Solomon I
Psychoanal Rev. 1986 Spring;73(1):31-40.
This paper has attempted to discover if the two analyses of Mr. Z by Kohut do in fact substantiate the clinical efficacy of his theoretical model. A brief overview was presented, as were critical assessments. The major point was developed, that a creative working-through of a complementary countertransference was largely responsible for the success of a second analysis after a first phase was seriously undercut by interfering material which rigidified the therapist's interpretation. It was concluded by noting how Kohut's need to overcome the countertransference played a vital role in catalyzing the evolution of his new theory.
本文试图探究科胡特对Z先生的两种分析是否确实证实了其理论模型的临床疗效。文中给出了简要概述以及批判性评估。主要观点是，在第一阶段因干扰性材料而严重受挫，这些材料使治疗师的解释僵化，而互补性反移情的创造性修通在很大程度上促成了第二次分析的成功。最后指出，科胡特克服反移情的需求在催化其新理论的演变过程中发挥了至关重要的作用。
