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.
Since the development of psychoanalysis as a therapeutic method, psychoanalytic researchers and therapists have suggested modifications in setting and technique, and new approaches based on psychoanalytic thinking have emerged. In this study, we investigated whether the application of three different forms of psychoanalytic technique (classic, clarifying, and supportive techniques) depends on the treatment approach and specific patient characteristics (severity of psychopathology and sociodemographic variables). Our sample consisted of 355 cases from the naturalistic DPG Practice Study (Benecke et al., 2011), which inspects psychoanalytically oriented approaches in Germany. Therapists completed a psychoanalytic technique questionnaire roughly 1 year after the beginning of treatment. As a measure of patients' severity of psychopathology, we combined self-report measures and ratings of trained interviewers. Therapists reported to use classic techniques most often in a treatment approach with long duration, more sessions per week, and couch setting, whereas they focused on clarifying and supportive techniques in shorter therapies with less sessions per week and face-to-face setting. The severity of psychopathology and being female were significantly associated with applying supportive techniques even after controlling for treatment approach. The results are mainly in concordance with theoretical recommendations. However, therapists evaluated the application of techniques themselves and there was no external evaluation. Future studies should inspect correlations between the application of specific techniques and symptomatic change.