Modern conflict theory

1. Introduction

Version followed: Charles Brenner's late compromise-formation theory as set out in Psychoanalytic Technique and Psychic Conflict (1976) and The Mind in Conflict (1982), updated by his 1994 paper "The mind as conflict and compromise formation" (where he drops the id/ego/superego agencies), combined with Jacob Arlow's model of unconscious fantasy ("Unconscious fantasy and disturbances of conscious experience", 1969; "Fantasy, memory and reality testing", 1969) and his account of how interpretations are formed ("The genesis of interpretation", 1979; "Metaphor and the psychoanalytic situation", 1979; "Methodology and reconstruction", 1991). The shared process view comes from Arlow & Brenner, "The psychoanalytic process" (1990). Where the earlier structural-theory version (Arlow & Brenner 1964) differs, this guide follows the later Brenner and says so. Source access: the only primary text read in full was Brenner 1994. The books and the Arlow papers sit behind paywalls or lending libraries (PEP-Web, Internet Archive). Claims credited to them come from familiarity with the texts, not from re-checking pages, and are tagged [uncertain] where precise wording or page detail matters. There is no treatment manual for this approach. It is taught through institute curricula (e.g., NYPSI Course 100) and case seminars.

What it is. It is a form of psychoanalysis, and of psychoanalytic psychotherapy, in which the therapist's single main tool is interpreting psychic conflict. Brenner holds that every emotionally significant thought, feeling, symptom, character trait, dream and transference reaction is a compromise formation with four interacting components: (1) a drive derivative, meaning a libidinal or aggressive wish; (2) unpleasure (anxiety or depressive affect) tied to that wish, whose content is a childhood calamity: loss of the object, loss of love, castration or bodily harm, or punishment; (3) defense, meaning anything that reduces the unpleasure; and (4) moral demands and self-punishment [source: Brenner 1994, pp. 480–484]. Arlow adds that conflicts are organised as persistent unconscious fantasies. These are story-like, childhood-derived scenarios that keep running out of awareness and colour perception, memory, symptoms and the way the patient experiences the therapist [source: Arlow 1969, recalled; uncertain].

How change happens. Conflict is never removed, because it is ubiquitous and normal. Repeated interpretation of the components of conflict, especially in the transference, gives the patient insight. That insight lets the patient's compromise formations shift from pathological to more normal ones: enough gratification, not too much unpleasure, not too much inhibition, and not too much self-punishment [source: Brenner 1994, p. 486]. Brenner restates Freud's goal as conscious "judgmental repudiation" replacing automatic defense [source: Brenner 1994, p. 485].

2. Framework

Conflict theory has no manualised phases. Brenner and Arlow describe one continuous process: the patient's conflicts appear in associations and transference, the analyst forms conjectures and interprets, the patient responds with new material, and the work is repeated (working through) [source: Arlow & Brenner 1990, recalled; uncertain]. The phases below are the conventional classical sequence used in institute teaching. The division is a teaching convenience [synthesis].

Phase	Goals	Format / typical length	Criteria for moving on
Evaluation and recommendation	Gather history and current conflicts. Form a provisional view of the main compromise formations. Judge whether the patient can tolerate a primarily interpretive treatment. Agree the frame.	1–4 face-to-face consultations [synthesis]	The patient accepts the frame (frequency, fee, missed-session policy, the method of saying what comes to mind). There is no acute risk needing a non-interpretive response.
Opening phase	Establish free association. Begin interpreting the most accessible defenses and the transference attitudes the patient brings to treatment, including compliance and "good patient" behaviour. Notice recurrent themes and metaphors.	Classical analysis: 4–5 sessions/week, about 45–50 min, couch. Psychotherapy adaptation: 1–3/week face to face [synthesis]. Usually several months.	The patient associates fairly freely. Transference reactions to the therapist are noticeable and can be talked about. Some interpretations have produced confirming new material rather than mere agreement [synthesis].
Middle phase (working through)	Repeatedly interpret wish, unpleasure (with its specific calamity), defense and self-punishment as they show up in the transference, current life, dreams and reconstructed childhood. Identify the organising unconscious fantasies and their oedipal-phase roots.	Same frequency. Usually years: analysis is open-ended, often 4–7 years [synthesis; uncertain].	Insights recur across contexts and the patient increasingly recognises his own defenses. Symptoms and character patterns change in the direction of Brenner's normality criteria [source: Brenner 1994, p. 486].
Termination	Interpret the conflicts revived by ending (loss, guilt, triumph, wishes to stay or to leave first). Consolidate the patient's capacity for self-observation.	A date is set mutually, often 3–12 months ahead [synthesis]	Compromise formations are more adaptive, with more gratification and less anxiety, depressive affect, inhibition and self-punishment. The aim is not "absence of conflict", which Brenner says is impossible [source: Brenner 1994, p. 486].

