The author recalls that the founders of the Fourth Group refused to accept any interference of the institution in the analytic process and wanted to avoid the hierarchical and normative relationship of the institution vis-à-vis the analyst in training. Classical supervisions could present the risk of turning into a supervision of the analysis. The theorization of the “Fourth Analysis” by J.-P. Valabréga was intended to avoid this interference. Its name was based on the theorization of the inter-analytic situation and of the observation of all four referents involved in this situation, hence the other term used of multi-referential analysis. Valabréga suggested that the transference/countertransference interactions identifiable in the supervision should be situated between these different referents. Although the “Fourth Analysis” constituted the only real theorization of the supervision, it is worth noting that a certain idealization inherent to the theorization of this practice can limit its utilization in the supervisions of analysts in training.