An ad hoc poll of analysts in study groups, at meetings, and in conversations, indicated that a number had more than one analysis. (Some, of course, had a personal analysis prior to training, so that the training analysis was a reanalysis.) Those who had reanalyses felt the experience contributed substantially to the quality of their work and lives. Those self-assessments appeared borne out by work that seemed more attuned to the patient, directed toward understanding process, and facilitating of the development and understanding of transference, resistance, and countertransference. That work also seemed less doctrinaire, conveying vitality and life without being wild. The benefits of reanalysis did not seem to correlate with theoretical orientation. It made little difference whether the analyst's work was conceptualized within ego psychological, conflict, self-psychological, intersubjective, or object relations frameworks. It seemed that the theoretical framework of the “reanalys and” and the “reanalyst” did not matter as much as the additional, personal psychoanalytic experience.