Applying The Conversational Analysis Strategies To Psychoanalytic Process Research. Rhythm And Blues: 152nd Session With Amalia (Part 1)



Studies of the psychotherapeutic process using the methods of conversation analysis can make a substantial contribution to further development of psychotherapeutic practice. The case study of Amalia, particularly session 152, has been analysed many times using different methods that are briefly reviewed here. This paper is devoted to the analysis of session 152, based on the new transcription material that includes the prosodic elements of the dialogue in the analytical dyad. Our study demonstrates the following: (a) how the analyst and the patient together create a common object of conversation, i.e. psychoanalysis; (b) the use of different therapeutic tools that have not been properly covered in literature yet and may be described as ‘devices’. We define our work as a qualitative study based on the non-statistical data of the verbal production analysis whose results may be used for advancing new hypotheses.

General Information

Keywords: conversational analysis, metaphor analysis, psychoanalytic process, Amalie X

Journal rubric: Essay


For citation: Buchholz M., Agarkov V.A., Kächele H. Applying The Conversational Analysis Strategies To Psychoanalytic Process Research. Rhythm And Blues: 152nd Session With Amalia (Part 1). Konsul'tativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya = Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy, 2017. Vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 76–97. DOI: 10.17759/cpp.2017250305. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)


  1. Akthar S. Diversity without fanfare: Some reflections on contemporary psychoanalytic technique. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 2007. Vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 690— 704. doi:10.1080/07351690701468405
  2. Balint M. Changing therapeutical aims and techniques in psycho-analysis. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 1950. Vol. 31, pp. 117—124.
  3. Braten S. The intersubjective mirror in infant learning and evolution of speech. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2009. 351 p. doi:10.1075/aicr.76
  4. Buchholz M.B. Patterns of empathy as embodied practice in clinical conversation — a musical dimension. Frontiers in Psychology, 2014. Vol. 5. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00349
  5. Buchholz M.B., Kächele H. Conversation analysis — a powerful tool for psychoanalytic practice and psychotherapy research. Language and Psychoanalysis, 2013. Vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 4—30. doi:10.7565/landp.2013.004
  6. Conte E., Khrennikov A.Y., Todarello O., Robertis R.D., Federici A., Zbilut J.P. On the Possibility That We Think in a Quantum Mechanical Manner: An Experimental Verification of Existing Quantum Interference Effects in Cognitive Anomaly of Conjunction Fallacy. Chaos and Complexity Letters, 2009. Vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 123—136.
  7. Conversation and brain damage. Goodwin C. (ed.). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. 328 p.
  8. Dausendschön-Gay U., Krafft U. Text und Körpergesten. Psychotherapie und Sozialwissenschaft, 2002. Vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 30—60.
  9. Erikson E.H. The dream specimen of psychoanalysis. Journal of the American Psychoanalitic Assosiation, 1954. Vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 5—56. doi:10.1177/000306515400200101
  10. Franke E. Raum — Bewegung — Rhythmus. Zu den Grundlagen einer Erkenntnis durch den Körper. In F. Bockrath, B. Boschert, F. Franke (eds.). Körperliche Erkenntnis. Formen reflexiver Erkenntnis. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag, 2008, pp. 15—40.
  11. Freud S. The interpretation of dreams. // The Standard Edition of the Complete Works of Sigmund Freud. Vol. 4—5. / J. Strachey (ed.). London: The Hogart Press and the Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1953.
  12. Freud S. Introductory lectures on psycho-analysis. London: The Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1963.
  13. Goodwin C. Gesture, aphasia and interaction. In D. McNeill (ed.). Language and gesture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp. 84—98.
  14. Goodwin C. Contextures of action. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, C.D. LeBaron (eds.). Embodied interaction. Language and body in the material world. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011, pp. 182—193.
  15. Handbook of Mentalization-Based Treatment. Allen J.G., Fonagy P. (eds.) Chichester, England; Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2006. 364 p.
  16. Hepburn A., Bolden G.B. The conversation analytic approach to transcription. In J. Sidnell, T. Stivers (eds.). The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013, pp. 57—77. doi:10.1002/9781118325001.ch4
  17. Heritage J.C. A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J.M. Atkinson, J.C. Heritage (eds.). Structures of social action. Reprint. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992, pp. 299—346.
  18. Jones E.E. Therapeutic action: A guide to psychoanalytic therapy. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 2000. 281 p.
  19. Kächele H., Albani C., Buchheim A., Hölzer M., Hohage R., Mergenthaler E., Jiménez J.P., Leuzinger-Bohleber M., Neudert-Dreyer L., Pokorny D., Thomä H. The German specimen case Amalia X: Empirical studies. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 2006. Vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 809—826. doi:10.1516/17NN-M9HJ-U25A-YUU5
  20. Korobov N., Bamberg M. “Strip poker! They don’t show nothing!”: Positioning identities in adolescent male talk about a television game show. In M.G.W. Bamberg, A. de Fina, D. Schiffrin (eds.). Selves and identities in narrative and discourse. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ., 2007, pp. 253—272.
  21. Levinson S.C. On the human “Interaction Engine”. In S.C. Levinson, N.J. Enfield (eds.). Roots of human sociality: culture, cognition and interaction. Oxford: Berg Publishers, 2006, pp. 39—69.
  22. Levy R., Ablon J., Thomä H., Kächele H., Ackerman J., Erhardt I., Seybert C. A session of psychoanalysis as analyzed by the Psychotherapy Process Q-set: Amalia X, session 152. In R.A. Levy, J.S. Ablon, H. Kächele (eds.). Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Research. New York: Humana, 2012, pp. 509—528.
