Assessing psychodynamic conflicts: I. Reliability of the idiographic conflict formulation method.
Assessing psychodynamic conflicts: I. Reliability of the idiographic conflict formulation method.
复制标题
评估心理动力冲突：I.具体冲突表述方法的可靠性。
DOI：
10.1080/00332747.1989.11024451
复制
发表时间：
1989
期刊：
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Cooper,SH
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Perry,JC;Augusto,F;Cooper,SH
近年来，人们对设计研究心理动力学现象的方法越来越感兴趣。这些努力必须面对困难，首先，在指定数据、观察语言和心理动力学命题的推理规则方面，其次，在确定所使用的措施的可靠性和有效性方面。考虑到传统心理动力学概念的“模糊性”，弗洛伊德以来的心理动力学临床医生在提出新假设方面比在检验其有效性方面取得了更大的成功也就不足为奇了。正如赖兴巴赫（Reichenbach，1938）所观察到的，科学要求发现之后对所有新命题进行系统验证，无论其大众接受程度如何。研究心理动力学的核心是研究自我功能（Bellak 和 Goldsmith 1984）、防御机制（Perry 和 Cooper 1988）和心理动力学冲突的方法。本文报告了具体冲突表述（lCF）的可靠性，这是一种表述个人心理动力学冲突的指导方法。之前关于心理动力学表述可靠性的研究通常没有产生令人满意的结果。 Seitz（1966）描述了一组精神分析学家未能就一个案例达成一致的表述。他指出，每位法官在解释临床数据时都采用了不同程度的推论，小组最终因分歧而陷入僵局。 Malan (1976) 开发了一种方法，包括两部分：动态假设，包括压力源
RECENT years have seen increasing interest in devising methods of studying psychodynamic phenomena. These efforts have had to confront difficulties, first, in specifying the data, the observation language, and rules of inference for psychodynamic propositions, and second, in determining the reliability and validity of the measures used. Given how" fuzzy" traditional psychodynamic concepts are, it is no wonder that psychodynamic clinicians from Freud onward have achieved more success in generating new hypotheses than in testing their validity. As Reichenbach (1938) has observed, science requires that discovery be followed by systematic validation of all new propositions, regardless of their degree of popular acceptance. At the core of efforts to study psychodynamics have been methods to study ego functioning (Bellak and Goldsmith 1984), defense mechanisms (Perry and Cooper 1988), and psychodynamic conflicts. This paper reports on the reliability of the Idiographic Conflict Formulation (lCF), a guided method for formulating an individual's psychodynamic conflicts.Previous work on the reliability of psychodynamic formulations has generally not produced auspicious findings. Seitz (1966) described the failure of a group of psychoanalysts to arrive at a consensus formulation of a case. He noted that each judge applied different levels of inference in interpreting the clinical data, and the group eventually became deadlocked over disagreements. Malan (1976) developed a method that includes two parts: a dynamic hypothesis including the stressors to