The authors consider the influence that a sense of geographical and cultural ties of candidates from different regions has on their theoretical interests. They question the way that this is taken into consideration in psychoanalytic training. The function of theory, both in terms of its transmission and the creation of new knowledge, is explored from this perspective. The results of an Internet survey are presented. The candidate sample for this survey (N = 250) was drawn from Europe, Latin America and North America, and candidates were asked to indicate their degree of interest for each of the 55 authors in a given list. The results showed that there were significant differences in the areas of theoretical interest of the candidates depending on the geographical region. Furthermore, what is also significant is how these differences in areas of theoretical interest were linked to those authors who had developed their work in the same geographical region as the candidates. These differences are shown to be connected to the candidates' sense of regional belonging. Data are also presented about which authors have the greatest impact in a given region, along with the influence values of the authors in relation to each one of the regions. Finally, the candidates' interest in each of the authors is specified in terms of a general mean rank and a regional mean rank, thus showing which authors candidates find most interesting in each of the regions. The study concludes by arguing that the results of the investigation enable us to question how psychoanalytic theory is transmitted, and, more specifically, how it is transmitted within institutions at a regional level. It is also suggested that the means be found to uncover the inconsistencies linked to cultural ties. It is proposed that further research be conducted to look more deeply into how cultural differences play a part in the different theoretical languages in the training of psychoanalysts.
Keywords: candidate, scientific research, psychoanalytic training, international, culture, psychoanalytic theory
Introduction
This investigation3 aims to contribute to psychoanalytic training by showing the different perspectives that candidates have towards this subject. 3In this article, the similarities and differences in relation to the areas of theoretical interest of candidates from certain institutions of the International Psychoanalytical Association (IPA) in Europe and North and South America are explored and described. The influence that local culture has on institutional culture is examined.
What role do cultural and theoretical language differences play in psychoanalytic training?
Psychoanalytical theories are related to authors who have generated ideas about the unconscious, about the suffering caused by a lack of understanding of the unconscious, and about the different paths by which it may be alleviated. Depending on the culture of the institute, the country and the region to which each candidate belongs, IPA institutions propose the inclusion of some authors in psychoanalytic training and the exclusion of others. Various analysts have been interested in investigating the policies which characterize the training programme in psychoanalytic institutions. The results of Calef (1972), a study of responses to a questionnaire distributed to all institutions in existence at that time, have already shown a certain degree of uniformity in studies relating to psychoanalysis, even though the results did suggest different methodologies and philosophies. Wallerstein (1978) gives more weight to these differences in his investigation of how institutions combine the training of competent professionals in practice with the advance of the science of psychoanalysis. Wallerstein's conclusions clearly show the divergence between different institutions: some considered that there was no conflict in the two training objectives, while others suggested that, if, in fact, this conflict existed, there was a preference for psychoanalytic practice. The current relevance of this problem is evident, particularly with respect to educational policy (Auchincloss and Michels, 2003).
There are other questions which further complicate the issue: Does the inclusion of dissimilar theories in psychoanalytic training produce confusion or does this contribute to the observation of clinical facts (Ferrari et al., 2003)? Is the principal objective of training the fostering of learning or is it the identification with the different modes of thinking of the analyst (Target, 2004)? What then is the function of psychoanalytic theory both in terms of its transmission and in the creation of new knowledge?
This last question raises several issues for discussion, both historical and current, which can be stated in the following way:
1) the unconscious function of theory;
2) theoretical pluralism versus the search for common ground;
3) the relationship between theory, its validation and clinical practice; and
4) the underlying influence of cultural ties and the transmission of theory in each institution.
With respect to the first point, the unconscious function of theory has been related to the process of identification with the conceptual model of the analyst or supervisor (Bernardi, 1989; Ferrari et al., 2003). It has also been related to the attainment of the goal of analytical identity seen as an objective of psychoanalytic training. For some, the skills required for this training are equated with important personal qualities (Szecs�dy, 2003; Target, 2004). In addition, research has shown that there are factors in psychoanalytic training which can lead to fervent adhesion to a specific theory, with the risk of this being perceived as all-embracing and above question (Ferrari et al., 2003). Others have discovered that theories tend to offer the analyst a sense of security and order in the face of the uncertainty that the analytical task entails (Almond, 2003; Hamilton, 1996).
On the second point, Wallerstein (1988, 1989, 2005b) refers to the fact that theoretical pluralism is related to the place and the way in which we were trained and in which we live and practise our profession. He proposes a search for common ground and considers that there is a growing tendency to transcend theoretical pluralism and for a convergence at the level of clinical practice towards a unified theory.
