Menu

Blog

 

Category Archives: Uncategorized

7 Reasons Why Psychoanalysis Is Still Relevant Today
Psychoanalysis is still relevant

Psychoanalysis is still relevant because:

  • Psychoanalytic theories and therapies strive to understand the unique phenomenology of a person. In doing so, the meaning and values that give significance to our lives are honored and supported. In our modern era of brain research, a person’s experience of living is sometimes reduced to a discussion of biochemicals and brain structures. Love, happiness, sadness, or misery can be simplistically “explained” by neuropathways, select brain regions, and neurotransmitters. While the remarkable advances of science have allowed researchers to understand how biological systems function during the experience of such emotions, they actually offer descriptions of how they happen, not explanations for these phenomena. By reducing the essence of the human experience (or any living creature’s experience, for that matter) to an objectified mechanistic system, we deny the most salient of human abilities, our imagination! Our capacity to create seemingly limitless ideas and stories has allowed the mind to be emancipated from the constraints of sensory reality. We imagine, invent, create, and transcend beyond the material world toward a world of potentialities.
  • All civilized societies require that persons conform to the standards, rules, and expectations that are necessary to live cooperatively. Our socialization begins at birth and requires that a person learn to adapt to social demands and to internalize those demands as one’s own. The primary task for mental health is to achieve this conformity while preserving one’s personal integrity. This integrity requires us to respect our diversity in many forms, such as ethnic, religious, sexual, etc., while balancing our needs for social connection and acceptance.Psychoanalytic therapies have kept theseexistential considerations central to the mission of advancing human understanding and promoting personal growth.
  • As today’s technology has allowed us nearly immediate gratification for many of our needs, such convenience can undermine a person’s emotional maturity by circumventing the ability to tolerate frustration. Tolerating frustration involves the ability to delay gratification, self-containment of tension states, inhibiting reflexive action, and the ability to engage in thoughtful, reflective planning. Lacking in this capacity, one is prone toward impulsive and potentially addictive lifestyles. No wonder, then, that these addictive and impulsive styles have historically been seen as characteristic of adolescence, where mature brain development has not yet been achieved. If, however, needs and demands can be satisfied in nanoseconds, there is little motivation to cultivate self-containment. Psychoanalytic therapies are not quick fixes, intentionally, so as to allow for the facilitation of the maturing processes to unfold. So, while some might call this old-fashioned, it is actually a principle aligned with how nature works.The emergence and unfolding of the mind is better supported by engaging our internal emotional and cognitive potentials to grapple with life’s challenges, than by adopting canned answers from the internet or random facts from Google searches.
  • Psychoanalytic therapies strive to enhance self-awareness. Patients are encouraged and empowered to seek their personal truths through introspection and insight. The role of the therapist serves as a guide who accompanies the patient through the exploration and examination of one’s private mind. As a guide, the therapist offers some protection from the fear of self-knowledge and, most importantly, serves as a witness to the self-truths that may need to be proclaimed.Guiding and witnessing are among the most important interpersonal functions as they offer a secure acceptance and validation of the individual. These functions establish the conditions for healthy attachment and honor a person’s value and purpose.
  • As a system for understanding mental illness, or human suffering, psychoanalytic models provide a compassionate and normalizing perspective. Whereas symptoms are expressions of suffering, they also represent a person’s best effort at retaining whatever sanity that person has achieved. Psychoneuroses are distinguished from other forms of misery by referring to the mental suffering derived from conflicts within and between persons. The gift of our imagination can also be a curse when it comes to facing unfathomable thoughts, fantasies, and recollections. Psychoanalytic therapy allows the patient to distinguish perceptions from fantasies, desires from needs, or speculations from truths. Insight and corrective emotional experiences with the therapist can help us regain our ability to care for ourselves and our loved ones.
  • Why do critics of psychoanalysis say that it is not a science and that it does not stand up to rigorous empirical validation from scientific testing? This criticism is partially true, but misleading.In psychoanalytic therapies, the focus of inquiry and treatment is exclusively upon a person’s unique subjective experience and thus each treatment is unique in itself.Therefore, every therapy is tailored to the specific needs of the individual based upon his/her personality, background, abilities, and maturity. One person’s therapy cannot be accurately compared to another’s, precluding the meaningful comparisons needed for scientifically controlled research studies. Simply put, psychoanalytic therapies treat people, not diagnoses. This approach to therapy values the person over the diagnosis. That is, the focus of treatment is to help a patient achieve an improved quality of life, not simply to reduce problematic symptoms. This goal may be achieved by reducing symptoms to some degree but may also include acceptance of one’s self and that some of life’s issues need to be survived rather than “fixed.” Furthermore, many studies have shown that the single most important factor for any successful psychotherapy, regardless of type, is the quality of the relationship between the therapist and the patient. The therapeutic relationship has been the cornerstone of psychoanalysis since its inception.
  • Nobel laureate, Eric Kandel, has stated that psychoanalytic theory offers the most comprehensive understanding of the mind among all other psychological theories.The ideas and concepts have undergone over a century of revisions and modifications aimed at helping to understand the human condition.As complex and multi-faceted creatures we are endowed with an incessant curiosity and remarkable resilience. We not only invented science, but also the humanities. Art, music, literature, and dance are methods humans have created to express the enormity of our shared lives and the drive to understand the essential meaning of our existence. Psychoanalytic theories also examine our relationship to these humanities as they may hold personal significance for the individual. Psychoanalysis evolved from Freud’s devotion to understanding himself and others as members of a dominant world species. All of our methods for expression serve to approximate, but never fully elucidate, human uniqueness.