Psychotherapy variant. Brenner treated the theory of conflict as applying to all mental life, so the same interpretive logic applies at lower frequency. The main difference is that less transference material builds up between sessions. The therapist therefore interprets more often from current-life material and needs to be more active in pointing out connections [synthesis; the primary texts address mainly analysis].

3. Guiding principles

Everything is a compromise formation [source: Brenner 1994, p. 477]. In practice: for any symptom, trait, act or feeling, ask what wish it expresses, what unpleasure it wards off, how it defends, and how it punishes.
Conflict is ubiquitous; normal and pathological differ by degree [source: Brenner 1994, pp. 477, 486]. In practice: the goal is a better compromise, not a conflict-free patient. Judge progress by the four criteria (gratification, unpleasure, inhibition, self-punishment).
Defense is defined by function, not by a catalogue of mechanisms [source: Brenner 1994; Brenner 1982]. In practice: any thought, memory, action or even affect can serve as a defense. Ask what this is doing to the unpleasure right now, not which named mechanism it is.
Unpleasure has specific ideational content: the calamities of childhood [source: Brenner 1994, pp. 481–483; Brenner 1982]. In practice: do not stop at "you're anxious". Find out whether the feared or felt calamity is losing the person, losing their love, bodily harm or castration, or punishment.
Depressive affect motivates defense just as anxiety does [source: Brenner 1994, pp. 482–483]. In practice: when the calamity is felt as having already happened ("I've already lost them"), look for defenses against misery, not only against fear.
Moral demands and self-punishment are part of every conflict [source: Brenner 1994, p. 480]. In practice: look for guilt, the need to suffer, and spoiling of success. Superego analysis is "largely an unexplored area of technique" [source: Brenner 1994, p. 480], so attend to it deliberately.
No separate mental agencies (late Brenner) [source: Brenner 1994, p. 485 ff.]. In practice: do not frame interpretations as "your ego versus your id". Speak of wishes, fears, ways of protecting oneself, and self-criticism. (The earlier Arlow & Brenner 1964 version kept the structural agencies.)
Interpretation is the therapeutic instrument [source: Brenner 1976; Arlow & Brenner 1990, recalled; uncertain]. In practice: do not use advice, reassurance, deliberate "corrective experiences" or manipulation of the relationship. If you are tempted to use them, treat the temptation as data.
Everything in the relationship is transference, including the "alliance" [source: Brenner 1979, "Working alliance, therapeutic alliance, and transference", recalled; Wikipedia summary]. In practice: interpret friendliness, cooperation and idealisation as compromise formations as well. Do not cultivate an alliance by non-analytic means.
Neutrality, meaning not siding with any component of the conflict [source: Brenner 1976, recalled; uncertain]. In practice: do not side with the wish against the guilt, or with the guilt against the wish. Show how they are combined.
Interpretations are conjectures checked against the patient's material [source: Brenner 1976; Arlow 1979, recalled; uncertain]. In practice: form hypotheses from sequence, repetition and convergence, offer them tentatively, and judge them by the new associations that follow, not by whether the patient agrees.
Unconscious fantasy runs continuously and shapes perception [source: Arlow 1969, recalled; Sigourney Award summary]. In practice: when a patient misperceives, overreacts or reports a symptom, ask what inner story the event is being read through.
The analyst's own mental activity is data [source: Arlow 1979, recalled; uncertain]. In practice: notice your own spontaneous thoughts, images and pulls during a session. They often register the patient's fantasy before you can reason it out, but they must then be checked against the material.
Childhood, especially the oedipal phase, is where the main conflicts form [source: Brenner 1982; Brenner 1994, p. 481]. In practice: link present compromise formations to the childhood wishes and calamities they repeat, when the material supports it.
Theoretical parsimony, not pluralism [source: Wikipedia, Brenner; Friedman 2011 abstract]. In practice: use one consistent model. Do not switch frameworks when the work gets hard. First ask which conflict you have not yet understood.