In a published controversy with Wallerstein, Green (2005) doubts the existence of common ground and argues that we are heading towards an affirmation of the pluralism of psychoanalytical thought. This presupposes the interchange of different points of view which would justify the various theoretical perspectives. However, this interchange has not yet taken place. Both authors appear to agree that the future of psychoanalysis will be centred around theoretical validation arising from work with clinical material even though they differ in their conception of the process to arrive at this point (Wallerstein, 2005a).
The post-Freudian discussion of the validation of theory and practice, connected to the third point, concerns the degree of autonomy versus epistemological heter-onomy and how this relates to the circularity of the hermeneutic, the therapeutic and the scientific aspects within psychoanalysis (Jim�nez, 2004). In psychoanalytic training, the traditional clinical method has always been considered to be the only source of psychoanalytic knowledge. However, this view has come up against much criticism. One of these criticisms refers to the fact that a standard requirement of any scientific theory is that it be consistent with other concepts which are generally accepted in other disciplines (Strenger, 1991, p. 186). In this sense, the process of validation of psychoanalytical hypotheses requires the search for a wide-ranging theoretical coherence in a context which is distinct from the analytical situation (Bernardi, 2003; Fonagy and Target, 2003; Thom� and K�chele, 1992).
The fourth point, which relates in each institution to the influence of the underlying sense of cultural ties and the transmission of theory, constitutes the central axis of this article. Although the subject of the impact of local culture on the training of psychoanalysis has not been explored to any great extent, one of the possible consequences of this relates to the ability to idealize one's own personal model of the mind, using it as a basis for cultural criticism (Auchincloss and Michels, 2003). How does one differentiate between differences in culture and theoretical perspective? Does psychoanalysis have resources which can contribute to the understanding of these differences and their theoretical and clinical consequences? The understanding of the hierarchy of values relating to the local institutional culture might help to shed light on theoretical ideas. This understanding may be seen as a pivotal point in the interface between two fields of circular discussions: one relating to the local culture and the other to the psychoanalytical institutional culture.
Puget (1995) suggests that the difficulty in recognizing the unconscious aspects of the social bond arises from the fact that it is difficult for analysts to know how to be conscious of their choice of values. These values are included in and contribute to the formation of their own body of ideas, their idols and ideals which give shape to their representations and the type of unconscious agreements and pacts which each individual makes with the group.
Perhaps considering the obvious, namely belonging to a specific institution, to a specific country, to a specific region, may enable us to contribute new meaning to the rationality and the irrationality of the sense of belonging to a specific theory. In addition, it may also be useful to study under what conditions there is an accentuation of the similarities and differences between different groups.
The overall aim of this study is to consider cultural ties in relation to psychoanalytic training, and to question whether the discovery of the mark that sociocultural ties leave on each candidate improves this training. In the study described here, the authors consider the influence of candidates' sense of geographical and cultural ties on their theoretical interests, questioning the way that this is taken into consideration in psychoanalytic training. The function of theory, both in terms of its transmission and the creation of new knowledge is explored from this perspective.
Method
This investigation is exploratory and descriptive in nature and has a qualitative and quantitative focus. It consisted of the creation of a preliminary survey of 40 candidates in three regions, which served as a pilot study. The research project based on this material was presented for discussion at the 7th Training Research Programme of the IPA, August 2001. The feedback was used to produce the final version of the survey, which was self-administered and consisted of 18 closed questions about different topics relating to training. The self-administered survey was translated from Spanish into English, French, Portuguese, German and Italian. Candidates from the three regions assisted in the translation and the revision of the survey, which was posted on the IPSO website (www.ipsocandidates.org). Candidates from some countries helped to check for any problems in accessing this webpage. There was also an alternative survey (in English only) for those who did not manage to access the original survey due to technical difficulties.
Finally, requests and access instructions to complete the survey were sent out by e-mail, including an identification number and password to guarantee that only IPA candidates could access the website. Candidates were also informed that their replies would be sent to an e-mail address which would then forward their completed surveys anonymously to the research team. Survey completion requests were distributed eight times at intervals of approximately 15 days between January and April 2002.