Psychoanalysis is still relevant today; in fact, it has never been more important.

Is Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Evidence-Based?
Evidence-Based Psychodynamic Psychotherapy

Is Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Evidence-Based?

The public—and many clinicians—often assume that it is not. In fact, many university courses teach that only cognitive-behavioral approaches have current empirical support. This assumption is false and does a disservice to the field and to the public alike. A growing number of studies demonstrate that psychodynamic psychotherapy is evidence-based, and support the value of psychoanalytic and psychodynamic approaches, especially for complex cases and long-term change. 

Some Psychological Approaches Are Easier to Research Than Others

Clinical psychology is a multifaceted discipline, with a history that spans over 100 years. Since its origins, approaches and perspectives have come and gone in popularity. Classical psychoanalysis, object relations theory, and ego psychology; humanistic client-centered, gestalt, and existential therapies; behavior therapies; cognitive, cognitive-behavioral, and mindfulness-based cognitive therapies; interpersonal therapy; eye movement desensitization therapy; dialectical behavior therapy; integrative or holistic therapy—and the list continues to grow. Some approaches have been studied more than others. Many show promising results in some studies, only to be found to be limited in others. Some win favor because they are simple to research, and so garner publicity and research grants. Others draw attention because they are easy to teach and to master, or are short in duration and so inexpensive. Psychoanalytic and psychodynamic approaches are complex; they are not easily taught and they pose challenges to research. But, despite this, they continue to have many followers and are gaining impressive scientific support.

A Growing Body of Research Supports the Value of Psychodynamic Psychotherapy, Despite Its Complexity

Is psychodynamic psychotherapy evidence-based? Absolutely! Numerous current scientific studies support the value of psychodynamic and psychoanalytic approaches. In fact, meta-analyses—studies that gather evidence across multiple studies—demonstrate the effectiveness of psychodynamic and psychoanalytic work and indicate that, in some cases, psychodynamic approaches may be more effective in the long-run than other therapeutic models (e.g., Abbass et al., 2014; Baardseth et al., 2013; Bastos, Guimaraes, & Trentini, 2015; Buchheim et al., 2012; Busch, 2015; Grande et al., 2009; Johansson et al., 2010; Kallestad, Valen, McCullough, Svartberg, Høglend, & Stiles, 2010; Klug, Zimmermann, & Huber, 2016; Leichsenring, & Rabung, 2011; Midgley & Kennedy, 2011; Parker & Turner, 2014; Rizeanu, 2016; Shedler, 2010; Shepherd & Beail, 2017; Soares et al., 2018; Waldron, Gazzillo, Genova, & Lingiardi, 2013; Waldron, Gazzillo, & Stukenberg, 2015).

Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Is Often Misperceived

As noted by Shedler (2010) in an article published by the American Psychologist—a well-regarded publication of the American Psychological Association, “the perception that psychodynamic approaches lack empirical support does not accord with available scientific evidence and may reflect selective dissemination of research findings” (p. 98). This faulty perception has led some educational programs to downplay its significance or even dismiss it as an “outdated” approach. It is in the public interest that the field conduct scientific inquiry into the potential benefits and mechanisms of all therapies that clinicians have found to be valuable. Researchers cannot adequately investigate theories that they do not fully understand—research draws from a theoretical base (Britzman, 2012), which must be clearly understood before meaningful studies can be conducted regarding its mechanisms (e.g., Gazzillo et al., 2017; Laska, Gurman, & Wampold, 2014; Waldron et al., 2015). It is, therefore, crucial for science as well that the field continue to be educated about the premises of these valuable therapeutic approaches. Unlike some behavioral theories, many of the constructs of psychodynamic and psychoanalytic theory can only be assessed indirectly. Fortunately, many researchers are accepting the creative challenge.

It Is Important to Continue Researching All Psychotherapy Approaches

It is important for psychologists, psychoanalysts, and counselors to stay current, with scientifically grounded evidence, regarding issues relevant to enhancing their service to the public and the profession. Research, and informed discussion and practice, strengthen the profession. Is psychodynamic psychotherapy evidence-based? Yes, psychodynamic and psychoanalytic therapies are indeed empirically validated as valuable approaches for a wide range of disorders and clients. And, to quote Eric Kandel, neuroscientist and Nobel Laureate, “Psychoanalysis still represents the most coherent and intellectually satisfying view of the mind” (1999, p. 505).

