Abstract
The author argues that existing research on the outcome of psychoanalysis and the psychoanalytic therapies is sufficient to claim a solid basis in scientific evidence for psychodynamically oriented clinical work. She explores sociocultural trends that increase the probability that analytic therapists and academic researchers will misunderstand one another, and she discusses the problematic status of the randomized controlled trial as the "gold standard" of research. She urges readers to educate themselves about what the outcome research actually shows, to support empirical investigations of psychoanalytic theories and practice, to make alliances with therapists of other orientations, and to try to contribute to changing the terms in which policymakers and the public frame their understanding of mental health and mental suffering.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
