Il dominio dell’implicito nelle coppie e nella terapia di coppia

Titolo Rivista RICERCA PSICOANALITICA
Autori/Curatori Susan M. Shimmerlik
Anno di pubblicazione 2013 Fascicolo 2013/2
Lingua Italiano Numero pagine 20 P. 9-28 Dimensione file 230 KB
DOI 10.3280/RPR2013-002002
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

I recenti progressi avvenuti attraverso lo sviluppo della psicoanalisi e la teoria dei sistemi familiari, oltre alle scoperte apportate dalle neuroscienze e dall’infant research, creano ampie convergenze nella nostra comprensione dell’esperienza umana. Un’importante convergenza si è realizzata grazie alla comprensione delle modalità implicite dell’esperienza, in particolare per ciò che riguarda la comunicazione affettiva. Attraverso l’ottica della coppia e della terapia di coppia, questo scritto esamina le modalità in cui i modelli relazionali familiari e di coppia si attuano nel dominio dell’agire, attraverso processi di comunicazione non conscia e implicita. Avendo compreso che la natura dell’esperienza implicita è tale per cui solo attraverso l’agito essa diventa accessibile, sosterrò che buona parte di ciò che abbiamo immagazzinato nel dominio dell’implicito rimane inserito e agito nelle relazioni più intime e di conseguenza può diventare accessibile solo nel contesto di quelle relazioni. Esplorerò poi alcune implicazioni dei processi impliciti, in relazione alla triade formata dal terapeuta e dalla coppia in terapia.;

Keywords:Dominio dell’implicito, terapia di coppia, teoria dei sistemi familiari, BCPSG, processi di comunicazione

