Analytic listening and the five senses: introduction

This introductory essay, the three papers that follow-by Jonathan Palmer, Forrest Hamer, and Peter Goldberg-and the commentary by Susan Yamaguchi are products of the panel "Analytic Listening and the Five Senses," presented at the American Psychoanalytic Association meeting in San Francisco, June 11, 2011.     

The psychoanalytic vision of Hans Loewald

Hans Loewald is a comprehensive and original theorist on a par with any major post-Freudian thinker, yet neither his ideas nor his person have become the basis for a Loewaldian school or approach, and he is not as well known as other innovators of comparable quality. In this paper the author attempts to characterize the scope and depth of Loewald's theory-his vision of the psyche and psychic life, or metapsychology, his characterization of the psychoanalytic process, and his vision of the clinical and human goals of psychoanalysis. She suggests that Loewald holds in all of these realms, and without apparent contradiction, a doubled-emphatically ego-psychological and emphatically object-relational-perspective, and an equal commitment to both the first topography and the structural theory. His views throughout are undergirded by a bi-directional developmental view that centers on differentiation and integration. The paper includes brief reflections on how to assess psychoanalytic theories, like Loewald's, developed before empirical research that seems to challenge them.     

Error detection in text: do feedback and familiarity help?

In the present study, the authors examined the extent to which familiarity and feedback (auditory and/or articulatory) might be beneficial to proofreading. Participants proofread unfamiliar and familiar (repeated) passages while (a) concurrently reading either aloud or silently, (b) concurrently listening to the passages being read to them, or (c) reading without either auditory or articulatory feedback. Errors were one-letter changes that transformed function words into contextually inappropriate words. Familiarity improved reading times largely irrespective of feedback, and it enhanced error detection only when auditory feedback was available to participants. Proofreaders' enhanced error detection in familiar text reflected a change in their sensitivity to errors rather than any change in the placement of the response criterion for reporting errors. These findings suggest that familiarity can produce two kinds of functional fluency, one involving speed of processing, which is largely independent of feedback, and the other concerned with accuracy of processing, which relies on feedback.