American pragmatism and American psychoanalysis

The author compares American pragmatism with American psychoanalysis in an effort to place the existence of the many diverse schools and theories of psychoanalysis in a historical context. Pragmatism is seen as a theory of instrumentation or a collection of tools for accomplishing goals; it claims that many of our efforts to know and seek truth are based upon myths. Psychoanalysis, too, can be seen to pursue certain theoretical claims based on myths. The present climate of pluralism in psychoanalysis is not a phase, but an indication of our diverse ways of achieving in-depth understanding of another person.     

A developmental model for the occupational socioeconomic status of American men

Prior research suggested that psychological, sociological and economic variables, measuring both differential and developmental dimensions, must be considered for an exhaustive analysis of adult vocational status. From the resulting estimated predictive model, occupational socioeconomic status was examined through 16 selected family, ecological, educational, ethnoreligious, and political predictor variables. The data were obtained from a national sample of 1355 American men. Factor analysis supported the hypothesized existence of an educational-socioeconomic factor and a political identification factor, plus a less discrete religiousity factor. Path analysis confirmed that a respondent's education, adult social class, and father's occupational socioeconomic status were principle predictors of the respondent's occupational socioeconomic status.     

The scientific status of American psychology in 1900

In 1900, psychologists were attempting to define themselves and searching for their role among both academic and non-academic public. The success of experimental methods served to advance their position as exemplary scientists, although, as the authors argue in this article, other factors were also important. First, the issue of measurement involved many disagreements about the tools needed to measure psychological constructs or even whether psychologists should measure anything at all. Second, the relationship between the brain and psychological constructs enhanced psychology's status for some, whereas others felt that psychologists should stay away from such topics. Parallels with present-day concerns among psychologists are addressed at the end of the article.     

The emergence of an American middle school of psychoanalysis commentary on Karen Rosica's paper

In this paper we explore a few points emphasized by both Fairbairn and American Relational Theory related to conceptualizations of the new and old object and the implications for working in the analytic situation. Underlying much of our discussion is the belief that there are useful tensions between, on the one hand, Fairbairn's emphasis on our attachment to bad and old objects and refractory clinging to these bad objects in the face of receiving something new, and, on the other, a construal of a push or willingness toward integrating externality and newness of objects (e.g., Winnicott, 1969; Benjamin, 1988). American Relational models which explore complexities of interaction augment an understanding of Fairbairn's formulations of why we hold on to old objects. Fairbairn's theory also offers ways of understanding aspects of repetition, even, and sometimes especially, in trying to provide new experience.