This article examines the responses to a question asking candidates to indicate the degree of personal interest in each of 55 authors in a given list. Authors mentioned in investigations carried out by Hamilton (1996), Leibovich de Duarte et al. (2004), and Roussos (2000) were used as a basis for the construction of the list of 55 authors used in this investigation. Hamilton (1996) lists 20 sources of theoretical influence in psychoanalytical technique with the help of analysts from the UK and USA. Leibovich de Duarte et al. (2004) analyses the degree of influence of 30 authors in Argentine clinical psychotherapy practice. The list of authors drawn from these sources was discussed with IPSO Executive Committee members, and augmented by those authors not already included that the candidate representatives of each region considered significant.
A final alphabetical list (see the appendix) was used to evaluate candidates' degree of interest. This was in contrast to the previous studies, where the investigation centred on theoretical influence on technique and clinical practice. Candidates were asked to respond according to a rating scale which included the following options: not interesting, slightly interesting, quite interesting, very interesting, most interesting. Freud was the only author who was listed differently. Candidates were asked to rate their level of interest according to three levels of evaluation (Hamilton, 1996; Leibovich de Duarte et al., 2004; Roussos 2000), in accordance with the different models of his work: drive theory (designated here as 'Freud'), the topographical model ('Freud T') and the structural model ('Freud M'). One of the authors in the list was eliminated due to a technical error.
The selection of the sample proved to be an obstacle and at the same time a challenge. The size and the characteristics of the total IPA candidate population were not known. Neither IPA nor IPSO currently maintains a database which registers the number of candidates. By means of the IPA administration, letters were sent to the directors of the institutions in the three regions requesting demographic information about the candidates. Only 23 responses were obtained from approximately 156 organizations contacted.
The cooperation of IPSO representatives from the different regions and the help of the American Psychoanalytic Association Affiliate Council, as well as some training institutions, enabled the building of a database of 1,140 candidate e-mails, out of an estimated 4,000 candidates at that time. Of the e-mail addresses obtained, only 902 were deemed valid at the time of sending out the surveys. A total of 256 surveys was received from candidates, four of which were rejected as they were more than 80% incomplete. Due to candidate population identification and localization problems, it was not possible to obtain a random sample. Although this limits the possibility of making inferences about the candidates who responded, it does not call into question the fact that the sample was representative.
Demographic data
The classification of countries into three regions was carried out according to the 2003 IPA Roster: Europe (including Israel), North America and Latin America. The percentage of surveys returned in relation to e-mails sent by region and the characteristics of the candidates are described in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
Results
Characterization of regional candidates by the authors who interest them
In order to determine whether such a characterization was possible, a discriminant analysis was performed. Afifi and Clark (1996) define discriminant analysis as a technique aiming to classify and order data according to two or more groups. Before conducting this analysis, group membership is assumed to be mutually exclusive (no member belongs to more than one group). This technique is of an exploratory and descriptive nature and aims to find a linear combination of variables which enables data to be separated into different groups. This analysis showed that it was possible to discriminate between each region according to the authors who were of interest to the candidates. As can be seen in Figure 1, the candidates of each region are clustered together in different places in the chart. This separation by region is significant.
It can be seen that discriminant function 1 clearly distinguishes North American candidates from those who come from Europe and Latin America. Function 2 discriminates between European candidates and Latin American candidates.
The ability of discriminant analysis to predict by region is clearly shown in Table 3. The total predicted mean of the candidates accurately placed in the appropriate regional group is 89.7%. This separation by region is significant.
The authors that most clearly differentiate each region were determined by means of a discriminant analysis structure matrix. These authors were associated with the corresponding region according to the discriminant correlation value with the relevant axis. This axis also shows the discriminant function in which they were included and the positive score associated with each author. The following authors can be linked with the following regions in accordance with discriminant function 1:
North America: Loewald H; Brenner C; Mitchell S; Schafer R; Ogden TH;
and discriminant function 2:
Latin America: Baranger W; Nasio D; Garma A; Liberman D; Lacan J; Segal H Europe: Green A; Balint M; Kernberg O; Thom� H; K�chele H; Lebovici S; Ferenczi S; Bollas C. (See Table 4.)
Do authors have an impact in those regions where they have developed their work?
The data were reanalysed using the mean rank related to the interest in each author according to candidate region, to give the 'influence value' on candidates in each of the three regions. These data were analysed by means of the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test and the pairwise comparisons of Fligner-Policello, to test for the existence of a significant difference between the groups (see Table 5).
Each author is principally of interest in the country in which he or she has developed his or her work, the exception being European authors who have more influence in Latin America than in Europe.
Which authors have an impact in each region?
