psychoanalytic theory and technique produced an “inside” and “outside” of the session, where the role of patient's and therapist's socio-cultural belongings (social subjectivity) remained relatively excluded from being understood and worked in treatment (Berenstein, 2004; Orlinsky y Ronnestad, 2005). AIMS AND METHODS: comparing session from psychoanalytic process of Argentina and United States, this study evaluated the presence of specific aspects of social subjectivity in patient-therapist discourse, and its links with clinical interventions. 40 sessions were used (20 for each country). The methodological design was exploratory and descriptive, with quali-quantitative analysis. Both the social subjectivity categories classification and the interventions classification of were used. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: in both groups, social subjectivity was targeted with specific psychoanalytic interventions, with a greater use of signaling and confrontation in argentine therapists. Results show that aspects historically assigned to the session's context were registered within its text. Implications for psychoanalysis' research, practice and clinical training are discussed