You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Sometimes during an analysis there are puzzling non-verbal interactions that are vitally meaningful and require understanding and interpretation Current psychoanalysis gives much greater importance to the role and interplay of such dyadic factors in the analytic relationship than would be suggested by the classic transference / countertransference paradigm alone. The development of an analytic relationship is determined by the ongoing mutual transferences and their interaction with the working, realistic, and primary (narcissistic) relationships (De Jonghe & Rijnierje, 1991). Transference has been studied extensively in psychoanalysis, but it is also ubiquitous in everyday life; it develops in all social situations where another person is important to one's life, and it is therefore a major feature of all human relationships. The trend in contemporary theorizing is toward a multimodel approach that stresses the patient's subjective perspective While individual schools of psychoanalytic thought continue to see themselves as unique in their theoretical understandings, more and more analysts seem to be using several models concurrently, usually reflecting a two-person relational psychology rather than a single metamodel (Modell, 1984; Eagle, 1984; Pine, 1985).
It is said that actions speak louder than words; but what does a behaviour say, specifically, about the past or about the immediate analytic situation?