4. Intervention inventory

Conflict theory has one basic intervention, interpretation of the components of conflict, plus the frame and listening methods that make interpretation possible. Brenner did not publish a list of named exercises, and none are invented here. The entries below break the method into the distinct operations that the primary texts and institute teaching describe. The scripts are illustrative.

4.1 Setting the frame and the basic instruction

Purpose / when: At the start of treatment. It sets up the conditions in which conflicts can show themselves: regular sessions, a fixed fee and time, and the request to say whatever comes to mind [source: Brenner 1976, recalled; uncertain].
Steps: (1) Agree frequency, length, fee and the missed-session policy, and keep them stable. (2) Explain the method once, plainly. (3) Do not add rules about what the patient should talk about. (4) From then on, treat how the patient relates to the frame (lateness, fee, requests to change times) as material.
Example language (illustrative): "The way we work is that you try to say whatever comes to mind, including things that seem unimportant, embarrassing or about me, and we look together at what comes up."
Watch for / working: Compliance that is too perfect, or an early wish for rules, is already a compromise formation to be interpreted later. You know it is working when the patient's speech moves beyond a prepared narrative.

4.2 Listening for conflict: sequence, repetition, convergence

Purpose / when: Continuously. It produces the data for conjectures. Arlow describes the analyst inferring unconscious fantasy from the order in which material appears (contiguity), recurring themes, shared imagery and metaphor, and several lines of material converging on one meaning [source: Arlow 1979 and 1991, recalled; uncertain as to exact criteria].
Steps: (1) Listen with even attention, without sorting too early. (2) Note what comes right after what, especially after a mention of you, a pause, or a change of topic. (3) Track words, images and metaphors that recur across sessions. (4) Look for a single scenario (who does what to whom, with what feared result) that would explain several apparently separate items.
Example language (illustrative): usually silent. If you speak: "You moved from the argument with your boss straight to your father's illness. I wonder what links them."
Watch for / working: It is working when one hypothesis explains material from different sources (transference, current life, dream, memory). Be wary of a hypothesis that rests on one striking detail.

4.3 Using the therapist's own associations (introspection)

Purpose / when: When the material feels opaque, or when a sudden image, memory or impulse comes to you during the session. Arlow described interpretation as often beginning with the analyst's own spontaneous thoughts, which are then checked cognitively against the patient's material [source: Arlow 1979, "The genesis of interpretation", recalled; uncertain].
Steps: (1) Notice your own passing thought or image without acting on it. (2) Ask what in the patient's last few minutes might have triggered it. (3) Turn it into a conjecture about the patient's fantasy. (4) Wait for confirming material before you interpret. Do not disclose the thought itself [synthesis: non-disclosure is the classical default].
Example language (illustrative): internal: "An image of a scolded child just came to me. Is she bracing for my disapproval?" Out loud, later: "You seem to be expecting me to tell you off."
Watch for / working: Your associations are also compromise formations. Brenner treated countertransference this way [source: Brenner 1985, "Countertransference as compromise formation", recalled; uncertain]. Use only conjectures that the patient's material independently supports.

