Insight, working through, and practice: the role of procedural knowledge

Insight orientation scale: A promising tool for organizational outcomes-A psychometric analysis using item response theory

Insight is a construct carried out into different theoretical orientations with increasing application out of the boundaries of clinical psychology. Recent studies have investigated insight also as a promising variable for organizational outcomes. Given the relevance of Insight in promoting change, this paper aimed at describing the psychometric analysis of one of the shortest, most agile, and most versatile tool for measuring some of the characteristics of insight, the Insight Orientation Scale (IOS), using Item Response Theory. To achieve this goal, we applied a Mixed Rash Model to the IOS. Data from 1,445 individuals were analyzed by the means of WIN-MIRA and Multilog. Based on the likelihood statistics (CAIC) we assumed a three-class solution for the IOS. Results also indicated that the greater part of items had good discrimination and threshold parameters. These findings confirmed psychometric stability of the IOS highlighting its measurement precision, supporting its utility in both research and practice.

Validation of the Psychological Insight Scale: A new scale to assess psychological insight following a psychedelic experience

INTRODUCTION

As their name suggests, 'psychedelic' (mind-revealing) compounds are thought to catalyse processes of psychological insight; however, few satisfactory scales exist to sample this. This study sought to develop a new scale to measure psychological insight after a psychedelic experience: the Psychological Insight Scale (PIS).

METHODS

The PIS is a six- to seven-item questionnaire that enquires about psychological insight after a psychedelic experience (PIS-6) and accompanied behavioural changes (PIS item 7). In total, 886 participants took part in a study in which the PIS and other questionnaires were completed in a prospective fashion in relation to a planned psychedelic experience. For validation purposes, data from 279 participants were analysed from a non-specific 'global psychedelic survey' study.

RESULTS

Principal components analysis of PIS scores revealed a principal component explaining 73.57% of the variance, which displayed high internal consistency at multiple timepoints throughout the study (average Cronbach's α = 0.94). Criterion validity was confirmed using the global psychedelic survey study, and convergent validity was confirmed via the Therapeutic-Realizations Scale. Furthermore, PIS scores significantly mediated the relationship between emotional breakthrough and long-term well-being.

CONCLUSION

The PIS is complementary to current subjective measures used in psychedelic studies, most of which are completed in relation to the acute experience. Insight - as measured by the PIS - was found to be a key mediator of long-term psychological outcomes following a psychedelic experience. Future research may investigate how insight varies throughout a psychedelic process, its underlying neurobiology and how it impacts behaviour and mental health.

Insight into conflictual relationship patterns: Development and validation of an observer rating scale

Objective: This study aimed to develop an observer-rated measure of Insight into Conflictual Relationship Patterns (ICR) applicable to audio- or videotapes of psychotherapy sessions and conduct a first psychometric evaluation. Method: We investigated the item properties, principal components, reliability, and validity of the ICR in a naturalistic sample of N = 125 outpatients in psychodynamic psychotherapy. Results: The ICR consists of 12 items that showed adequate item discrimination and item difficulty indices. All items represent one principal component. Using item response theory, discrimination parameters and item characteristic curves revealed that the ability of all items to differentiate patients was adequate to very good. The scale demonstrated good interrater reliability (ICC(3,1) = .76-.93), adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .84), and high retest reliability (r = .91). Regarding validity, the ICR was significantly associated with insight according to the Achievement of Therapeutic Objectives Scale and patient-perceived session depth. Insight at session five predicted a symptomatic increase from session five to session ten. Conclusion: The ICR is an observer-rated measure to assess insight from psychotherapy session recordings that has demonstrated several aspects of reliability and validity. Future studies are needed to clarify the impact of ICR-assessed insight for symptomatic outcome.

The Neuropsychoanalytic Approach: Using Neuroscience as the Basic Science of Psychoanalysis

Neuroscience was the basic science behind Freud's psychoanalytic theory and technique. He worked as a neurologist for 20 years before being aware that a new approach to understand complex diseases, namely the hysterias, was needed. Solms coined the term neuropsychoanalysis to affirm that neuroscience still belongs in psychoanalysis. The neuropsychoanalytic field has continued Freud's original ideas as stated in 1895. Developments in psychoanalysis that have been created or revised by the neuropsychoanalysis movement include pain/relatedness/opioids, drive, structural model, dreams, cathexis, and dynamic unconscious. Neuroscience has contributed to the development of new psychoanalytic theory, such as Bazan's (2011) description of anxiety driven by unconscious intentions or “phantoms.” Results of adopting the “dual aspect monism” approach of idiographic psychoanalytic clinical observation combined with nomothetic investigation of related human phenomena include clarification and revision of theory, restoration of the scientific base of psychoanalysis, and improvement of clinical treatments. By imbricating psychoanalytic thinking with neuroscience, psychoanalysts are also positioned to make contributions to neuroscience research. Freud's original Project for a Scientific Psychology/Psychology for Neurologists can be carried forward in a way that moves psychoanalysis into the twenty-first century as a core contemporary science (Kandel, 1999). Neuroscience as the basic science of psychoanalysis both improves the field, and enhances its scientific and cultural status.

The dialog between psychoanalysis and neuroscience: what does philosophy of mind say?

OBJECTIVE

To briefly review how the main monist and dualist currents of philosophy of mind approach the mind-body problem and to describe their association with arguments for and against a closer dialog between psychoanalysis and neuroscience.

METHODS

The literature was reviewed for studies in the fields of psychology, psychoanalysis, neuroscience, and philosophy of mind.

RESULTS

Some currents are incompatible with a closer dialog between psychoanalysis and neurosciences: interactionism and psychophysical parallelism, because they do not account for current knowledge about the brain; epiphenomenalism, which claims that the mind is a mere byproduct of the brain; and analytical behaviorism, eliminative materialism, reductive materialism and functionalism, because they ignore subjective experiences. In contrast, emergentism claims that mental states are dependent on brain states, but have properties that go beyond the field of neurobiology.

CONCLUSIONS

Only emergentism is compatible with a closer dialog between psychoanalysis and neuroscience.

Interdisciplinary studies and our practice

Why should psychoanalysts learn about neighboring disciplines? It is often argued that, although information from neuroscience, neuropsychology, evolutionary psychology, and other fields may be of interest to analysts, it has no real effect on their practice: on the way they listen, the way they react, or the way they treat their patients. A corollary of this position is that there is no reason to include such information in a psychoanalytic curriculum, since it does not help candidates become better analysts. Against this view, two reasons are advanced for the importance of interdisciplinary study. The more general reason is that it grounds psychoanalysis in the broader scientific world, reducing its isolation and inbred parochialism. This can help justify the discipline intellectually, possibly in advance of and independently of supportive research from within the field (e.g., outcome studies). The second reason is that our own minds, and particularly those of the generation now entering training, have been altered by changes in the scientific zeitgeist and we need to have some grasp of these changes. Finally, six examples of findings from other disciplines are presented that even now may be contributing to thinking about psychoanalytic practice.