  1. Beebe B. and Lachmann F. M. (2002). Infant research and adult treatment: Co-constructing interactions. Hillsdale, N.J.: Analytic Press.
  2. Amini F., Lewi T., Lannon R., Louie A., Baumbacher G., McGuinness T., & Schiff E. Z. (1996). Affect, attachment, memory: Contributions toward psycho-biologic integration. Psychiatry, 59: 213-239
  3. Aron L. (1990). One person and two person psychologies and the method of psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 7: 475-485, DOI: 10.1037/0736-9735.7.4.475
  4. Bateson G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books
  5. Beebe B., Jaffe J. & Lachmann F. M. (1992). A dyadic systems view of communication. In: Skolnick N. & Warshaw S. (Eds.), Relational perspectives in psychoanalysis (pp. 61- 81). Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press
  6. Beebe B., Jaffe J., Lachmann F.M., Feldstein S., Crown C. & Jasnow M. (2000). Systems models in development and psychoanalysis: The case of vocal rhythm coordination and attachment. Infant Mental Health Journal, 21: 99-122, DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0355(200001/04)21:1/2<99::AID-IMHJ11>3.0.CO;2-#
  7. Beebe B., Knoblauch S., Rustin J. & Sorter D. (Eds.) (2005). Forms of intersubjectivity in infant research and adult treatment. New York: Other Press
  8. Beebe B. and Lachmann F. M. (1998). Co-constructing inner and relational processes: Selfand mutual regulation in infant research and adult treatment. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 15: 480-516, DOI: 10.1037/0736-9735.15.4.480
  9. Beebe B., Lachmann F. M. and Jaffe J. (1997). Mother-infant interaction structures and presymbolic self- and object representations. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 7: 133-182, DOI: 10.1080/10481889709539172
  10. Bollas C. (1987). The shadow of the object. New York: Columbia University Press.
  11. Boston Change Process Study Group (BCPSG): Bruschweiler-Stern N., Harrison A. M., Lyons- Ruth K., Morgan A. C., Nahum J. P., Sander L. W., Stern D. N., Tronick E. Z. (2002). Explicating the implicit: The local level and the microprocess of change in the analytic situation. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 83: 1051-1062, DOI: 10.1516/B105-35WV-MM0Y-NTAD
  12. BCPSG: Bruschweiler-Stern N., Harrison A.M., Lyons-Ruth K., Morgan A. C., Nahum J. P., Sander L.W., Stern D. N., Tronick E. Z. (2005). The something more than interpretation revisited: Sloppiness and co-creativity in the psychoanalytic encounter. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 53: 693-729, DOI: 10.1177/0003065105053-0030401
  13. BCPSG: Bruschweiler-Stern N., Lyons-Ruth K., Morgan A. C., Nahum J. P., Sander L. W., Stern D. N., Tronick E. Z. (2007). The foundational level of psychodynamic meaning: Implicit process in relation to conflict, defense and the dynamic unconscious. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 88: 843-860 DOI: 10.1516/T2T4-0X02-6H21-5475
  14. Bowen M. (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. New York: Jason Aronson
  15. Bromberg P.M. (1998). Standing in the spaces: Essays on clinical process, trauma & dissociation. Hillsdale, N.J.: The Analytic Press
  16. Buccino G., Lui F., Canessa N. Patteri I., Lagravinese G., Benuzzi F., Porro C. A. and Rizzolatti G. (2004). Neural circuits involved in the recognition of actions performed by non conspecifics: An fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16: 114-126 DOI: 10.1162/089892904322755601
  17. Calvo-Merino B., Grezes J., Glaser D. E., Passingham R. E., & Haggard P. (2006). Seeing or doing? Influence of visual and motor familiarity in action observation. Current Biology, 16: 1905-1910 DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2006.07.065
  18. Clyman R. B.(1991). The procedural organization of emotions: A contribution from cognitive science to the psychoanalytic theory of therapeutic action. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 39: 349-382
  19. Davies J.M. (1998). Multiple perspectives on multiplicity. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 8: 195-206 DOI: 10.1080/10481889809539241
  20. Fivaz-Depeursing E. & Favez N. (2006). Exploring triangulation in infancy: Two contrasted cases. Family Process, 45: 3-18 DOI: 10.1111/j.1545-5300.2006.00077
  21. Fosshage J. (2005). The explicit and implicit domains in psychoanalytic change. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 25: 516-539 DOI: 10.2513/s07351690pi2504_7
  22. Gallese V., Fadiga L., Fogassi L., & Rizzolatti G. (1996). Action recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain, 119: 593-609 DOI: 10.1093/brain/119.2.593
  23. Ghent E. (1989). The dialectics of one-person and two-person psychologies. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 25: 169-211.
  24. Ghent E. (2002). Wish, need, drive: Motive in the light of dynamic systems theory and Edelman’s selectionist theory. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 12: 763-808 DOI: 10.1080/104-81881209348705
  25. Goldstein S. & Thau S. (2004). Integrating attachment theory and neuroscience in couple therapy. International Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, 1: 214-223 DOI: 10.1002/aps.73
  26. Haley J. (1976). Problem-solving therapy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  27. Hoffman L. (1982). Foundations of family therapy. New York: Basic Books
  28. Lyons-Ruth K. (1999). The two-person unconscious: Intersubjective dialogue, enactive relational representation, and the emergence of new forms of relational organization. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 19: 576-617 DOI: 10.1080/07351699909534267
  29. Minuchin S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
  30. Nahum J. P. (1994). New theoretical vistas in psychoanalysis: Louis Sander’s theory of early development. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 11: 1-19 DOI: 10.1037/h0079512
  31. Palley R. (2005). A neuroscience perspective on forms of intersubjectivity in infant research and adult treatment. In: Beebe B., Knoblauch S., Rustin J., and Sorter D. (Eds.). Forms of intersubjectivity in infant research and adult treatment (pp. 191-241). New York: Other Press.
  32. Rizzolatti G., Fadiga L., Gallese V. & Fogassi L. (1996). Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Cognitive Brain Research, 3: 131-141 DOI: 10.1016/0926-6410(95)00038-0
  33. Rizzolatti G., Fogassi L. & Gallese V. (2001). Neuro-physiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2: 661-670, DOI: 10.1038/35090060
  34. Sander L.W. (1977). The regulation of exchange in the infant-caretaker system and some aspects of the context-content relationship. In: Lewis & Rosenblum (Eds.). Interaction, conversation, and the development of language (pp. 133–156). New York: Wiley.
  35. Sander L. W. (1983). Polarity, paradox, and the organizing process in development. In: Call J., Galenson E., & Tyson R. (Eds.), Frontiers of infant psychiatry (pp. 333-346). New York: Basic Books
  36. Sander L.W. (2000). Where are we going in the field of infant mental health? Infant Mental Health Journal, 21: 5-20 DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0355(200001/04)21:1/2<5::AIDIMHJ2>3.0.CO;2-S
  37. Schacter D. L. (1996). Searching for memory: The brain, the mind and the past. New York: Basic Books.
  38. Schore A. N. (1994). Affect regulation and the origin of the self: The neurobiology of emotional development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  39. Schore A.N. (2003). Affect regulation and the repair of the self. NewYork: Norton & Co.
  40. Siegel D. J. (1999). The developing mind: Toward a neurobiology of interpersonal experience. New York: Guilford Press
  41. Solomon M. F. & Siegel J. P. (1999). Countertransference in couples therapy. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
  42. Sorce J. F., Emde R. N., Campos J. J. & Klinnert M. D. (1985). Maternal emotional signaling: It’s effects on the visual cliff behavior of 1-year olds. Developmental Psychology, 21: 195-200 DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.21.1.195
  43. Stechler G. (1996). Self-disclosure and affect. New York: Annual Spring Meeting of the Division of Psychoanalysis (39) of the American Psychological Association
  44. Stechler G. (2000). Louis W. Sander and the question of affective presence. Infant Mental Health Journal, 21: 75-84 DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0355(200001/04)21:1/2<75::AIDIMHJ9>3.0.CO;2-Z
  45. Stechler G. (2003). Affect: The heart of the matter. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 13: 711-726, DOI: 10.1080/10481881309348765
  46. Stern D. B. (1997). Unformulated experience: From dissociation to imagination in psychoanalysis. Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press
  47. Stern D.N. (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant: A view from psychoanalysis and developmental psychology. New York: Basic Books.
  48. Stern D. N., Sander L.W., Nahum J. P., Harrison A. M., Lyons-Ruth K., Morgan A. C., Bruschweiler- Stern N. & Tronick E. Z. (1998). Non-interpretive mechanisms in psychoanalytic therapy: The “something more” than interpretation. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 79: 903-921
  49. Tronick E. Z.(1989). Emotions and emotional communication in infants. American Psychologist, 44: 112-119 DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.44.2.112
  50. Watzlawick P., Beavin J. H., & Jackson D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication: A study of interactional patterns, pathologies, and paradoxes. New York: Norton
  51. White M. & Epstein D. (1990). Narrative means to therapeutic ends. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.

Susan M. Shimmerlik, Il dominio dell’implicito nelle coppie e nella terapia di coppia in "RICERCA PSICOANALITICA" 2/2013, pp 9-28, DOI: 10.3280/RPR2013-002002