References
- Aron, L. (2012). Rethinking “double thinking”: Psychoanalysis and scientific research: An introduction to a series. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 22, 704–709.
- Bibring, E. (1954). Psychoanalysis and the dynamic psychotherapies. Journal of American Psychoanalytic Association, 2, 745–770.
- Green, A. (1996a). Response to Robert S. Wallerstein. Newsletter of the International Psycho-Analytic Association, 5(1), 18–21.
- Green, A. (1996b). What kind of research for psychoanalysis? Newsletter of the International Psycho-Analytic Association, 5(1), 10–14.
- Green, A. (2000). Science and science fiction in infant research. In J. Sandler, A.-M. Sander, & R. Davies (Eds.), Clinical and observational psychoanalytic research: Roots of a controversy: André Green and Daniel Stern (pp. 41–72). London, UK: Karnac Books.
- Hoffman, I. Z. (2009). Double thinking our way to “scientific” legitimacy: The desiccation of human experience. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 57, 1043–1070.
- Hoffman, I. Z. (2012). Response to Safran: The development of critical psychoanalytic sensibility. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 22, 721–730.
- Safran, J. D. (2012). Double thinking or dialectical thinking. A critical appreciation of Hoffman's “Doublethinking” critique. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 22, 710–720.
- Wallerstein, R. S. (1986a). Forty-two lives in treatment: A study of psychoanalysis and psychotherapy. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
- Wallerstein, R. S. (1986b). Psychoanalysis as a science: A response to the new challenges. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 55, 414–451.
- Wallerstein, R. S. (1988). Psychoanalysis, psychoanalytic science, and psychoanalytic research—1966. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 36, 3–30.
- Wallerstein, R. S. (1996). Psychoanalytic research: Where do we disagree? Newsletter of the International Psycho-Analytic Association, 5(1), 15–17.
- Wallerstein, R. S. (2009). What kind of research in psychoanalytic science? International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 90, 109–133.