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.
The influence of the personality of the psychoanalyst on the patient's treatment is well known but rarely discussed. Follow-up studies and psychotherapy research studies say little about personality factors of the analyst. Yet the referring clinician makes a private assessment of the personality of the analyst in pondering how the analyst and the patient will “match” and how well they will work together. Unfortunately, most of these decisions are made without full awareness of the data on which they are based, and this results in therapy assignments often being made on an intuitive basis with, at best, moderate success.
It is difficult to make a careful study of the analyst's interaction with the patient. It is this interaction, which I call “the psychoanalytic atmosphere,” and the analyst's personality attitudes, that command our attention. The purpose of this paper is to increase awareness of the importance of the analyst's personality in the treatment process, and thus to improve our therapeutic skills. The analyst's awareness of his personality can turn what might be an obstacle to treatment into a vehicle for treatment. We should remember that, at first, resistance, transference, and countertransference were seen only as obstacles to treatment; only later were they recognized as indispensable vehicles for treatment.
Glover believes that the findings of his questionnaire on “Common Technical Practices” could be taken as representative of the British analytic group up to the year 1938. On later republication of his findings (Glover, 1955) he felt the situation had not altered much. Glover asked: “How far do you think the personality
of the analyst plays a part in the conduct of analysis?” In commenting on the replies to this question, he stated:
More than half the replies agreed that the personality of the analyst plays “a considerable part,” “a more important part than is always realised,” etc., in the conduct of analysis. Amongst these some regret this influen