted as the effect of a lack of intermediate epistemic patterns. Second, the fundamental principles of an integrative model are considered so as to translate and articulate a set of heterogeneous requirements into distinct strata. Discussion: Since psychoanalysis is fundamentally a case-by-case practice characterized by inequivalence and unexpectedness, its utmost aim is to use a type of effectiveness based on the singularity of the case. However, this does not prevent it from being evaluable provided that the epistemic levels of the evaluation are clearly differentiated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信