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.
Peculiar difficulties attend the investigation of unconscious phenomena, and as these are frequently of an emotional nature some criterion of values is necessary. There is little field for experiment in psycho-analysis, but observation is important and should be comprehensive, whilst the importance of inference cannot be overrated. Interpretations must always be of the nature of theories, hence they should exhibit an economy of hypothesis, and should conform to the principles of familiarity, extension and analogy. The single and simple theory should be preferred to the multiple and complicated, the more familiar of two theories is the more likely, the more extended the application the better, whilst the validity of a theory in parallel cases provides confirmatory evidence.
Every psycho-analytic interpretation should be a better and simpler explanation than that of the patient: it should fit in with other events diversely interpreted by the patient, and it should be an explanation more or less familiar in other spheres of life. It is more trustworthy if of interpretative value in dreams, myths, etc., and is rendered more probable by applicability in parallel instances. Removal of the symptoms after analysis is of corroborative value, whilst admission of the truth of any explanation by the patient is of slight significance. Finally, all rival explanations should be less satisfactory than the given interpretation. It is wrong to assume that because we arrive at an interpretation by the method of free association, it must necessarily be correct.