MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1596572533 · doi:10.1177/070674371405900608

Book Review: Psychotherapy: Seeing and Being Seen: Emerging from a Psychic Retreat

2014· article· en· W1596572533 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paul Ian Steinberg

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumiliationPsychicPsychoanalysisEmbarrassmentPsychologyShamePsychoanalytic theoryFeelingNarcissismPsychotherapistSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychotherapy Seeing and Being Seen: Emerging From a Psychic Retreat John Steiner. New York (NY): Routledge; 2013. 196 p. US$42.95Reviewer rating: ExcellentI decided to review this book because its predecessor,1 which I found intriguing and very useful, is highly regarded and frequently cited in the contemporary psychoanalytic literature. John Steiner provides a lengthy introduction summarizing each chapter, preparing the reader well for what follows, and engaging the reader. He repeats this format in each chapter, outlining in more detail what he wants to convey.Steiner discusses clinical situations where patients feel stuck, and where failure to develop impedes the progress of the analysis. He observes that defences are sometimes held onto with great tenacity, and are most resistant to change when they form an organized and coordinated structure. He describes these systems of defences as pathological organizations of personality, which give rise to structures he calls psychic retreats. This book is divided into 3 parts. Part 1 deals with embarrassment, shame, and humiliation. Part 2 deals with helplessness, power, and dominance. Part 3 deals with mourning, melancholia, and repetition compulsion.Part 1 starts with Anxiety of Being Seen: Narcissistic Pride and Narcissistic Humiliation. Steiner describes a patient whose defences were based on fantasies of superiority and admiration, who was very sensitive to being observed. The analytic setting made him feel exposed; he was prone to feeling inferior and persecuted. In Gaze, Domination and Humiliation in the Schreber Case, Steiner suggests that the subject of Freud's famous study failed to find anyone who could understand and contain his distress, leaving him unable to face the humiliation and emerge from his paranoia. Steiner believes that containment requires the analyst to be open to the patient's projections, and to understand the experience evoked in him (the analyst) in a way that retains a relationship with reality. In Improvement and the Embarrassment of Tenderness, Steiner illustrates the narcissistic organization the patient turns to for protection, and his fear that this would be seen through and exposed. In Transference to the Analyst as an Excluded Observer, Steiner describes how the analyst can sometimes be provoked to make judgmental interpretations in response to being excluded and looked down on. Steiner provides an excellent summary of the relation between transference and projective identification, and between splitting and the internal world. Steiner highlights Klein's discovery that what is transferred is not so much an object from the past, but one that exists in the present, as an internal object that is then projected onto the analytic situation. Steiner does not aggrandize himself as a therapist. At the end of a treatment he describes, he clearly entertains doubts about to what extent his patient was helped.Part 2 begins with Struggle for Dominance in the Oedipus Situation. Steiner describes the conflict over power and dominance that can occur in the Oedipal situation, and distinguishes between paranoid and depressive solutions to the Oedipus complex. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.034

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207