Sabrina Cherry

Psychoanalytic practice in the early postgraduate years

As a pilot investigation for a longitudinal study of psychoanalytic careers, a survey was conducted of analysts who graduated during the last fifteen years from the Columbia University Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research. Graduates were asked to describe both their analytic practice and their interest in pursuing appointment as training and supervising analysts. The 23-item questionnaire was completed by 67 of 102 potential respondents (66%). The study identified two subgroups of graduates: those who were not certified and were not training analysts (GAs), 78% of the sample, and certified and training analysts (CAs, TAs), 22% of the sample. GAs started a mean of 1.4 new analytic cases since graduation, as compared to CAs and TAs, who started a mean of 5.4 and 8.3 new cases, respectively. CAs and TAs also saw more twice-weekly therapy cases than did GAs. Once-weekly therapy was the most commonly practiced treatment for all subgroups. Interest in becoming a TA was highest during the first five postgraduate years and was lower among non-TAs five to fifteen years after graduation. Only one of the CA respondents met current APsaA immersion criteria for training analyst appointment.

A PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF CAREER DEVELOPMENT AND ANALYTIC PRACTICE: THE FIRST FIVE YEARS

To better understand the professional development of early career analysts, the Columbia University Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research initiated a prospective longitudinal study of its graduates beginning in June 2003. Twenty-six of 29 graduates (90%) have completed confidential baseline questionnaires focusing on four domains: experience in analytic training, current private practice, postgraduate activities, and career goals. Participants are followed longitudinally with annual follow-up questionnaires and interviews. Of the cohort of graduates from 2003—2007, 58% were female, compared to 20% female in the cohort of graduates from 1973—1977. A bimodal distribution emerges wherein half of all graduates continue to sustain immersion of at least three ongoing cases in analysis at a four-times-weekly frequency. The other half do not maintain this immersion in four-times-a-week treatment; they primarily apply their training to psychotherapy practice. The more immersed group indicate significantly stronger interest in pursuing training analyst appointment as a primary career goal. The nonimmersed group conduct psychotherapy, feel positive about their training experience, teach at the institute, and have high morale, yet do not consider being a psychoanalyst their primary career identity. Thus, by five years, two viable and satisfying career paths emerge among our graduates. These data are important for training programs, both in preparing their graduates for future practice and in supporting their postgraduate experience.

A prospective study of psychoanalytic practice and professional development: early career interviews.

In 2003 the Columbia Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research began a prospective study of graduates designed to both describe and understand their professional trajectory. The study has two components: a quantitative component based on an anonymous comprehensive questionnaire given analysts yearly starting with their graduation, and a qualitative component comprising analyst interviews beginning at the end of the first postgraduate year and repeated every two years. Analysis of the first six years of the qualitative study shows that analysts will talk openly about their practice and careers and that when they do, practical issues are a dominant concern. Analysts both immersed and not immersed in four-times-weekly analytic cases experiment with adapting skills developed in training to treat cases in analysis seen less frequently. Analysts without four-times-weekly case immersion are engaged in analytic careers, participate as faculty at the institute, and report a high degree of career satisfaction. The major findings of this study compel changes in psychoanalytic training programs. The field would do well to address actual clinical practice experience in institute curricula and training programs, thus making analytic training more relevant.

A Cross-Sectional Survey of Child and Adolescent Analysts in New York City

The field of child and adolescent psychoanalysis has been considered an endangered specialty for many decades. This study surveyed the nature of the practice of child and adolescent analysts (graduates and candidates) affiliated with three institutes accredited by the American Psychoanalytic Association in the New York City area. Sixty-one percent of those surveyed (63 of 103) responded. The child and adolescent analysts in this cohort treat a total of 201 adult, child, and adolescent analytic cases (M = 3.2, SD = 2.6). Of these cases, 17% are at a three-times-weekly frequency. Child and adolescent analytic practice is small, with a total of 56 analytic cases (M = .9, SD = 1.2). While 64% of these analysts have no child or adolescent analytic cases currently in treatment, 24% have very active child and adolescent analytic practices, conducting 73% of all the child and adolescent analyses reported. Implications of these findings and recommendations for future work are discussed.

The Columbia longitudinal study of postgraduate career development and psychoanalytic practice: four years of experience.

Research at the Columbia University Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research has documented that most graduate analysts practice very little psychoanalysis after their control cases terminate. Graduates who eventually became certified or training analysts had significantly more immersion in four-times-weekly psychoanalysis than did their noncertified, non–training analyst colleagues. For the graduates from 1987 to 2001 who responded to this survey (67 of 102; 66%), the mean number of four-times-weekly analytic cases treated was 1.4 for the whole sample, 3.4 for training analysts (7 of 67; 10% of the sample), 2.6 for certified non–training analysts (8 of 67; 12%), and 1.0 for noncertified analysts (52 of 67; 78%). In addition, while a majority of candidates in the first five postgraduate years were interested in pursuing a training analyst appointment, there was much less interest among analysts ten to fifteen years out who had not already become training analysts. It appeared that analytic practice and professional goals changed considerably in the initial years after analytic training, making it compelling to study factors contributing to analysts’ clinical and career decisions in this crucial time of career development (Cherry et al. 2004). In June 2003 we began a longitudinal study of graduates to investigate factors within the life and mind of the analyst that determine analytic practice and career path. Graduates are sent yearly questionnaires tracking their practice patterns, analytic cases, involvement in the institute, and postgraduate career evolution. The surveys explore professional identifications, experience initiating analytic cases, interest in becoming a training analyst, financial issues, career goals, overall confidence in analytic skills, and feelings about the field. The same questionnaires are sent every year to document changes in these areas over time. In addiation, an interview is conducted every other year, thus deepening the data collected. This prospective study, supported by the International Psychoanalytical Association’s Developing Psychoanalytic Practice and Training Program,