4.4 Forming and testing conjectures

Purpose / when: Before every interpretation. Brenner frames the analyst's understanding as conjecture that the patient's responses confirm or disconfirm [source: Brenner 1976, recalled; uncertain].
Steps: (1) State to yourself all four components: "Wish = __; feared or felt calamity = __; defense = __; self-punishment = __." (2) Note which component is closest to the patient's awareness. (3) Interpret only that part first. (4) Judge the response by what comes next (new memories, a dream, a slip, a change of affect), not by yes or no.
Example language (illustrative): "I may be wrong, but it seems you got quieter right after you mentioned your promotion."
Watch for / working: Confirmation looks like elaboration, new associations that fit, or affect that deepens. Polite agreement with nothing new, or a flat denial followed by confirming material, should both be read as data.

4.5 Analysis of defense

Purpose / when: Whenever the patient is warding off unpleasure in the session: changing topic, intellectualising, joking, going vague, being silent, being over-agreeable. Brenner treats analysing defense as central, and defense can be any mental content that reduces unpleasure [source: Brenner 1994, pp. 473–474, 478; Brenner 1982].
Steps: (1) Point out the observable shift. (2) Show that it is happening, then what it avoids: name the unpleasant affect and, when you can, its calamity content. (3) Leave the wish until the defense and the fear are acknowledged. (4) Repeat as the same defense recurs in new forms.
Example language (illustrative): "Each time you get close to how angry you were at her, you start explaining her side. It looks as if feeling the anger itself is frightening, as if it might cost you her."
Watch for / working: Do not attack the defense or imply the patient is "resisting". Describe it as a protection. It is working when the defended-against affect becomes more available and the patient begins to catch the defense himself.

4.6 Identifying the affect and its calamity (anxiety vs. depressive affect)

Purpose / when: When unpleasure is present or implied. Brenner distinguishes anxiety, where the calamity is impending, from depressive affect, where the calamity is felt as already real. The calamities are loss of the object, loss of love, castration or bodily harm, and punishment [source: Brenner 1994, pp. 481–483].
Steps: (1) Name the affect precisely. (2) Ask about, or infer, what the patient fears will happen, or feels has already happened. (3) Link it to one of the calamities in the patient's own terms, avoiding jargon. (4) Note whether the defense targets the wish or the affect itself (for example counterphobic or euphoric denial of anxiety [source: Brenner 1994, p. 482]).
Example language (illustrative): "Underneath the irritation, it sounds like dread: if you ask for what you want, he'll stop caring about you."
Watch for / working: It is working when vague "stress" becomes a specific feared scenario that the patient recognises.

4.7 Interpreting the wish (drive derivative)

Purpose / when: Once the defense and fear around a wish have been worked with, and the material points to a specific libidinal or aggressive wish, often oedipal, competitive, dependent or sadistic [source: Brenner 1994, p. 480; Brenner 1982].
Steps: (1) Ground the interpretation in the patient's own words and images. (2) Name the wish as a wish, not an action, and say it in ordinary language. (3) Connect it with the fear and the defense already identified, so it is never interpreted in isolation. (4) Expect a fresh wave of defense and self-reproach, and interpret those next.
Example language (illustrative): "Part of you wanted to beat him, really beat him, and that wish feels so dangerous that you lose on purpose."
Watch for / working: Premature or isolated wish interpretations produce intellectual agreement or a spike in anxiety without insight. It is working when the patient can hold the wish in mind with less alarm and less need to act it out or punish himself.