The data were reanalysed according to the mean score which showed the candidates' interest in each of the authors, and according to the region of origin of each author, this being the influence values of the authors in each region. These data were analysed by means of the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test and with Fligner-Policello contrast pairs to test for the existence of a significant difference between groups (see Table 6).
In Europe, authors of principal interest are European and North American; Latin American authors are of no interest. In North America, interesting authors are perceived to be North American and European and, in very few instances, Latin Americans. In Latin America, interest is about the same in Latin American and European authors; there is significantly less interest in North American authors.
What is the regional and overall interest of candidates in each author?
The overall and regional mean ranks relating to the degree of candidates' interest in each author were calculated. The results, together with the countries in which authors produced most of their work, are shown in Table 7. It is notable that Winnicott has the highest overall mean, indicating the greatest candidate interest.
Who are the 10 authors of greatest interest for candidates in each of the three regions?
The mean ranks of the 10 authors of greatest candidate interest were calculated for each of the three regions (see Table 8). The 10 authors of greatest interest to European candidates also possess a high mean rank, indicating a high degree of candidate interest in other regions. However, authors who have a mean rank reflecting a high degree of interest only in the region where they produced most of their work, e.g. Schafer in North America and Baranger W in Latin America, are of lesser interest in other regions.
Discussion and conclusions
The results of our analysis show significant differences in terms of the theoretical interests of the candidates from each region. Another significant difference is the degree to which candidates from each region are interested in those authors who have developed and produced most of their work in the same region as the candidate. These differences demonstrate links between the sense of regional belonging of each candidate and the degree to which sociocultural ties leave a mark on candidates' training. The data enable us to question the way in which theory is transmitted in psychoanalytical institutions in different regions, and the inconsistencies in this transmission which are linked to cultural ties. They also enable us to question the objectives of training, as mentioned by Wallerstein (1978), with respect to both the training of competent professionals in psychoanalytical practice and/or the generation of new knowledge.
What then is the function of theory both in terms of its transmission and in the generation of new knowledge? In what way do cultural ties impinge on training and contribute to the problems mentioned in the introduction to this article?
In relation to the unconscious function of theory, Hinshelwood (2004) explores the need to recognize the identity and the ideal of the group so that an element of reflection can be incorporated into the goals which implicitly motivate both trainers and candidates. The results presented here concur with Hinshelwood, given that it is possible to discriminate between each region in terms of the authors who are of interest to the candidates.
Berenstein (1998) suggests that education is one of the methods that a given society employs to establish subjectivity and to produce the people that it requires. These subjects may later transmit their values and way of being to their successors, among others. This, in turn, leads us to the problem of education and formation, and 'de-formation' in training.
Hinshelwood (2004) proposes considering a training programme whose ideas are detached from the loyalties laid down by the institution to which one belongs. New communications technology could possibly play a part by enabling training through access and exposure to authors from different regions, thus fostering a questioning approach to the candidate's own theories. Would this be a threat to the hegemony and the loyalties of each institution or a way of opening the door to the exploration of the inconsistencies found in training, leading to its improvement?
The results indicating those authors of greatest interest in each of the three regions enable us to question whether theoretical pluralism or the search for common ground is something which can be taken into consideration during training, given that the reading material which interests candidates in each region could reflect their viewpoint on this issue. For example, it is clear that Latin American candidates are significantly less interested in North American authors, which makes it less likely that they will appreciate the search for a common ground perspective, and more likely that they will have a perspective on pluralism.
The relationship between theory, validation and practice shows very diverse approaches which are at odds with each other. Garza-Guerrero (2004) considers that clinical practice based on inductive arguments is partially responsible for the lack of new knowledge and for the proliferation of theories. Garza-Guerrero's view is that the future of psychoanalysis is linked to its evolution as a science and as a clinical discipline. Conversely, Laufer considers that 'we have to make a stand against becoming intimidated by the demand to be scientific' (2004, p. 17). There are few institutions which offer the option of research conducted with methodological rigour, yet it is nevertheless noteworthy that candidates are interested in authors such as Fonagy (overall mean 3.12) among others, who have contributed in the generation of alternative approaches in psychoanalytic training.
The influence of local culture on training is clearly shown by our findings, at least in relation to candidates' theoretical interests. The value hierarchies that are assigned to different authors in different regions demonstrate some inconsistencies relating to a candidate's place of training. How should we interpret the fact that some authors are of great interest to candidates in one region but are practically ignored in another?
