Psychoanalytic therapy: The Eysenck argument

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

H. J. Eysenck's (1952, 1963, 1966) criticisms of psychoanalytic therapy have recently been rejected by several psychologists. In 1952, Eysenck assessed the effectiveness of both psychoanalytic and nonpsychoanalytic psychotherapies. Based on a review of the literature, and referring to 24 studies covering over 7,000 cases, he concluded that the data failed to prove that psychotherapy facilitates the recovery of neurotics. One objection is that his argument mistakenly assumes an inflated spontaneous remission rate; another is that his interpretation of some of the studies he cites is radically defective. It has also been argued that more recent studies provide fresh evidence for the effectiveness of psychoanalysis. The present article recontructs Eysenck's original argument and tries to show how it can be defended against recent criticisms. (52 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)435-443
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Psychologist
Volume35
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 1980
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Psychoanalytic Therapy
Psychotherapy
Spontaneous Remission
Psychoanalysis
Psychology

Keywords

  • psychoanalysis & clinical effectiveness, analysis of H. J. Eysenck's arguments

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Psychoanalytic therapy : The Eysenck argument. / Erwin, Edward.

In: American Psychologist, Vol. 35, No. 5, 01.05.1980, p. 435-443.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4ad999bbdbc542b1b41d346682ad3e38,
title = "Psychoanalytic therapy: The Eysenck argument",
abstract = "H. J. Eysenck's (1952, 1963, 1966) criticisms of psychoanalytic therapy have recently been rejected by several psychologists. In 1952, Eysenck assessed the effectiveness of both psychoanalytic and nonpsychoanalytic psychotherapies. Based on a review of the literature, and referring to 24 studies covering over 7,000 cases, he concluded that the data failed to prove that psychotherapy facilitates the recovery of neurotics. One objection is that his argument mistakenly assumes an inflated spontaneous remission rate; another is that his interpretation of some of the studies he cites is radically defective. It has also been argued that more recent studies provide fresh evidence for the effectiveness of psychoanalysis. The present article recontructs Eysenck's original argument and tries to show how it can be defended against recent criticisms. (52 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).",
keywords = "psychoanalysis & clinical effectiveness, analysis of H. J. Eysenck's arguments",
author = "Edward Erwin",
year = "1980",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/0003-066X.35.5.435",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "435--443",
journal = "American Psychologist",
issn = "0003-066X",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Psychoanalytic therapy

T2 - The Eysenck argument

AU - Erwin, Edward

PY - 1980/5/1

Y1 - 1980/5/1

N2 - H. J. Eysenck's (1952, 1963, 1966) criticisms of psychoanalytic therapy have recently been rejected by several psychologists. In 1952, Eysenck assessed the effectiveness of both psychoanalytic and nonpsychoanalytic psychotherapies. Based on a review of the literature, and referring to 24 studies covering over 7,000 cases, he concluded that the data failed to prove that psychotherapy facilitates the recovery of neurotics. One objection is that his argument mistakenly assumes an inflated spontaneous remission rate; another is that his interpretation of some of the studies he cites is radically defective. It has also been argued that more recent studies provide fresh evidence for the effectiveness of psychoanalysis. The present article recontructs Eysenck's original argument and tries to show how it can be defended against recent criticisms. (52 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

AB - H. J. Eysenck's (1952, 1963, 1966) criticisms of psychoanalytic therapy have recently been rejected by several psychologists. In 1952, Eysenck assessed the effectiveness of both psychoanalytic and nonpsychoanalytic psychotherapies. Based on a review of the literature, and referring to 24 studies covering over 7,000 cases, he concluded that the data failed to prove that psychotherapy facilitates the recovery of neurotics. One objection is that his argument mistakenly assumes an inflated spontaneous remission rate; another is that his interpretation of some of the studies he cites is radically defective. It has also been argued that more recent studies provide fresh evidence for the effectiveness of psychoanalysis. The present article recontructs Eysenck's original argument and tries to show how it can be defended against recent criticisms. (52 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

KW - psychoanalysis & clinical effectiveness, analysis of H. J. Eysenck's arguments

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0019015304&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0019015304&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/0003-066X.35.5.435

DO - 10.1037/0003-066X.35.5.435

M3 - Article

C2 - 7386972

AN - SCOPUS:0019015304

VL - 35

SP - 435

EP - 443

JO - American Psychologist

JF - American Psychologist

SN - 0003-066X

IS - 5

ER -