References for Evidence-Based Psychodynamic Psychotherapy

Abbass, A. A., Kisely, S. R., Town, J. M., Leichsenring, F., Driessen, E., De Maat, S., Gerber, A., Dekker, J., Rabung, S., Rusalovska, S., & Crowe, E. (2014). Short-term psychodynamic psychotherapies for common mental disorders (review). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 7, 1-108.  doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004687.pub4

Baardseth, T. P., Goldberg, S. B., Pace, B. T., Wislocki, A. P., Frost, N. D., Siddiqui, J. R., Lindemann, A. M., Kivlighan III, D. M., Laska, K. M., Del Re, A. C., Minami, T., & Wampold, B. E. (2013). Cognitive-behavioral therapy versus other therapies: Redux. Clinical Psychology Review, 33, 395-405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.01.004

Bastos, A. G., Guimaraes, L. S. P., & Trentini, C. M. (2015). The efficacy of long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy, fluoxetine and their combination in the outpatient treatment of depression. Psychotherapy Research, 25(5), 612-624. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2014.935519

Britzman, D. P. (2012). What is the use of theory? A psychoanalytic discussion. Changing English: Studies in Culture and Education, 19(1), 43-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2012.649143

Buchheim, A., Viviani, R., Kessler, H., Kächele, H., Cierpka, M., et al. (2012). Changes in prefrontal-limbic function in major depression after 15 months of long-term psychotherapy. PLoS ONE, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033745

Busch, F. N. (2015). Discussion: Psychoanalytic research: Progress and questions. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 35, 196-203. https://doi.org/10.1080/07351690.2015.987607

Gazzillo, F., Waldron S., Gorman, B. S., Stukenberg, K. W., Genova, F., Ristucci, C., Faccini, F., & Mazza, C. (2017). The components of psychoanalysis: Factor analyses of process measures of 27 fully recorded psychoanalyses. Psychoanalytic Psychology, advance online publication, 1-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pap0000155

Grande, T., Dilg, R., Jakobsen, T., Keller, W., Krawietz, B., Langer, M., Oberbracht, C., Stehle, S., Stennes, M., & Rudolf, G. (2009). Structural change as a predictor of long-term follow-up outcome. Psychotherapy Research, 19(3), 344-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300902914147

Johansson, P., Høglend, P., Ulberg, R., Amlo, S., Marble, A., Bøgwald, K.-P., Sørbye, Ø., Sjaastad, M. C., & Heyerdahl, O. (2010). The mediating role of insight for long-term improvements in psychodynamic therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78(3), 438-448. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019245

Kallestad, H., Valen, J., McCullough, L., Svartberg, M., Høglend, P., & Stiles, T. C. (2010). The relationship between insight gained during therapy and long-term outcome in short-term dynamic psychotherapy and cognitive therapy for cluster C personality disorders. Psychotherapy Research, 20(5), 526-534. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2010.492807

Kandel, E. (1999). Biology and the future of psychoanalysis: New intellectural framework for psychiatry revisited. American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 505-524. https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/ajp.156.4.505

Klug, G., Zimmermann, J., & Huber, D. (2016). Outcome trajectories and mediation in psychotherapeutic treatments of major depression. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 64(2), 307-343. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003065116644742

Laska, K. M., Gurman, A. S., & Wampold, B. E. (2014). Expanding the lens of evidence-based practice in psychotherapy: A common factors perspective. Psychotherapy, 51(4), 467-481. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0034332

Leichsenring, F., & Rabung, S. (2011). Long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy in complex mental disorders: Update of a meta-analysis. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 199, 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.110.082776

Midgley, N., & Kennedy, E. (2011). Psychodynamic psychotherapy for children and adolescents: A critical review of the evidence base. Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 37(3), 232-260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0075417X.2011.614738

Parker, B., & Turner, W. (2014). Psychoanalytic/psychodynamic psychotherapy for sexually abused children and adolescents: A systematic review. Research on Social Work Practice, 24(4), 389-399. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731514525477

Rizeanu, S. (2016). Psychotherapy of borderline personality disorder. Romanian Journal of Experimental Applied Psychology, 7(3), 76-81. doi: 10.15303/rjeap.2016.v7i3.a7

Shedler, J. (2010). The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 65(2), 98-109. doi: 10.1037/a0018378,

Shepherd, C., & Beail, N. (2017). A systematic review of the effectiveness of psychoanalysis, psychoanalytic and psychodynamic psychotherapy with adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities: Progress and challenges. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 31(1), 94-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/02668734.2017.1286610

Soares, M. C., Mondin, T. C., Silva, G. D. G. D., Barbosa, L. P., Molina, M. L., Jansen, K., Souza, L. D. M., & Silva, R. A. D. (2018). Comparison of clinical significance of cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychodynamic therapy for major depressive disorder: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 206(9), 686-693.

Waldron, S., Gazzillo, F., Genova, F., & Lingiardi, V. (2013). Relational and classical elements in psychoanalyses: An empirical study with case illustrations. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 30(4), 567-600.Waldron, S., Gazzillo, F., & Stukenberg, K. (2015). Do the processes of psychoanalytic work lead to benefit? Studies by the APS Research Group and the Psychoanalytic Research Consortium. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 35, 169-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/07351690.2015.987602

Subscribe to
Our Newsletter

Connect With Us