Qualitive methodologies and psychoanalysis have much in common as ways to understand the meaning of human experience. However, they each have lacunae, or areas of absence, which other kinds of evidence could be used to fill. Psychoanalysis can be said to lack robust evidence. Qualitative research methods can be criticized for lacking depth and not allowing for the researcher’s impact. This paper asserts that there are additional methods of data analysis which can address these lacunae. They include patterns of silences and pauses, use of quoted speech and congruence and discongruence’ all of which can give a richer analysis of research findings.