4.8 Interpreting self-punishment and moral demands (superego analysis)

Purpose / when: When suffering seems to be needed: self-sabotage after success, accidents, harsh self-criticism, worsening after good sessions. Brenner places moral demands and self-punishment inside every compromise formation and calls their analysis an under-developed area of technique [source: Brenner 1994, pp. 479–480].
Steps: (1) Point out the timing of the suffering, for example right after pleasure or achievement. (2) Make the hidden "crime" explicit, meaning the wish being punished. (3) Show how the punishment also permits the wish, for example "I've paid, so I may continue" [synthesis: standard classical reading; check against material]. (4) Trace the moral standard back to the childhood fear of parental disapproval [source: Brenner 1994, p. 480].
Example language (illustrative): "It's striking that the week your paper was accepted is the week you've felt most worthless, as if you have to pay for having done well."
Watch for / working: If the patient feels accused, the interpretation has been heard as a further judgment. Re-interpret that response. It is working when success can be enjoyed with less retaliation against the self.

4.9 Transference interpretation

Purpose / when: Whenever the patient's experience of the therapist (fear, idealisation, compliance, rivalry, erotic feeling, "working alliance") carries the conflict live. Brenner holds that the alliance is transference too, and that all of it is compromise formation to be analysed [source: Brenner 1979, recalled; Wikipedia, Brenner].
Steps: (1) Notice allusions to you, including indirect ones about other doctors, teachers or bosses that come after a mention of the session. (2) Name the attitude toward you in the here and now. (3) Interpret its defensive and wish-fulfilling sides. (4) Link it to current-life and childhood versions when the material supports it.
Example language (illustrative): "You've told me twice today how helpful these sessions are, both times right after a long silence. I wonder if praising me keeps away some disappointment or criticism you're not sure is safe to say."
Watch for / working: Do not gratify the transference (reassure, advise, befriend) or reject it. It is working when the patient can talk about feelings toward you as feelings and not as facts.

4.10 Identifying and interpreting unconscious fantasy

Purpose / when: When several symptoms, traits or transference reactions seem to run on the same hidden script. Arlow describes unconscious fantasy as a continuously active, organised scenario that shapes perception and conscious experience [source: Arlow 1969, recalled; Sigourney Award summary].
Steps: (1) Collect the derivatives (recurrent daydreams, misperceptions, symptoms, metaphors, dream images). (2) Put together the scenario: actors, actions, feared and wished outcomes. (3) Interpret it piece by piece, starting with how it distorts the present ("you read X as Y"). (4) Only later reconstruct its childhood version (see 4.12).
Example language (illustrative): "It's as if there's a story running underneath, that any closeness ends with you being swallowed up, and you keep reading people through it: your girlfriend, your boss, now me."
Watch for / working: Do not impose a ready-made fantasy taken from theory. Arlow's fantasies are individual, and the NYPSI curriculum explicitly asks whether there is enough evidence [source: NYPSI Course 100]. It is working when the patient starts to recognise the story in new situations unprompted.

4.11 Working with metaphor

Purpose / when: When the patient uses vivid figures of speech ("walking on eggshells", "buried alive"). Arlow treated metaphor as a bridge to unconscious fantasy [source: Arlow 1979, "Metaphor and the psychoanalytic situation", recalled; uncertain]. Institute teaching stresses the affects carried by patients' favourite stories and metaphors [source: CMPS Porder tribute].
Steps: (1) Note the metaphor and any repetition of it. (2) Take it literally for a moment and invite elaboration. (3) Link its imagery to the conflict you are building toward.
Example language (illustrative): "You said 'buried alive' again. What comes to mind about being buried alive?"
Watch for / working: It is working when elaboration brings up memories, body sensations or affect, not just a dictionary definition.

4.12 Reconstruction (genetic interpretation)

Purpose / when: In the middle phase, when the present conflict is well established and childhood material is converging. It links today's compromise formation to the childhood wishes and calamities from which it formed [source: Arlow 1991, "Methodology and reconstruction", recalled; Brenner 1982].
Steps: (1) Gather convergent memories, screen memories, dream elements and transference repetitions. (2) Offer a tentative reconstruction ("it may have been that…"). (3) Treat it as a hypothesis that new memories or feelings will confirm, revise or disconfirm. (4) Return to the present: show how the old solution is still being applied.
Example language (illustrative): "Perhaps when your brother was born you felt you'd lost your mother, and being 'no trouble at all' was how you tried to win her back. You still try to be no trouble here."
Watch for / working: Reconstructions offered as facts invite compliance or argument. It is working when new memories or a dream follow and the present pattern loosens.

