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.
THE CONCEPT OF TRANSFERENCE WAS originally used to describe and understand a cluster of reactions by the patient that occurred during the course of an analysis. While that simple view is still largely accepted, there is a wide diversity of opinions as to why transference occurs, what it means, how it is to be utilized by the analyst, and what its significance to successful treatment is.
All three authors on this panel agree that the concept of transference designates behavior and feelings on the part of the patient that occur in treatment. Where they differ from the classical position is in their belief that transference develops out of a particular patient-therapist relationship. Steeped in the interpersonal tradition, the authors are acutely sensitive to the effects not only of the personality variables involved, but also of the impact of the analyst's theory, technique and even language on the very existence of a particular transference reaction. This is a far cry from viewing transference as a simple unfolding of a patient's pathology.
Thus it is entirely possible, in fact probable, that certain aspects of a patient's personality will not become a focus for analysis in a given patient-therapist dyad because it is inattended to by the analyst, or because it does not develop in the particular interpersonal field that evolves between the patient and his or her analyst. Each author addresses this issue focusing on different aspects of the problem.