Bernardi (1989) suggests that there would appear to be neither logical compatibility nor semantic congruence between psychoanalytic paradigms. The weight of the problem, from his perspective, is not centred on the fact that each theory may make a contribution to psychoanalytic knowledge, but rather that it may prove to be restrictive. Might it be of help when discussing ideas to understand the restrictions imposed not only by a given theory but also by one's own institutional culture? How is it possible to discuss similarities and differences suggested by Latin American authors in their various papers if the interest in reading these papers in other regions is practically non-existent? Could it be that few of these papers have been translated? If this is the case, could this be linked to power relationships which lie outside the realm of theory and which are linked to Latin American culture and the way that others view this culture?
Why are North American authors of less interest in Latin America? Although some North American authors are seen as interesting, the question still remains valid. The explanation mentioned above relating to translation does not seem appropriate, given that Latin American candidates are interested principally and in equal measure in Latin American and European authors. It may be that socio-historical reasons account for the way in which Latin America perceives other regions. In the words of Vezzetti and Valladares, 'in Buenos Aires, psychoanalysis represents firstly and above all Europe' (quoted in Roudinesco, 2004, p. 193).
Could it be that an examination of institutional and historical policies in relation to regional differences will help us to come up with other ways of dealing with these differences?
Campbell (2005) describes the current debate, suggesting that the IPA's objective is to produce a set of standards and procedures which continue to offer a central coherent nucleus which gives meaning to the identity of the psychoanalyst they train, but which also allows a certain degree of regional and philosophical flexibility. Does this mean that we should consider regional differences in conjunction with the implications of local cultural ties?
Furthermore, would being aware of the mark that a sense of belonging leaves contribute to the development of theoretical knowledge?
We emphasize the words of Puget and Ka�s: 'It is not easy to recognize the place which cultural and sociopolitical dimensions occupy in psychoanalytic theory and practice' (1991, p. 9). However, in the light of the results of this investigation, it is indispensable that an effort be made to recognize this place for the future of psychoanalytic training.
Acknowledgement. We would like to express our thanks to: the candidates from the three regions whose help made it possible to carry out this investigation; CyberPsyche.org who provided the technical support to develop the survey; and the IPA general administrator, Piers Pendred, who provided candidate number data.
Translations of summary
Autoren, die Einfluss auf die Kandidatenausbildung aus�ben: kulturelle Unterschiede und Theoriesprachen. Die Autoren untersuchen den Einfluss, den die Wahrnehmung geographischer und kultureller Bindungen auf die theoretischen Interessen von Kandidaten aus unterschiedlichen Regionen aus�bt. Die Funktion der Theorie wird im Hinblick sowohl auf ihre Transmission als auch mit Blick auf die Erzeugung neuen Wissens unter dieser Perspektive erforscht. Vorgestellt werden zudem die Ergebnisse einer Internet-Umfrage. Das Sample dieser Umfrage (n = 250) bestand aus Kandidaten aus Europa, Lateinamerika und Nordamerika. Die Kandidaten wurden gebeten, den Grad ihres Interesses an jedem der 55 Autoren, die in einer vorgegebenen Liste aufgef�hrt waren, anzugeben. Die Ergebnisse verwiesen auf signifikante Unterschiede in den theoretischen Interessensbereichen der Kandidaten je nach geographischer Region. Signifikant war dar�ber hinaus, wie diese Unterschiede in den Gebieten des theoretischen Interesses mit jenen Autoren zusammenhingen, die ihr Werk in der Region der befragten Kandidaten entwickelt hatten. Es wird gezeigt, dass diese Unterschiede mit der Wahrnehmung der geographischen Zugeh�rigkeit der Kandidaten zusammenhingen. Au�erdem werden Daten pr�sentiert, die zeigen, welche Autoren in jeder der Regionen den gr��ten Einfluss aus�ben und wie es um die relativen Einfl�sse der Autoren in den einzelnen Regionen bestellt ist. Sodann wird das Interesse der Kandidaten an den einzelnen Autoren in Form eines allgemeinen und eines regionalen Durchschnittsranking spezifiziert. Auf diese Weise wird deutlich, welche Autoren die Kandidaten in jeder der Regionen am interessantesten finden. Abschlie�end wird die These vertreten, dass die Ergebnisse der Untersuchung Aufschluss dar�ber geben, wie psychoanalytische Theorie transmittiert wird und wie sie - spezifischer - auf regionaler Ebene innerhalb der Institutionen vermittelt wird. Es wird auch argumentiert, dass die Durchschnittwerte die mit kulturellen Bindungen zusammen-h�ngenden Inkonsistenzen aufdecken. Weitere Forschungen sind w�nschenswert, um gr�ndlicher zu untersuchen, welche Rolle kulturelle Unterschiede f�r die verschiedenen theoretischen Sprachen in der Ausbildung von Psychoanalytikern spielen.
