Stuck in Vertical: The Kinetic Temperament in Development and Interaction

Abstract

Integrating movement theory and nonverbal behavioral research with psychoanalytic theory and practice, the author develops the concept of kinetic temperament and illustrates is application in two psychoanalytic case studies. The author discusses the concepts and language necessary for this integration and demonstrates how using a fine-grained, visually based system of analysis of body endowment and behavior can be useful in a relational, intersubjectively tuned, psychoanalytic treatment, and in the continuing dialogue on psychoanalytic theory. The two cases, an infant and an adult who share an overexclusive use of the vertical dimension in action and interaction, illustrate the kinetic temperament and how it affects relationships and development.

Notes

¹All individuals, adult and infant, described in this paper are composite figures, drawn from several different situations and settings.

²Some developmental thinkers believe that physical and brain experiences involved in crawling are crucial for certain cognitive tasks, specifically the ability to read. There is some evidence that structured “contralateral movement” such as crawling helps alleviate certain cognitive challenges (Hannaford, 2005). But there is as yet no research that definitively connects the absence of crawling with later cognitive problems. Furthermore, there is strong cross-cultural evidence to suggest that crawling is not critical in the development of locomotion itself (Hopkins & Westra, 1988). Given this uncertain terrain, it is important in working with children to rule out neurological difficulties when a motor pattern is significantly delayed. Bonnie was somewhat delayed in rolling over, but delay is not in itself a problem, and in this case neurological problems were ruled out since, as we see, Bonnie's behavior dramatically shifted when her parents changed their handling of her. With respect to a psychokinetic perspective, “Bonnie” and “Judith” show that, while crawling may or may not be a necessary precursor to walking or to smooth motor or cognitive functioning, the variables that produce and surround the phenomenon of not crawling can be the context out of which problem patterns in cognition and interaction may develop.

³Neuroscience research is investigating how the functioning of “mirror neurons” relates to imitation and its role in learning, empathy, and intersubjective, shared awareness. This work on the complexity of imitation involves debating the necessity of the imitator's understanding the ends of actions, not simply perceiving them occurring, in order for imitation to occur. Cited in Hurley and Chater (2005a, 2005b) are the different views espoused in theories of Meltzoff and Moore (1997) and Meltzoff (2005) on one hand, and Rizzolati (2005) and Tomasello (1999) on the other. The work of Meltzoff and Moore with very early infant imitation mouth and hand gestures suggests that imitation may precede and beget understanding of other agents' actions, and that it develops in stages, while Rizzolati and Tomasello hold the view that in other cases goals must be understood before imitation takes place. Both positions may be appropriate to explain different kinds, stages, and purposes of imitation. In this case, a question would arise as to the baby's ability to imitate certain actions.

⁴Singing and dancing, and generally silly and wiggly play in a sitting position, helped Bonnie free her torso. A “peek-a-boo” game in which Mom or Dad scuttled to her side and behind her helped her to twist in the horizontal. To promote curling we playfully folded her knees up to her chest and helped her find and hold her feet, something that many babies do at 3 months. Soon she folded her legs up by herself, grabbed her feet and rolled sideways, and then could turn to her tummy by lengthening.

⁵Thus, the family's new learning avoided problems occurring in spheres that psychoanalysts refer to as “separation-individuation” (Mahler et al., 1975), “affect regulation” (Schore, 1994), and “attachment” (Fonagy, 2001; Goldberg et al., 1995).

⁶I refer to the distinct physical partnering of patient and analyst as the kinetic transference and countertransference that is always part of the total transference situation and of the kinetic text (La Barre, 2005).

⁷This kind of subconscious interchange is a likely mechanism for “role responsiveness” (Sandler, 1976), transference–countertransference enactments (Chused, 1998; Davies & Frawley-O'Dea, 1991/1999; Jacobs, 1998), and the analytic “third” (Ogden, 1994). Movement theory adds the point that we cannot be aware of these feelings before they are embodied.

⁸I include this example of “acting out” and touch in this case to address a common fear that working explicitly with movement and the body will cause many experiences like this that will uncontrollably come to take over, making reflection impossible. But my experience is that this kind of interactivity does not happen very often, and when it does, the actions become integrated into the verbal dialogue, augmenting what can be spoken and understood.