  23. Luborsky L., Spence D. Quantitative research on psychoanalytic therapy. In A. Bergin, S. Garfield. Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change. New York: Wiley, 1971, pp. 408—438.
  24. Mazokopaki K., Kugiumutzakis G. Infant rhythms: Expressions of musical companionship. In S. Malloch, C. Trevarthen (eds.). Communicative musicality. Exploring the basis of human companionship. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, pp. 185—208.
  25. Meltzoff A.N., Gopnik A., Repacholi B.M. Toddlers’ understanding of intentions, desires and emotions: Explorations of the Dark Ages. In P.D. Zelazo, J.W. Astington, D.R. Olson (eds.). Developing theories of intention. Social understanding and self-control. Mahwah, NJ; London: Lawrence Earlbaum, 1999, pp. 17—42.
  26. Mondada L. The conversation analytic approach to data collection. In J. Sidnell, T. Stivers (eds.). The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley- Blackwell, 2013, pp. 32—57. doi:10.1002/9781118325001.ch3
  27. O’Dell M.L., Nieminen T., Lennes M. Modeling turn-taking rhythms with oscillators. Linguistica Uralica, 2012. Vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 218—227. doi:10.3176/ lu.2012.3.08
  28. Osborne N. Towards a chronobiology of musical rhythms. In S. Malloch, C. Trevarthen (eds.). Communicative musicality. Exploring the basis of human companionship. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, pp. 545—565.
  29. Peräkylä A., Antaki C., Vehviläinen S., Leudar I. Conversation analysis and psychotherapy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2008. 234 p.
  30. Peräkylä A. Shifting the perspective after the patient’s response to an interpretation. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 2010. Vol. 91, no. 6, pp. 1363—1384. doi:10.1111/j.1745-8315.2010.00323.x
  31. Reich U., Rohrmeier M. Batidas latinas: On rhythm and meter in Spanish and Portuguese and other forms of music. In J.C. Reina, R. Szczepaniak (eds.). Syllable and word languages. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014, pp. 391—420. doi:10.1515/9783110346992.391
  32. Rycroft C.S. The nature and function of the analyst’s communication to the patient. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 1956. Vol. 37, pp. 469—472.
  33. Sachs D. Reflection on Freud´s Dora case after 48 years. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 2005. Vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 45—53.
  34. Salgado J., Cunha C., Bento T. Positioning microanalysis: Studying the self through the exploration of dialogical processes. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 2013. Vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 325—353. doi:10.1007/s12124-013-9238-y
  35. Stein L.I. The doctor-nurse game. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1967. Vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 699—703. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1967.01730240055009
  36. Stivers T., Enfield N.J., Brown P., Englert C., Hayashi M., Heinemann T., Levinson S.C. Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009. Vol. 106, no. 26, pp. 10587—10592. doi:10.1073/pnas.0903616106
  37. Stolorow R.D., Atwood G.E. Three realms of the unconscious. In S.A. Mitchell, L. Aron (eds.). Relational psychoanalysis, Volume 1: The emergence of a tradition. London: The Analytic Press, 1999, pp. 365—378.
  38. Tateo L. The dialogical dance: Self, identity, construction, positioning and embodiment in Tango dancers. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 2014. Vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 1—23. doi:10.1007/s12124-014-9258-2
  39. The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. J. Sidnell, T. Stivers (eds.) Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013. 844 p.
  40. Tomasello M. The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge; London: Harvard University Press, 1999. 256 p.
  41. Tomasello M. Constructing a language. A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press, 2003. 408 p.
  42. Tomasello M. Why don´t apes point? In S.C. Levinson, J.N. Enfield (eds.). Roots of human sociality: culture, cognition and interaction. Oxford: Berg Publishers, 2006, pp. 506—524.
  43. Tomasello M. Origins of human communication. Cambridge; London: MIT-Press, 2008. 408 p.
  44. Vuust P., Wallentin M., Mouridsen K., Ostergard L., Roepstorff A. Tapping polyrhythms in music activates language areas. Neuroscience Letters, 2011. Vol. 494, no. 3, pp. 211—216. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2011.03.015
  45. Waal F., de The ‘Russian Doll’ model of empathy and imitation. In S. Braten (ed.). On being moved: from mirror neurons to empathy. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ., 2007, pp. 49—73. doi:10.1075/aicr.68.06waa
  46. Weiste E., Peräkylä A. Prosody and empathic communication in psychotherapy interaction. Psychotherapy Research, 2014. Vol. 24, no 6, pp. 687—701. doi:10.1080 /10503307.2013.879619
  47. Wilson A., Wallerstein R. Multiple approaches to a single case: Conclusions. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 2004. Vol. 85, no. 5, pp. 1269—1271. doi:0.1516/8UW2-LHDY-5VXD-1JPN
  48. Wootton A.J. Interaction and the development of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997. 232 p. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511519895
  49. Wootton A.J. Distress in adult-child interaction. In A. Peräkylä, M.-L. Sorjonen (eds.). Emotion in interaction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 42—63. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199730735.003.0003

Information About the Authors

Michae Buchholz, social psychology professor, International Psychoanalytic University,psychoanalysist, International Psychoanalytic University, Berlin, Germany, e-mail:

Vsevolod A. Agarkov, Research Associate, Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Psychology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia, e-mail:

Horst Kächele, International Psychoanalytic University, psychoanalysit, International Psychoanalytic University, Germany, e-mail:



Total: 3104
Previous month: 24
Current month: 6


Total: 1293
Previous month: 1
Current month: 0