The Matrix of Group Analysis: An Historical Perspective

1991 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm Pines
2008 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bracha Hadar

This paper suggests an integration of two therapeutic domains in which the author was trained and certified: group analysis and bioenergetic analysis. Bioenergetic analysis is a psychodynamic psychotherapy, which sees the individual as a psychosomatic unity and combines work with the body and the mind. The author considers the pioneering book The Group as an Object of Desire by Morris Nitsun as a facilitating environment for the ideas of this paper to be accepted. Nitsun opens up the importance, on one hand, and the neglect, on the other hand, of sexuality and the body in the discourse of group analysis. The paper brings the body to the front of group analysis. It illuminates the body as the stage on which the drama of shame occurs. The paper discusses five dimensions of shame, categorized into five degrees of pathology, having to do with the developmental stages in which it occurred. The most archaic one (degree 1) is the most malignant and inhibits the social life of the individual. The fifth degree, social shame, is necessary in order to be part of society. A bridge of understanding between group analysis and bioenergetic analysis is suggested in which social shame, the more superficial one, serves as a defence against or displacement of the bodily shame. The ultimate space for working, therapeutically, on shame is the group, provided the body is not dissociated from the arena. A clinical example of working with a group in the integrated model is described, followed by a discussion. It is suggested to consider the matrix as the group body-mind instead of only the group mind.


2003 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-154
Author(s):  
Simon F. Crowe ◽  
Robyn M. Bittner ◽  
Ramona Raggl ◽  
Graeme Senior

AbstractQualitative analysis of neuropsychological instruments has been a long tradition in neuropsychological assessment. This study extended this type of analysis to the Matrix Reasoning (MR) subtest of the WAIS-III. The study compared the performance of TBI participants on the item types identified within the MR subtest (i.e., pattern completion, classification, analogy and serial reasoning) with a group of normal controls. MR items were classified into categories (as defined respectively by the Psychological Corporation and by our own research definition). Ninety-three non brain-injured control and 72 brain injured control participants were included in the study. One way analysis of variance indicated that the TBI group performed significantly worse than the non brain-injured group the MR performance overall as well as for both the Psychological Corporation classification and on the research defined categories. Within group analysis revealed that both groups performed significantly differently across the item categories with the most difficult categories being analogy and serial reasoning for the research defined categories and the classification and serial reasoning categories for the Psychological Corporation-defined groups. The results of the study indicate that an item type analysis of the MR performance may further contribute to the qualitative aspects of diagnostic formulation.


2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm Pines

In 1939 a German—Jewish psychoanalyst who had left Germany in 1933 and who had, in 1938 moved to Exeter, a small city in the south west of England, began to practise group analysis. Soon caught up in military psychiatry, where he had ample opportunity to put his ideas and experience into practice, S.H. Foulkes elaborated his theoretical ideas in his first book in 1948. Thus the practice of group analysis began in England, geographically far from Frankfurt and from Vienna, where Foulkes had trained and worked, and in relative professional isolation. This is often a necessary condition for original work; compare the example of Ronald Fairbairn, contemporaneous in Edinburgh. But no man is an island and Foulkes' work has to be set in the context of the European ideas of his intellectual and social inheritance. We must situate him in history, figure against ground, as he himself insisted was a basic component of group-analytic theory.


2003 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Roberts

This paper explores the ancient Greek quasi-mystical concepts of Chronos and then Kairos, particularly in relation to group analysis and individual analytic psychotherapy. It concludes with some thoughts on the nature of time and space and introduces Chaos, a third Greek concept, with a consideration of the chaotic patterns of movement in space-time which are, it seems, self-organizing and have led to the emergence from the matrix of space-time of matter, life and ultimately mind.


2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guilaine Kinouani

I am a black woman. This statement may trigger various responses and, perhaps even the urge to disengage. Nonetheless I write it as a social fact. Firstly, to forewarn the reader that the lifeworld they are about to enter may well challenge theirs and, to correct potential erroneous, normative, racial and gendered assumptions. I trust readers will stay with any potential discomfort. Read on. And, reflect upon it at the end of the article. I am too a psychologist and aspiring group analyst. This social and professional positioning means that I have heard many conversations on ‘difference’ where I, and others whose bodies look like mine, have been placed under the deforming microscope of the white gaze, for the alleged edification of my peers, one of the most objectifying encounter I continue to experience. There is a long history within western epistemic, ontological and other scholarly pursuits of normalizing whiteness, of regarding those ‘deviating’ from it as ‘different’ and, of subjecting them/us to investigation, curiosity and/or exoticisation. Ultimately, to consumption. Group analysis is no exception. Difference is a historically loaded term built on the brutality of white masculinist and heteronormative social constructions and thus, on the enactment of power related violence. Central to formulating the function of ‘difference’ and of such brutality between individuals and groups, is the group analytic concept of the matrix. Foulkes (1973), conceptualized it as a hypothetical web of communication and relationships providing the group a shared ground of meaning and significance. This article aims to critically examine the concept of the matrix with reference to race and specifically, to whiteness. It argues that fixating difference onto people of colour, serves fundamental functions for whiteness by linking this process to Foulkes’ concept of location of disturbance. In the second part, the group matrix and whiteness are considered. Finally, using various vignettes, a formulatory framework is suggested to illustrate how whiteness may be reproduced within different levels of the group matrix.


2021 ◽  
pp. 053331642110254
Author(s):  
Juan Tubert-Oklander

There is usually more than one theoretical view of a hypercomplex situation, which may be cognitively complementary, but they bring about different results when used to orient our practice, on account of their underlying assumptions, values, and intentions. The authors compare two approaches to work with groups: Foulkes’s group analysis and Kaës’s psychoanalytic approach to groups, exploring their coincidences and differences, through their respective concepts of the matrix and the group psychic apparatus. Psychoanalysis starts from the assumption of an isolated individual subject, and then constructs the additional dimension of relations and collective life. Group analysis takes as its starting point the assumption of the primary and essential relational and social nature of the human being, and the subject is a secondary construction that emerges from the initial participatory existence. The concept of the internal group in Kaës is strictly intrapsychic and abstract, while in Pichon-Rivière it is experiential and introjective. Psychoanalysis and group analysis are based on two different conceptions of human existence, and this is clearly shown by the authors’ clinical vignette. Studies like this contribute to a better understanding among the various traditions and schools of analytic work with groups.


2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Tubert-Oklander

This is my response to Regine Scholz’s and Earl Hopper’s commentaries on my 2019 Foulkes Lecture. Here I discuss Foulkes’ concept of the matrix and the limits of his metaphor of individuals as knots in the communicational network, as well as the opposition and mutual relation between classical psychoanalysis and group analysis, on the one hand, and the relational perspective on the other. I also emphasize the urgent need to revise our underlying assumptions that contradict the discoveries of analysis, in order to develop a new interdisciplinary and all-inclusive paradigm of the human being.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document