Autores que impactan en la formaci�n de los candidatos: diferencias culturales y lenguajes te�ricos. Las autoras plantean la incidencia que los v�nculos geogr�ficos y culturales de los candidatos procedentes de diferentes regiones tienen sobre sus intereses te�ricos. Asimismo valoran la manera en que dicha influencia es considerada en la formaci�n psicoanal�tica. Desde esta perspectiva se explora la funci�n de la teor�a, tanto en t�rminos de su transmisi�n como en cuanto producci�n de nuevos conocimientos. Se presentan resultados de una encuesta realizada a trav�s de Internet. La muestra de candidatos de esta encuesta (N = 250) fue tomada de Europa, Am�rica Latina y Norteam�rica, y a los candidatos se les pidi� que indicaran su grado de inter�s respecto a cada uno de los 55 autores de una lista determinada. Los resultados demuestran diferencias significativas entre los intereses te�ricos de los candidatos seg�n la regi�n geogr�fica. M�s a�n, es significativa tambi�n la diferencia de inter�s hacia los autores que han desarrollado su obra en la misma regi�n de los candidatos. Se demuestra que estas diferencias est�n ligadas al sentimiento de pertenencia regional del candidato. Tambi�n se aportan datos acerca de qu� autores tienen mayor impacto en cada regi�n, junto con los valores de influencia de los autores en relaci�n a cada una de las regiones. Por �ltimo se especifica, a trav�s de la media general y por regiones, el inter�s de los candidatos en cada uno de los autores, as� como los autores de mayor inter�s en cada una de las regiones. El estudio concluye argumentando que los resultados de la investigaci�n permiten cuestionar la manera en que se viene transmitiendo la teor�a psicoanal�tica, y, m�s espec�ficamente, c�mo es transmitida en las instituciones a nivel regional. Tambi�n se sugiere buscar los medios para poner al descubierto las inconsistencias relacionadas con los v�nculos culturales. Se propone adem�s investigar m�s profundamente de qu� manera las diferencias culturales inciden en los diferentes lenguajes te�ricos en la formaci�n de los psicoanalistas.
Les auteurs qui ont une influence sur la formation des candidats : diff�rences culturelles et langages th�oriques. Les auteurs examinent l'influence du sens des liens g�ographiques et culturels de candidats de diff�rentes r�gions sur leurs int�r�ts th�oriques. Ils interrogent la fa�on dont cet �l�ment est pris en consid�ration dans la formation analytique. La fonction de la th�orie, aussi bien en termes de transmission que de cr�ation de nouvelles connaissances, est explor�e de ce point de vue. Les r�sultats d'une enqu�te par l'internet sont pr�sent�s. L'�chantillon de candidats pour cette enqu�te (N=250) est issu d'Europe, d'Am�rique du Nord et Latine, et les candidats devaient indiquer leur degr� d'int�r�t pour chacun des 55 auteurs d'une liste pr�-�tablie. Les r�sultats ont montr� qu'il y a des diff�rences significatives entre aires d'int�r�t th�orique qui d�pendaient de la r�gion g�ographique des candidats. De plus, ce qui est �galement significatif est que ces diff�rences d'aire d'int�r�t th�orique �taient reli�es � ces auteurs qui avaient d�velopp� leur oeuvre dans la m�me r�gion g�ographique que les candidats. Ces diff�rences se trouvent connect�es au sens d'appartenance r�gionale des candidats. Les auteurs pr�sentent �galement des donn�es concernant les auteurs ont le plus grand impact dans une r�gion donn�e, en parall�le avec les valeurs d'influence des auteurs en relation avec chacune des r�gions. Finalement, l'int�r�t des candidats pour chacun des auteurs est sp�cifi� en termes de rang moyen g�n�ral et de rang moyen r�gional, montrant ainsi quels sont les auteurs que les candidats trouvent plus int�ressants dans chacune de ces r�gions. L'�tude conclut en soulignant que les r�sultats de cette investigation nous autorisent � questionner comment la th�orie psychanalytique est transmise et, plus sp�cialement, comment elle est transmise � travers les institutions � un niveau r�gional. Les auteurs sugg�rent aussi des moyens pour rep�rer des incoh�rences li�es � des attaches culturelles. Une recherche ult�rieure est propos�e, afin d'examiner de fa�on plus approfondie comment les diff�rences culturelles jouent un r�le dans les diff�rents langages th�oriques au cours de la formation des psychanalystes.
