speaker-0: I don't get sort of overly bound by what's this or that. I I sort of think of things in more trans-theoretical or trans-diagnostic ways. And so I think expressiveness, being you know, experientially oriented are are critical to change.
speaker-1: What is profound change in psychotherapy? This is the question that has preoccupied Dr. Christopher Moran since the beginning of his career. While the vast majority of psychotherapy research is attempting to address the matter of whether or not psychotherapy works, Dr. Moran's process research focuses on a vital concern. How does psychotherapy work? Dr. Moran's scholarship on the Alliance is extremely clinically relevant and can inform how we might respond to moments of rupture in ways that help our patients. Dr. Moran comes by his passionate belief in pluralism, honestly. He is a psychoanalytically trained researcher and clinician who was also taught by Albert Ellis. He makes a strong case for engaging in dialogues outside of analytic communities and says that today's students are hungry for an integrationist perspective. Additionally, you'll want to hear Dr. Moran's thoughts on what we need to change about training the next generation of psychotherapists. I think you'll find this conversation to be an engaging one. I know I did. Enjoy. J. Christopher Moran, PhD, is Dean and Professor at the Gordon F. Derner School of Psychology, Adelphi University, and co director of the Center for Alliance Focused Training. He is principal investigator of the Psychotherapy Research Program at Mount Sinai, Beth Israel, where he is also on faculty at ICANN School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. He has had postdoctoral training in Cognitive, University of Toronto, and Psychoanalytic Therapies, New York University. He is a fellow of APA and has served on its Clinical Practice Guidelines Advisory Steering Committee. He is also past president of the Society for Psychotherapy Research and past editor of its journal Psychotherapy Research. He has served on several editorial boards, held other faculty appointments, and received multiple honors, including distinguished courier awards from APA, SPR, and the National Register. He has published over 200 papers, 10 books, and four videos, generally on rupture, repair, and alliance focused training. ⁓ thank you so much, Chris, for joining me today. I'm really excited to be speaking to you.
speaker-0: My pleasure. I am honored for the invitation and hopefully I can say something meaningful.
speaker-1: Well, I wanted to start by just having you tell us a bit about how you entered into academia and what your sort of professional trajectory has been.
speaker-0: Okay. ⁓ I guess to be fully transparent, I know you gave me some questions to think about and and that was that was the starter, and that's a it's a tricky one for me, ⁓ because I'm very aware of, you know, how arbitrary it is, how you define things. And but the thing that came to mind first and foremost was it all began on my grandfather my grandmother's lap, actually. ⁓ she in in many respects was ⁓ my first academic mentor and ⁓ she was the one who ⁓ you know really introduced me to the arts and sciences and and and how to think about things in different ways. ⁓ so so I think of her as launching my academic career ⁓ and also shaping my orientation towards pluralism. I think she was very important in that and that theme is has been fundamental to my journey. it, you know, in in retrospect, I I see it very clearly. ⁓ and one one early expression of it, not that early, but ⁓ but these days maybe early is in in in undergrad I was a double major in in psychology and and English. and the the institution I went to The psychology department was very behavioral. ⁓ it was the alma mater of BF Skinner. so we were all issued our our skinner boxes and our rat coming right in and worked with the rat all across our years there. And it also had a very neuroscience bent. So at some point we we implanted ⁓ electrodes in our rat and and examined behavior. So it was very, you know,
speaker-1: As behavioral as it gets.
speaker-0: Yeah, very behavioral, very neuroscience. ⁓ but it was in the English department where I was able to sort of explore more philosophical and and psychoanalytic themes. And it's where I really, you know, came to appreciate personality, ⁓ and existential themes. And so so I've always had those sides to me and you know, one's philosophical and one's super practical. And I think that that I think I don't see that as contradictions. I just see that as like ⁓ they work in in compliment for me. ⁓ so and then going forward, you know, for a variety of reasons and I know I'm being ⁓ selective in terms of the details here, but ⁓ I ended up in a in a doctoral program that was cognate behavioral. ⁓ my dissertation was involved ⁓ Pretty sophisticated statistical multivaried applications. I was working with a program that was developed in in in Sweden. So all the codes were in Swedish. But but but that sort of was very influential in terms of my research skills and and then clinically speaking, during my time in graduate school, I got to work with Albert Ellis and I was supervised by him for almost two years among other people at his at his institute who were very important to me. and you know that was I I think that they were I I think when I was there I was aware that I I didn't quite fit. ⁓ I was always struggling to find my voice within things. And so I always felt like somewhat of a misfit. But I think that's true wherever I am. So I don't think that that's particular to that ⁓ place. But I also appreciated that ⁓ you know, how supportive everyone was with regard to my difference. ⁓ and so recently I I I changed offices, and when you change offices, you get to look at files and things that you've been collecting, and and I found ⁓ an evaluation from from Al saying basically, you know, it was very positive, but his his comment was. does it his own way. Which, you know I took it yeah. I I didn't take that as a critical. I thought I was always really supportive. ⁓ but I know that I was very interested early on with this idea of I I know it sounds ambitious, but this idea of what is profound change. And and that's what I kind of struggled with.
