Opening to the otherwise: The discipline of listening and the necessity of free‐association for psychoanalytic praxis

It is argued that only free‐association methodically opens the discourse of self‐consciousness (the representations available to reflective awareness) to the voicing of the repressed. The method is key to Freud's originality and the sine qua non of any genuinely psychoanalytic process. Clinical procedures which do not prioritize a steadfast and ongoing commitment to this method (instead emphasizing either interpretative formulations, as decisive acts that appear to fix and finalize the meaning of a particular lived experience, or the vicissitudes of transference‐countertransference in the immediate treatment situation) all too readily entrap the treatment, limiting its capacity to divulge the power of unconscious processes. Influenced by Laplanche, Freud's 1920 principles of lifefulness and deathfulness (the binding and unbinding of psychic energy in representations) facilitate an understanding of the unique significance of free‐associative discourse in opening the representational textuality of self‐consciousness to the voicing of that which is otherwise than representationality and reason. The ‘otherwise’ is intimated as the returning force of the repressed, as the ‘unfathomable navel’ of ‘thing‐presentations,’ experienced and expressed within the text of awareness, yet not translatable into the law and order of its logical and rhetorical reflections. Free‐associative discourse thus affects self‐consciousness in a way that is radically different from other creative procedures (‘psychosynthetic’ or integratively interpretive). In this respect, the status of free‐associative praxis as necessary for a genuinely psychoanalytic process is justified.     

Eye tracking reveals the cost of switching between self and other perspectives in a visual perspective-taking task

Previous studies have shown that while people can rapidly and accurately compute their own and other people’s visual perspectives, they experience difficulty ignoring the irrelevant perspective when the two perspectives differ. We used the “avatar” perspective-taking task to examine the mechanisms that underlie these egocentric (i.e., interference from their own perspective) and altercentric (i.e., interference from the other person’s perspective) tendencies. Participants were eye-tracked as they verified the number of discs in a visual scene according to either their own or an on-screen avatar’s perspective. Crucially in some trials the two perspectives were inconsistent (i.e., each saw a different number of discs), while in others they were consistent. To examine the effect of perspective switching, performance was compared for trials that were preceded with the same versus a different perspective cue. We found that altercentric interference can be reduced or eliminated when participants stick with their own perspective across consecutive trials. Our eye-tracking analyses revealed distinct fixation patterns for self and other perspective taking, suggesting that consistency effects in this paradigm are driven by implicit mentalizing of what others can see, and not automatic directional cues from the avatar.     

Effects of self‐enhancement on agreement on personality profiles

Effects of self‐enhancement and socially desirable responding (SDR) on rater agreement for personality profiles were studied in 304 students. Dyads of participants described themselves and their peer on the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO‐PI‐R) that measures 30 facets of personality. In addition, participants filled in six scales measuring self‐enhancement or SDR. Data analyses focussed on moderator and suppressor effects of SDR on the similarity between self‐reported and other reported NEO‐PI‐R profiles. Three kinds of profile agreement were distinguished: (a) normative agreement; (b) distinctive agreement and (c) profile normativeness, that is, how strongly a self‐reported personality profile resembled the average profile of all participants. There were no moderator or suppressor effects on distinctive agreement, but SDR predicted profile normativeness quite strongly. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Adult attachment and spousal reactions to military deployment separations and reunions

We explored adult attachment and spousal perceptions of intrapersonal and relationship functioning during military deployments. In Study 1, spouses of military members experiencing a separation were assessed, and in Study Two, spouses of military members experiencing a reunion were assessed. Study 3 entailed a large‐scale survey of relationship perceptions of spouses of military members. In Studies One and Two, attachment dimensions were related to perceptions of intrapersonal and relationship functioning during the separation and reunion, with associations moderated by days separated/reunited. In Study 3, attachment dimensions were related to relationship perceptions, with associations moderated by deployment stages. This research not only contributes to the knowledge of attachment processes in military contexts but also has the potential to inform policies and services supporting military families.     

A lost horizon: the experience of an other and school bullying

To date, research on bullying has largely employed empirical methodologies, including quantitative and qualitative approaches. Through this research we have come to understand bullying as both a dyadic and peer group phenomenon, primarily situated in the heads (thinking) of those involved, or in a lack of skill or expertise, or in the delinquency of a bully who needs to be reformed. This research has largely directed its strategies toward problem students using individual and peer group approaches. And yet school bullying continues to be a crucial educational issue affecting millions of students each year. In this project I introduce a missing philosophical perspective. Analyzing the work of Hans-Georg Gadamer I am led to conclude that typical anti-bullying strategies at times simply train bullies to be better at bullying (i.e., learning to bully more covertly, more expertly so as to inflict the same devastation without adult detection). Gadamer invites us to think about bullying in new ways. While certainly involving the thinking and skills of the bully and the victim, Gadamer contends that bullying does not fundamentally result from a problem within the participants, but is fostered by certain spaces between them; terrains that cultivate specific experiences of an "other". Generally, this project stems from an interest in the ways that domination develops in this "space between". Specifically in this paper I ask: What is the nature of "hermeneutic" experience as conceptualized by Gadamer? What kinds of experiences of an other does bullying exemplify? What kinds of experience of an other do non-bullying relations exemplify and what kinds of relational spaces foster such experience? This paper opens up significant new territory for anti-bullying work, expanding our focus to include the space between students which fosters certain inter-personal experiences - experiences situated in domination and stymied growth or, alternatively, experiences of reciprocity which open the possibility of human growth and transformation.     

Analysis and treatment of problem behavior evoked by music

The present study investigated the effects of differential negative reinforcement of other behavior (DNRO) on problem behavior evoked by music in a 7-year-old child with pervasive developmental disorder. Following an auditory stimulus assessment, DNRO was used to reduce problem behavior to near-zero levels. Results are discussed in terms of identifying establishing operations to govern treatment options and the use of negative reinforcement when arbitrarily imposed positive reinforcers do not compete with escape from auditory stimulation.     

Enacted Others: Specifying Goffman's Phenomenological Omissions and Sociological Accomplishments

Erving Goffman's distinctive contribution to an understanding of others was grounded in his information control and ritual models of the interaction process. This contribution centered on the forms of the interaction order rather than self-other relations as traditionally conceived in phenomenology. Goffman came to phenomenology as a sympathetic but critical outsider who sought resources for the sociological mining of the interaction order. His engagement with phenomenological thinkers (principally Gustav Ichheiser, Jean-Paul Sartre and Alfred Schutz) has to be understood in these terms. The article traces basic differences in analytical focus through a range of phenomenological critiques of Goffman and a comparison of salient aspects of Schutz's and Goffman's writings. While the contrasts have perhaps been overplayed, I conclude that Goffman's thinking about others probably owed more to his pragmatist roots than to his later encounters with phenomenology.Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Phenomenology and the Human Sciences in 1992 and 2003. I am grateful to discussions with participants at both meetings, which helped to clarify my ideas on a number of the paper's themes.     

THE ANALYST'S APPROACH AND THE PATIENT'S PSYCHIC GROWTH

Psychoanalysis, which shares many functions with other therapies, is built upon its unique concern for the unconscious forces active behind a patient's symptoms and difficulties. What defines psychoanalysis is the analyst's approach as a disciplined engagement in the service of exploring those forces and their roots, an approach that is the product of curiosity working in the service of the other. As a result of the analyst's actualizing this approach, the patient comes to benefit not only from whatever specific declarative interpretations and insights have been explicitly opened, but also, importantly, from observing and taking in the unspoken underlying psychoanalytic mental processes. In this light, the patient's significant capacities for empathy, a subject often neglected, are also discussed. ¹