Research: The Training of Psychoanalysts

This is another installment of an ongoing section devoted to the subject of research. The following five articles represent thinking on the current status of research in psychoanalytic education and training. An ongoing question in psychoanalysis concerns who is qualified to practice and how the training should be conducted. The articles by psychoanalysts which follow are concerned with these issues.

Yonata Feldman recounts her participation in one of the earlier efforts to train social workers to work with resistance and to undertake a therapeutic rather than a supportive role with their clients, whose diagnosis was mainly borderline. Deborah P. Margolis traces the European and American history of approaches to the training of psychoanalysts, and the controversy around the question of lay analysis.

Further ideas on training are selected from a conference on that subject sponsored by the National Accreditation Association for Psychoanalysis. Members of Jungian, Reikian, Adlerian and Modern Psychoanalytic institutes participated, and the diverse views of Jonathan Goldberg, Alan Roland, Robert Ellenbogen and Hyman Spotnitz are presented here.

Ethel Goldwater Clevans and Phyllis Whitcomb Meadow give an account of the induction of transference, countertransference and regression as teaching tools in a five-day seminar for psychoanalysts