BJP RCPsych Publications
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Psychiatric Bulletin Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hobson, R. P.
Right arrow Articles by Valentine, J. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hobson, R. P.
Right arrow Articles by Valentine, J. D.

The British Journal of Psychiatry 173: 172-177 (1998)
© 1998 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

Objectivity in psychoanalytic judgements

RP Hobson, MP Patrick and JD Valentine
Developmental Psychopathology Research Unit, Tavistock Clinic, London.

BACKGROUND: There is widespread scepticism concerning the reliability and validity psychoanalytic judgements of patient-therapist transactions. We predicted that (a) in reviewing the initial part of 14 videotaped assessment interviews with borderline and dysthymic subjects, dynamic psychotherapists would agree in their ratings of psychoanalytically relevant characteristics of subjects' interpersonal relations; (b) inter-correlations among the ratings would conform with those expected from psychoanalytic descriptions of paranoid-schizoid' and 'depressive position' states of mind; and (c) these ratings would differentiate between borderline and dysthymic groups. METHOD: Six trained psychotherapists who were blind to the design of the study, independently rated qualities of interpersonal relatedness during the first 30 minutes of each interview, on a 30-item 'personal relatedness profile'. RESULTS: There was satisfactory interrater reliability in judgements among the raters, and evidence that the items were interrelated. There was also a significant difference between the two subject groups. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to make reliable psychoanalytic judgements about qualities of interpersonal relatedness. Moreover, there is evidence that paranoid-schizoid and depressive positive aspects of psychological functioning do constitute a meaningful constellation of clinically grounded phenomena.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br. J. PsychiatryHome page
L. E. CRANDELL, M. P. H. PATRICK, and R. P. HOBSON
'Still-face' interactions between mothers with borderline personality disorder and their 2-month-old infants
The British Journal of Psychiatry, September 1, 2003; 183(3): 239 - 247.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. PsychiatryHome page
R. P. HOBSON
Between ourselves: psychodynamics and the interpersonal domain
The British Journal of Psychiatry, March 1, 2003; 182(3): 193 - 195.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. PsychiatryHome page
M. LANMAN, F. GRIER, and C. EVANS
Objectivity in psychoanalytic assessment of couple relationships
The British Journal of Psychiatry, March 1, 2003; 182(3): 255 - 260.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Psychiatric Bulletin Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
Copyright © 1998 The Royal College of Psychiatrists.