speaker-1: Getting that framed.
speaker-0: within the cognitive behavioral world. And that's what kind of made me kind of, you know, bounce around the, you know, against the edges of it. ⁓ I did a postdoctoral training in in Toronto and ⁓ at the Clark Institute of Psychiatry and the cognitive therapy unit. And my cognitive therapy supervisor was Zindel Siegel. And Zindel was one of those that was very interested in in, you know, underlying structure, schema theory. Schema theory like was a way in which ⁓ well actually was considered as having ⁓ integrative potential because there were dynamic researchers using the schema construct and ⁓ there was all this hope that it would be a bridge between all these traditions. And Zindel was one of the more sophisticated types within the cognitive world, ⁓ studying it and and studying its implications for change. And and so he was very influential. But also my postdoc I I started my collaboration with Jeremy Saffron and and Jeremy was the director of the cognitive therapy unit, but he was not a true blue cognitive therapist. He had a lot of other interests. And ⁓ but first and foremost, he introduced me to s the psychotherapy research world, and and he was just beginning ⁓ to study this notion of rupture. and so he introduced me to the notion. You know, of the alliance, alliance rupture, and again, constructs that had great integrative potential. ⁓ and so that kind of launched me in that world. shortly thereafter, I I took the position as director of the psychotherapy research program at Beth Israel Medical Center. And it that was the beginning of formal academic appointments. I was initially part of Mount Sinai, then the medical centers shifted to Einstein and then came back to Sinai again. ⁓ but I really cut my academic teeth as director of this research program. I was also at at some point I I was appointed chief psychologist, which actually was really formative in terms of my ⁓ clinical skills. ⁓ and I was, you know, helped develop a externship program, internship program and a postdoc there. ⁓ so I was steeped in training. ⁓ and it was in that role ⁓ as as director of the research program that I dove deeper into the study of the therapic relationship and the notion of rupture. And Jeremy came to New York himself. And so we continued our collaboration there. ⁓ and I realized that I I wanted to ⁓ really understand that literature. ⁓ And and so I decided to go into analytic training because I thought that's where it was richer. And I I had the sense that I I would do better in a structured environment and full immersion in in that world. And ⁓ I wasn't actually looking to be an analyst. I think I might have told you that when we first talked. ⁓
speaker-1: So you wanted a like a curriculum.
speaker-0: Yeah, I I wanted to make sure I really understood it. And so it was kind of an anthropological initiative. Full immersion, really understand it. I didn't I I, you know, what when I was gonna write about it or or present about it, I I I didn't want to pretend or ⁓ so in some ways it was driven my own anxiety. I wanted to really under you know be somewhat authoritative about that. ⁓ and the liturgy in the cognitive behavioral world was quite limited. And and Jeremy himself was a bridge, he was actually introducing some of that into the cognitive behavioral world. ⁓ and at the time he was self-taught, self, you know, read in some sense. ⁓ later on he would go on to analytic training as well. but I thought that was that would be best for me. So
speaker-1: Can we just clarify when you say that kind of research? Cause you're actually the f you know, the first scholar we we've had on the podcast that focuses on psychotherapy research, process research. And I think most people are more familiar with the idea of outcome research. Right. Right. Can you just kind of define what you mean by that or how what that means?
speaker-0: Thank you. I mean in a gross sense, the outcome research or the research that's really been driven by randomized clinical trials is really trying to answer the question, does does the does a treatment work? Right. And and but then there's this other arm of research that's actually looking at how does it work? And that's the process research. And in in in in truth, like for me, they really go hand in hand. ⁓ The research on on efficacy or effectiveness is actually quite sobering. And actually most of it is dominated by the cognitive behavioral world because there's a a fuller buy-in to ⁓ to empirical research. So the the analytic world's always been at best ambivalent about it. ⁓ so but but for me because of the the interest in in in in process. You wanted to study process in the context of outcome. You know, and and outcome is actually like I said at the beginning, it's another one of those words that gets used in so many different ways. So there's outcome from pre to post to follow up, but then there's outcome from session to session. And then there's these what could be described as micro outcomes, these these movements within the session. And that's that's the area I I've really studied. carefully with regard to this notion of rupture and repair. ⁓ but but you do have to have it, you do have to relate what you're doing in session to post session to overall outcome. Otherwise, you don't really know whatever you're looking at, whether it has any relevance for overall change. So so they do kind of, they're all nested together and they're all relevant for each other. But for me, the the the richness was in the process and and And what makes it rich is that you can actually ⁓ yield data that's clinically user-friendly. You can actually point to phenomena that are actually happening and and processes around that. And so that can be more informative for therapists. ⁓ so what is a rupture? What do I need to do when when it comes to a rupture? Now you're in the world of clinically user-friendly data and you're not Just kicking out some overall coefficient that clinicians don't know what to do with.