Autori che hanno un impatto sulla formazione dei candidati. Differenze culturali e linguaggio teorico. Gli autori discutono dell'influenza dei legami geografici e culturali dei candidati di diverse regioni sui propri interessi teorici e valutano in maniera critica come tali vengano presi in considerazione nella formazione analitica. Viene analizzata da questo punto di vista la funzione della teoria, sia il modo in cui essa viene trasmessa e sia il modo in cui si creano nuove conoscenze. Vengono presentati i risultati di un sondaggio condotto su Internet su un campione di candidati (N = 250) dall'Europa, dall'America Latina e dal Nord America. Ai candidati � stato chiesto di indicare il proprio grado d'interesse per ognuno dei 55 autori su una data lista. I risultati hanno dimostrato che esistono differenze significative nelle aree d'interesse teorico dei candidati a seconda della regione geografica. Inoltre, ci� che � significativo � come sono legate queste differenze nelle aree d'interesse teorico a quelle degli autori che avevano sviluppato il proprio lavoro nella stessa regione geografica dei candidati. Queste differenze sono legate al senso di appartenenza regionale dei candidati. Vengono inoltre presentati dei dati sull'impatto degli autori in una data regione insieme con quelli relativi alla loro influenza in ognuna di queste regioni. Infine, l'interesse dei candidati per ognuno degli autori � specificato con un punteggio medio generale ed un punteggio medio regionale, mostrando cos� quali autori vengono ritenuti pi� interessanti in ogni regione. Grazie ai risultati del presente studio, � possibile aprire un dibattito su come viene trasmessa la teoria psicoanalitica e, in maniera pi� specifica, come essa viene trasmessa all'interno delle istituzioni al livello regionale. Si raccomanda inoltre di trovare i mezzi per rilevare le incoerenze legate ai legami culturali. Si suggerisce inoltre di guardare in maniera pi� approfondita a come tali differenze culturali svolgano un ruolo nei diversi linguaggi teorici nella formazione degli psicoanalisti.
[Reference]
References
Afifi AA, Clark D (1996). Computer-aided multivariate analysis, 3rd edn. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall. 455 p. (Texts in statistical science series.)
Almond R (2003). The holding function of theory. J Am Psychoanal Assoc 51:131-53.
Auchincloss E, Michels R (2003). A reassessment of psychoanalytic education: Controversies and changes. Int J Psychoanal 84:387-403.
Berenstein I (1998). Education as a social and institutional means for producing persons. Paper presented at: Inter-regional Conferences IPA, Vienna, Nov 6.
Bernardi RE (1989). The role of paradigmatic determinants in psychoanalytic understanding. Int J Psychoanal 70:341-7. [El poder de las teor�as: El papel de los determinantes paradigm�ticos en la comprensi�n psicoanal�tica. Rev Psicoan�l (Buenos Aires) 46:904-29.]
Bernardi R (2003). What kind of evidence makes the analyst change his or her theoretical and technical ideas? In: Leuzinger-Bohleber M, Dreher AU, Canestri J, editors. Pluralism and unity? Methods of research in psychoanalysis, p. 125-36. London: IPA. (International Psychoanalysis Library.)
Calef V (1972). A report of the 4th Pre-Congress on Training, Vienna, 1971, to the 27th International Psychoanalytical Congress. Int J Psychoanal 53:37-44.
Campbell D (2005). The psychoanalytic education debate: Terminable and interminable. Int Psychoanal 14:19-21.
Ferrari H, G�lvez M, Maldonado JL, Moguillansky R, Moreno J, Seiguer G (2003). El papel de las teor�as en la transmisi�n del psicoan�lisis. Psicoan�lisis 25:105-12.
Fonagy P, Target M (2003). Psychoanalytic theories: Perspectives from developmental psychopathology. London: Whurr. 402 p. (Series in psychoanalysis .)
Garza-Guerrero C (2004). Reorganizational and educational demands of psychoanalytic training today: Our long and marasmic night of one century; Response [Psychoanalytic controversies]. Int J Psychoanal 85:3-13;18-26.
Green A (2005). The illusion of common ground and mythical pluralism. Int J Psychoanal 86: 627-32.
