The fundamental rule: a study of current usage

Members of the editorial boards of the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Psychoanalytic Quarterly, and Psychoanalytic Inquiry, plus selected analysts from Canada, France, and England, were asked how they presented the fundamental rule to their analysands and what considerations led to their choice of initial guidelines. Forty-nine of eight-three analysts responded to the survey. The respondents described diversity in phrasing of the fundamental rule, the time in analysis when the guidelines are given, and the reasons for the practice they follow. The method each chose appears to reflect the differing conceptions analysts have of the analytic process. Two major trends emerged: either our respondents emphasized delineating a work or functional framework or contract, or they emphasized establishing an attitude or spirit of cooperation, mutuality and work sharing. In each group respondents differed as to whether they favored minimal or more lengthy instructions. They also differed as to whether they followed a consistent approach or one tailored to the needs of the individual analysand. A source of tension lay in an inclination either to remain in the tradition set by Freud or to experiment with different phrasings and timings. The authors give their reasons for choosing to give explicit instructions, requesting associational material beyond thoughts and feelings, and describing resistance as inevitable and a potential source of insight.     

Self-concept and anxiety of adolescent and adult fathers

This study examines the relationship between the age of unmarried fathers and their self-concept and anxiety level. A total of 24 unmarried fathers (12 adolescents and 12 adults) comprised the sample. No significant differences were found between adolescent and adult fathers on self-concept or anxiety level. Findings are discussed with regard to the current status of research on adolescent fathers.     

ALTERNATIVE WORK SCHEDULES: TWO FIELD QUASI-EXPERIMENTS

In the first ( N = 140) of two quasi-experimental field studies, trial group employees were changed from a 5/40 to a 4/40 work schedule for four months then returned to a 5/40 schedule. In a second study ( N = 102), trial group employees were changed from 5/40 to flextime. Reactions were evaluated using a model for understanding the impact of work schedules. The effects of schedule changes matched those anticipated by pre-intervention surveys of employees. Factors related to organizational effectiveness were enhanced where specific organizational needs were met. Interference with personal activities was reduced where employees had experienced specific difficulties. The most powerful effect, however, was on worker attitudes toward specific work schedules. In addition, a mild positive (perhaps Hawthorne) effect was evident for a wide range of general worker reactions.