ABSTRACT
In this chapter, the author presents the preliminary findings from stage one of the research effort, involving analysis of questionnaire data from International Psychoanalytic Association analysts and candidates about their use of technology in clinical practice. Most agreed that teleanalysis was not equivalent to in-person analysis yet they differed on their perception of its acceptability. A linear regression was calculated to examine the relationship between ratings of the relative effectiveness of teleanalysis and various predictors. When the analysand or analyst has to relocate to a distant geographic location, the in-office analysis may shift to a teleanalysis format. Thus, the analytic dyad shifts to this method to preserve the analysis. Only 20 per cent considered teleanalysis a “good” alternative, with 9.5 percent rating it equivalent to “in person”. This suggests that almost 50 per cent of the sample view teleanalysis as a problematic alternative to analysis conducted with patient and analyst in the same room.