Hamilton V (1996). The analyst's preconscious. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press. 352 p.
Hinshelwood RD (2004). Reflections on psychic ownership and psychoanalytic studies. In: Casement A, editor. Who owns psychoanalysis?, p. 41-54. London: Karnac.
Jim�nez JP (2004). Validez y validaci�n del m�todo psicoanal�tico: Alegato sobre la necesidad de pluralismo metodol�gico y pragm�tico en psicoan�lisis. Rev Chil Psicoan�l 21:176-89. [(Internet). Madrid: Aperturas Psicoanal�ticas; �2004 [cited 2007 Jan 3]. Available from: http://www.aperturas.org/18jpjimenez.html.]
Laufer E (2004). Rejoinder: With reference also to Garza-Guerrero (2002) [Psychoanalytic controversies]. Int J Psychoanal 85:13-8.
Leibovich de Duarte A, Duhalde C, Huer�n V, Roussos A, Rutsztein G, Torricelli F (2004). Autores que influyen en la pr�ctica cl�nica de psicoterapeutas cognitivos y psicoanalistas con diferentes niveles de experiencia. In: VI Congreso Regional Sudamericano de Investigaci�n en Psicoterapia: Libro de res�menes, No 8. Buenos Aires: South American Chapter of the Society for Psychotherapy Research.
Puget J (1995). Realidad social, familiar y ps�quica. Paper presented at: Asociaci�n Psicoanal�tica Argentina, Buenos Aires, Oct 24.
Puget J, Ka�s R, editors (1991). Violencia de estado y psicoan�lisis. Buenos Aires: Centro Editor de Am�rica Latina. 188 p.
Roudinesco E (2004). The geography of psychoanalysis: Sovereignity, ownership and dispossession. In: Casement A, editor. Who owns psychoanalysis?, p. 177-201. London: Karnac.
Roussos A (2000). La inferencia cl�nica y la elaboraci�n de hip�tesis de trabajo de los psicoterapeutas: Estudio emp�rico mediante el uso de t�cnicas de an�lisis de procesos terap�uticos [Doctoral thesis]. Buenos Aires: Belgrano University. 95 p. [(Internet). Available from: ub.edu.ar/investigaciones/tesis/4_roussos.pdf.]
Strenger C (1991). Between hermeneutics and science: An essay on the epistemology of psychoanalysis. Madison, CT: International UP. 234 p.
Szecs�dy I (2003). To become or be made a psychoanalyst. Scand Psychoanal Rev 26:141- 272.
Target M (2004). How do we evaluate what candidates learn? Paper presented at: Discussion group on curriculum evaluation, 43rd IPA Congress, New Orleans, March, Emde R, moderator.
Thom� H, K�chele H (1992). Psychoanalytic practice, Vol. 1: Principles, Wilson M, translator. New York, NY: Springer. 421 p. [(1989). Teor�a y Pr�ctica del psicoan�lisis, Vol. 1: Fundamentos, Bluhm-Jim�nez G, Jim�nez de Jara JP, translators. Barcelona: Herder.]
Wallerstein R (1978). Perspectives on psychoanalytic training around the world. Int J Psychoanal 59:477-503.
Wallerstein R (1988). One psychoanalysis or many? Int J Psychoanal 69:5-21.
Wallerstein R (1989). Followup in psychoanalysis: Clinical and research values. J Am Psychoanal Assoc 37:921-41.
Wallerstein R (2005a). Dialogue or illusion? How do we go from here? Response to Andr� Green. Int J Psychoanal 86:633-8.
Wallerstein R (2005b). Will psychoanalytic pluralism be an enduring state of our discipline? Int J Psychoanal 86:623-6.
[Author Affiliation]
aANDREA M. RODR�GUEZ QUIROGA DE PEREIRA,2 bM. RITA RAGAU, cLAURA V. BORENSZTEIN DE WEINSTEIN and dSILVIA G. JADUR
aBerm�dez 306, La Lucila, 1636 Buenos Aires, Argentina - apereira@fibertel.com.ar
bO'Higgins 1665, 1�B, 1426 Buenos Aires, Argentina - ragaurit@fibertel.com.ar
cFray Justo Sta, Mar�a de Oro 2779, 10 B, 1425 Buenos Aires, Argentina - lauraweinstein@fibertel.com.ar
dSanta-Rosa 4952, 1414 Buenos Aires, Argentina - silviajadur@hotmail.com
(Final version accepted 12 October 2006)
2 Corresponding author.
No comments:
Post a Comment