The Boston Change Process Study Group: Reflections on a Clinical Theory

REFERENCES

• Blass, R., ed. (2010). Psychoanalytic controversies: distinguishing psychoanalysis from psychotherapy. Int. J. Psychoanal., 91: 15–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blum, D. (2011). Love at Goon Park: Harry Harlow and the Science of Affection. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Vol. I, Attachment. London: Hogarth/Inst. of Psychoanalysis.
   Google Scholar
• Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and Loss: Vol. II, Separation, Anxiety and Anger. London: Hogarth/Inst. of Psychoanalysis.
   Google Scholar
• Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss: Vol. III, Loss, Sadness and Depression. London: Hogarth/Inst. of Psychoanalysis.
   Google Scholar
• Bowlby, J., Robertson, J. & Rosenbluth, D. (1952). A two-year-old goes to the hospital. Psychoanal. Study Child, 7: 82–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busch, F. & Schmidt-Hellerau, C. (2004). How can we know what we need to know? Reflections on clinical judgment formation. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 52: 689–707.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chodorow, N. J. (2007). Reflections on Loewald’s “Internalization, Separation, Mourning, and the Superego.” Psychoanal. Q., 76: 1135–1151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chused, J. F. (1991). The evocative power of enactments. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 39: 615–640.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coen, S. J. (2002). Affect Intolerance in Patient and Analyst. Northvale, NJ/London: Jason Aronson.
   Google Scholar
• Dowling, S. (2011). [Review of] Change in Psychotherapy: A Unifying Paradigm, by the Boston Change Process Study Group, N. Bruschweiler-Stern, K. Lyons-Ruth, A. C. Morgan, J. P. Nahum, L. W. Sander & D. N. Stern. Int. J. Psychoanal., 92: 1322–1331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frank, K. A. (1999). Psychoanalytic Participation. Hillsdale, NJ/London: Analytic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Freud, A. & Dann, S. (1951). An experiment in group upbringing. Psychoanal. Study Child, 6: 127–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freud, S. (1920). Beyond the Pleasure Principle. S. E., 18.
   Google Scholar
• Gabbard, G. O. (1994). Psychodynamic psychiatry in clinical practice. In Basic Principles of Dynamic Psychiatry. Washington, DC/London: Amer. Psychiatric Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gill, M. M. (1983). The interpersonal paradigm and the degree of the therapist’s involvement. Contemp. Psychoanal., 19: 200–237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ginsburg, S. A. & Cohn, L. S. (2007). To coerce and be coerced. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 55: 55–79.
   Google Scholar
• Greenberg, J. R. & Mitchell, S. A. (1983). Object Relations in Psychoanalytic Theory. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hartmann H. (1939). Ich-psychologie un anpassungsproblem. Internat. Ztsch. F. Psa. U. Imago, XXIV.
   Google Scholar
• Hartmann H. (1950). Comments on the psychoanalytic theory of the ego. Psychoanal. Study Child, 5: 74–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann H. (1958). Ego Psychology and the Problem of Adaptation. New York: Int. Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• House, J. & Portuges, S. (2005). Relational knowing, memory, symbolization, and language: commentary on the Boston Change Process Study Group. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 53: 731–744.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, T. J. (1986). On countertransference enactments. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 34: 289–307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoblauch, S. H. (2008). “A lingering whiff of Descartes in the air”: from theoretical ideas to the messiness of clinical participation: commentary on paper by the Boston Change Process Study Group. Psychoanal. Dialogues, 18: 149–161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litowitz, B. E. (2005). When “something more” is less: commentary on the Boston Change Process Study Group. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 53: 751–759.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loewald, H. W. (1960). On the therapeutic action of psycho-analysis. Int. J. Psychoanal., 41: 16–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loewald, H. W. (1962). Internalization, separation, mourning, and the superego. Psychoanal. Q., 31: 483–504.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loewald, H. W. (1973). On internalization. Int. J. Psychoanal., 54: 9–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahler, M. S. (1974). Symbiosis and Individuation. Psychoanal. Study Child, 29: 89–106.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mahler, M. S., Pine, F. & Bergman, A. (1975). The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Mayes, L. C. (2005). Something different but what or why is unclear: commentary on the Boston Change Process Study Group. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 53: 746–750.
   Google Scholar
• Meissner, W. W. (1992). The concept of the therapeutic alliance. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 40: 1059–1087.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meissner, W. W. (2000). On analytic listening. Psychoanal Q., 69: 317–367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meissner, W. W. (2002). The problem of self-disclosure in psychoanalysis. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 50: 827–867.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Modell, A. H. (2008). Implicit or unconscious? Commentary on paper by the Boston Change Process Study Group. Psychoanal. Dialogues, 18: 162–167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novick, J. & Novick, K. K. (2000). Love in the therapeutic alliance. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 48: 189–218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novick, K. K. & Novick, J. (1998). An application of the concept of the therapeutic alliance. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 46: 813–846.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piaget, J. (1973). Plenary session: the affective unconscious and the cognitive unconscious. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 21: 249–261.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pine, F. (2001). Listening psychoanalytically—with what in mind? Int. J. Psychoanal., 82: 901–916.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reik, T. (1949). Listening with the Third Ear. New York: Farrar, Straus & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Reiser, M. F. (1999). Memory, empathy, and interactive dimensions of psychoanalytic practice. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 47: 485–501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roughton, R. E. (1993). Useful aspects of acting out: repetition, enactment and actualization. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 41: 443–471.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silverman, M. A. (2007). The psychoanalyst as a new old object, an old new object and a brand new object: reflections on Loewald’s ideas about the role of internalization in life and in psychoanalytic treatment. Psychoanal. Q., 76: 1153–1169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, H. F. (2000). Countertransference, conflictual listening, and the analytic object relationship. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 48: 95–128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spitz, R. A. (1945). Hospitalism: an inquiry into the genesis of psychiatric conditions in early childhood. Psychoanal. Study Child, 1: 53–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spitz, R. A. (1946) Anaclitic depression: an inquiry into the genesis of psychiatric conditions in early childhood, II. Psychoanal. Study Child, 2: 313–342.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spitz, R. A. (1950). Relevancy of direct infant observation. Psychoanal. Study Child, 5: 66–73.
   Google Scholar
• Stein, M. H. (1981). The unobjectionable part of the transference. J. Amer. Psychoanal. Assn., 29: 869–892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stern, D. B. (2008). “One never knows, do one?”: commentary on paper by the Boston Change Process Study Group. Psychoanal. Dialogues, 18: 168–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stern, D. N. (1985). The Interpersonal World of the Infant: A View from Psychoanalysis and Developmental Psychology. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar