Le modèle théorico-clinique : apports et intérêts pour la recherche en psychologie clinique

Abstract

ObjectiveThis article proposes some innovative approaches to a research model in clinical psychology with a psychoanalytical orientation that the authors call the theoretical-clinical model. This model makes it possible to respond to the impasses in the current methodological field to thinking and doing scientific research based on clinical practice. MethodAfter briefly mentioning the specificities and originalities of research in clinical psychology and psychoanalysis, and the scientific research models that currently prevail, the article presents the organizing principles of the so-called clinical-theoretical model. A final section focuses on the work of writing as a process of decentration that allows for the differentiation between research specific to clinical practice and scientific research in clinical psychology. ResultsThe theoretical-clinical model proposes to renounce the forging of precise hypotheses upstream of the research. It is a model that refers to and responds to the principles of psychoanalytic epistemology. The research is centered on the permanent articulation between theory and clinical practice, which refers to the idea of allowing oneself to be immersed in, and questioned by, the clinical material without too strong a hypothesis, at the risk of being blinded by the material that emerges. The hypothesis thus emerges from practice, from the material, and from the writing process. Contrary to the model of anchored theory, analysis is not a-theoretical: on the contrary, it asserts a theoretical anchoring that makes the material “speak” from the hypotheses and postulates of the discipline, in this case psychoanalysis. DiscussionResearch in psychology is crossed by two major models: the hypothetico-deductive and the grounded theory method. Recently, two researchers have proposed a more specific model for research in psychoanalytically oriented clinical psychology: the hypothetico-processual model. In the continuity of this work, we suggest another way of thinking and doing research in clinical psychology. ConclusionThe scientificity of psychoanalysis is strongly contested today, often in a very hasty and unscientific way. It is therefore necessary to find methodological tools that meet certain scientific criteria without losing sight of the originality and specificity of psychoanalytic clinical practice.