There are three main Internet discussion groups for psychoanalysts at present. All operate under similar principles. A paper is posted for discussion, usually on a Web site. Participants who have signed up for the discussion group send in their contributions by e-mail. All of the discussion groups use mailing list software, administered by a list moderator, that remails each message to all the discussion participants.
There are both rewards and difficulties in these discussion groups. They are a new medium, and groups are still experimenting with format. At their best, they offer in-depth immersion in a particular subject or author. This experience builds slowly and requires concentration and patience. One must read each e-mail carefully, sometimes consulting the paper again, and think through how it applies to one's clinical or subjective experiences. It is often hard in our busy lives to devote the concentration necessary to stay on this task.
The responses fall somewhere between a live discussion and written commentary. They are often more measured and thoughtful than live discussion, but they can lose spontaneity and engagement. These discussions invite national and international participation, bringing in a wider range of view than is often possible in a local presentation. The discussions can often be maddening, especially when they veer off in strange directions, get stuck on obscure points, or get into too much detail. Each discussion group has its regulars, who tend to dominate the discussion by default. I have always found that if I stick with it, I will learn something new or gain a greater appreciation of how a particular author thinks.
Each discussion group is different. For the discussion group of the International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, a paper is posted on the journal's website for discussion a month before publication of each issue. A good summary of the discussion is printed in the IJP within two or three months of the discussion.
The IJP editor responsible for the discussion group is Peter Fonagy. Reflecting the journal's readership, the participants tend to be international. Authors participating over the past year have included Ted Jacobs, Priscilla Roth, Jorge Ahumada, Giovanni Vassalli, Glen Gabbard, Julia Kristeva, and Andre Green. In practice, the authors' participation varies, usually limited to responses at the end of the discussion. In my opinion, the discussions tend to be more static and less interactive than with other groups.
For information on the IJP discussion group, see . To subscribe to the group, send an e-mail to with “subscribe” in the subject field and your full name and e-mail address in the body of the e-mail.
PsyBC is a private group of analysts who have organized a discussion group and offer online courses. This is the only group that charges a fee to participate. They have assembled a “standing panel of experts” that tilts toward the relational school but includes several more mainline analysts: Glen Gabbard as moderator and Arnie Richards, Owen Renik, Henry Smith, and Kimberly Leary, among others. Some of the discussions include the authors of the papers. For the PsyBC group, papers are available in print but not posted on the Web.
The discussions tend to be mostly among the panel of experts, and there is little outside discussion. Because of the homogeneity of the editorial group and personal friendships, the discussions are lively and provocative. This encourages one to listen in, but trying to join the discussion can feel like trying to enter a private club. Four month-long discussions are held each year.
Information on PsyBC can be found at . Look for links to the symposia series. Cost to participate is $80 per year.
I have been the moderator of the JAPA discussion group for the past two years. We run four or five discussions each year, forty-five days long, on papers published in JAPA during the past two years. Thus, each paper has been out for a period of time and is available in print. Papers are also posted on the Web. The editorial board of the journal is supposed to participate, but in practice, some do and some don't.
The JAPA group gets a wide range of responders, and there are usually new participants in each discussion. I have tried to evolve this group into a meet-the-author forum. Since September 2000, we have had papers by Hardin and Hardin, Holtzman and Kulish, H. Smith, Poland, and Spezzano. We encourage authors to participate throughout the discussion and get into dialogue on points that interest them. This can lead to extended debate that often facilitates the development of an author's thinking. We learn more in depth what the author thinks and why.
A summary of the discussions is posted online but is not printed. The list's unofficial steering committee — JAPA editor Arnie Richards, Todd Essig, and myself — choose the papers for discussion. We are talking about future directions for the discussion group.
Information on the JAPA discussion group, including an archive of articles and discussion summaries, can be found at . To subscribe to the group, send an e-mail to , with “subscribe” in the subject line and nothing in the body of the e-mail.
Robert S. White, M.D., is a member of the Western New England Psychoanalytic Society and an assistant professor of psychiatry at Yale University.