4.13 Dream analysis

Purpose / when: When a dream is reported. In late Brenner, dreams are compromise formations like any other, not a privileged royal road [source: Wikipedia, Brenner; Brenner 1982].
Steps: (1) Let the patient tell the dream. Note when in the session it is reported and what came before. (2) Ask for associations to individual elements. (3) Read the dream and its associations for the same four components and the transference allusions. (4) Interpret in the context of the current session's conflict, not as a standalone text.
Example language (illustrative): "What comes to mind about the locked room?" Later: "In the dream you're shut out, and today you came in angry that I kept you waiting."
Watch for / working: Dreams brought in large numbers can serve as a defense, for example as compliance or flooding. Interpret that function.

4.14 Working through

Purpose / when: Throughout the middle phase. The same conflicts are interpreted over and over in new contexts until the compromise formations change [source: Arlow & Brenner 1990, recalled; uncertain].
Steps: (1) Recognise the familiar conflict in new material. (2) Re-interpret, linking it to earlier insights, without repeating yourself mechanically. (3) Point out the variations, such as new defenses or a new form of the wish.
Example language (illustrative): "Here's that same move again: you got close to wanting something from me, and then turned it into a criticism of yourself."
Watch for / working: Measure change by Brenner's four criteria [source: Brenner 1994, p. 486], not by insight statements alone.

4.15 Termination work

Purpose / when: Once the compromise formations have changed adequately and the patient or therapist raises ending. The ending revives the central conflicts [synthesis; standard classical practice].
Steps: (1) Explore the wish to end and its meanings before setting a date. (2) Set a date mutually, well ahead. (3) Interpret what ending revives (loss, guilt about leaving, triumph, return of symptoms). (4) Keep the frame unchanged until the last session.
Example language (illustrative): "Since we set the date, the old symptom is back. Maybe part of you is showing me you can't leave, or punishing yourself for wanting to."
Watch for / working: A temporary return of symptoms is expected. It is working when the patient can examine it himself.

5. Handling problems

The general rule in conflict theory is that every difficulty is itself a compromise formation, to be understood and interpreted, not managed [source: Brenner 1994, p. 477; Brenner 1976, recalled]. Brenner and Arlow do not offer problem-by-problem protocols. The responses below apply that rule, and most of them are my own synthesis.

Stuck client / repetitive sessions. Treat the stalemate as a transference compromise. Ask what being stuck gratifies (defeating you, staying close, avoiding ending) and what it protects against. Check whether you have been interpreting only one component, for example only the wish and never the self-punishment, and switch. Re-read your process notes for sequence and repetition you have missed (4.2) [synthesis].
Resistance (silence, lateness, "nothing to say", intellectualising). Do not exhort or confront. Interpret it as defense (4.5): first that it is happening, then what unpleasure it avoids, often something about the therapist [source: Brenner 1994 on defense; synthesis for wording]. Illustrative: "It's hard to talk today, and I notice that came right after I raised the fee."
Overwhelm / flooding affect. Slow down. Interpret the defensive side first and avoid deep wish interpretations, because premature wish interpretation raises unpleasure. If the patient becomes disorganised, temporarily focus on the here-and-now affect and its immediate trigger in the session [synthesis]. Persistent inability to reflect suggests the frequency or the interpretive approach needs reassessing [synthesis; uncertain].
Non-adherence to the frame (missed sessions, unpaid fees, phoning between sessions). Keep the frame consistent and interpret the breach as a compromise formation, for example a wish to be special, a test of whether you will retaliate, or self-punishment through wasted treatment. Do not waive policy to preserve the relationship. Charging for missed sessions is a common classical practice, not a Brenner-specific rule [synthesis; uncertain].
Ruptures (patient angry, feels misunderstood, threatens to quit). Acknowledge any real error plainly. Do not over-apologise, because reassurance is not interpretation. Then explore what the hurt has revived: which calamity is felt as having happened, such as loss of love, and how the anger also defends against it. Brenner's position that the alliance is itself transference [source: Brenner 1979, recalled] means repair happens through interpretation, not by stepping outside it.
Patient agrees with every interpretation but nothing changes. Interpret the compliance itself: agreement as a way of placating you, or of avoiding the anxiety of disagreeing [synthesis based on 4.4 and 4.9].
Negative therapeutic reaction (worse after progress). Use superego interpretation (4.8): link the worsening to guilt about improving, surpassing others, or leaving a damaged parent behind [synthesis; consistent with Brenner 1994 on self-punishment].
Erotic or idealising transference. Neither gratify nor discourage it. Interpret it as a compromise formation with wishful, defensive (for example against rivalry or disappointment) and self-punitive parts (4.9) [synthesis].
Hostile or devaluing transference. Do not defend yourself. Interpret both the aggressive wish and the fear behind it (retaliation, loss), and note any relief the patient gets from your survival [synthesis].
Your own pull to reassure, advise or argue. Treat it as information about the patient's fantasy (4.3) and as your own compromise formation [source: Brenner 1985, recalled; uncertain]. Seek consultation if the pull persists.
Over-intellectualised formulation (modality-specific). The four-component scheme can turn into a box-ticking exercise. Interpret in the patient's own language and imagery, one component at a time, and keep affect central [synthesis; Friedman 2011 notes the risk of an "artificial drama"].
Imposing theory, e.g., forcing oedipal content (modality-specific). Require convergent evidence from several sources before naming a fantasy or reconstruction. NYPSI teaching explicitly asks whether there is enough evidence [source: NYPSI Course 100].
Lower-frequency psychotherapy (modality-specific). There is less transference build-up and more time between sessions. Rely more on current-life material and on linking within the session, and be more active in summarising recurrent patterns [synthesis; not addressed in the primary texts].
Crisis, suicidality, severe regression. Primary sources do not address these. Use standard clinical risk assessment and safety measures, which take precedence over neutrality. Afterwards, interpret the meanings of the crisis and of your intervention [synthesis].

Sources

Sources:

Books and papers cited (full text not accessed in this session; content recalled and marked [uncertain] where it matters):

Arlow, J. A. & Brenner, C. (1964). Psychoanalytic Concepts and the Structural Theory. IUP.
Brenner, C. (1976). Psychoanalytic Technique and Psychic Conflict. IUP.
Brenner, C. (1979). Working alliance, therapeutic alliance, and transference. JAPA, 27 (suppl.).
Brenner, C. (1982). The Mind in Conflict. IUP.
Brenner, C. (1985). Countertransference as compromise formation. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 54.
Brenner, C. (1994). The mind as conflict and compromise formation. Journal of Clinical Psychoanalysis, 3, 473–488.
Brenner, C. (2002). Conflict, compromise formation, and structural theory. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 71.
Brenner, C. (2006). Psychoanalysis or Mind and Meaning. Psychoanalytic Quarterly Press.
Arlow, J. A. (1969). Unconscious fantasy and disturbances of conscious experience. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 38, 1–27.
Arlow, J. A. (1969). Fantasy, memory, and reality testing. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 38.
Arlow, J. A. (1979). The genesis of interpretation. JAPA, 27, 193–206.
Arlow, J. A. (1979). Metaphor and the psychoanalytic situation. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 48.
Arlow, J. A. (1987). The dynamics of interpretation. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 56, 68–87.
Arlow, J. A. (1991). Methodology and reconstruction. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 60, 539–563.
Arlow, J. A. & Brenner, C. (1990). The psychoanalytic process. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 59, 678–692.
Abend, S. (2005). Analyzing intrapsychic conflict. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 74 (named in NYPSI syllabus; not accessed).

← Previous · I-005Ego psychology Next · I-007 →Contemporary Freudian analysis