speaker-1: So it's a I I hadn't thought about that so succinctly, but outcome research doesn't necessarily inform what you do in any individual session.
speaker-0: No, no. And especially these days you have a lot a lot of treatments that are packages. So you don't really and I don't think people really know what aspects of the package are actually effective. so i mean it's they're they're constructed from clinical expertise and clinical expertise shouldn't be minimized, but but the definition of evidence based is the best available empirical evidence, clinical expertise. and patient values and preferences. So you really need to actually be considering all three ⁓ domains at once. ⁓ so yes, yes, we don't yes. So I I do think that would be my criticism of psychotherapy research is we don't ⁓ yield enough ⁓ data that's actually that actually moves the needle, that actually really helps clinicians. And that's the that's the criticism of of psychotherapy research, but
speaker-1: Well, you you mentioned, you know, h psychoanalysis' attitude or how it regards empirical research. And I'm curious what you experienced about that. So you went to psychoanalytic training, you were a researcher. Like how did people receive you?
speaker-0: I mean it you know it was interesting. I mean There were a lot of prejudices that you would encounter. Like even it with when it came to CBT, people assumed that CBT meant you only worked in a very time-limited way. And that's not actually true. ⁓ but that's that's the kind of prejudice you would encounter. And ⁓ and same with research. But I'll I have to say that at least most of the senior faculty I worked with were were very supportive. And and what do I mean by that? I think that they were curious and and actually encouraging. so when it came to, for example, the rupture repair, I think they appreciated that while the ideas weren't necessarily new, they hadn't been empirically demonstrated. And so that was kind and and and operationalized the way we had. So it gives it, you know, makes it in some sense more accessible and more translatable. And the potential is to have an impact on other orientations because they can understand it better. Right. ⁓ and I think some of the people I worked with really got that. ⁓ and ⁓ and so that would include ⁓ Lou Aron and and say Basescu, who I worked with closely. but there were others who I think saw psychoanalysis as as ⁓ as more or maybe exclusively hermeneutic and and didn't and then resisted. And I I and I ⁓ I actually kind of thought to some extent there was some professional hypocrisy there because on one hand some of these people were big advocates for pluralism. Mm-hmm. But there was no seat at the table for the empirical voice. and then one example, which I think I mentioned to you, is Lou, ⁓ after I graduated, he he wanted to set up and that was when he became ⁓ became director after Bernie Kalinkowitz. And he wanted to integrate ⁓ research into the postdoc, NYU postdoc. ⁓ and so he set up a a a task force with some notable people like Morris Siegel, Bert Friedman, Doris Silverman, ⁓ and Jeremy and me. And he, you know, we met regularly, I can't remember how often, but then we Produced a proposal of how to integrate research in a stepwise way. And some of it had to do with the clinic and trying to build in measures that we could start using as a sort of infrastructure to study the process further. And then we brought it to the following protocol to the to the Senate. And it got roundly shut down. And that actually was kind of. Not that I was bitter about it, but I i i you know that just marked like okay, there's not a place for this, even at a program that was all about pluralism. so but but but what is also true about one's you know, when you when you choose your path, there's just so many communities you can actually fully devote yourself to. So I still kept a foot in the cognitive behavioral committee, I still a community, I still kept a foot in ⁓ the analytic world. But I I chose to immerse myself in the in the ⁓ psychotherapy research world. And the Society for Psychotherapy Research is an international society. And that's where I really focused my career. And and you know I became an officer, edited a journal, became you know president at some point. And And so that's where I concentrated my efforts. But I will say this too, and getting back to your original question. Maybe ⁓ just a few years back, ⁓ I was approached by Steve Asselrod at NYU postdoc to actually come back home in some sense. ⁓ and I use home because so many of the ideas that that informed our rupture repair comes from the relational tradition. So so I I know how important. NYU postdoc in particular and the relational movement was to what got crystallized in the rupture repair. that was never lost on me. And and so I did a few colloquia ⁓ and then and and what they they were explicit. I mean, Steve wanted me to actually talk about research. And he wanted me to teach a course that I think the
speaker-1: Mm-hmm.
speaker-0: It's from empirical research to clinical practice and using the rupture repair our our research program as an illustration. And I was at the time I was thinking, like, are you crazy? Because I'm thinking about 1999. ⁓ And I'm thinking, like, that's just not gonna fly. And I'm thinking, you know, if I were there, would I do take that? And I I my memory was ⁓ you know, everyone at the postdoc was all clinical. ⁓ and And and and the and the course is interesting because it it is clinical. It does, you know, as I alluded to, it does get extraordinarily practical. So I'm looking at the products of the work, but I'm also showing how we got there. So there so I keep the the research maybe even more explicit than I would when I do workshops. And I'm I'm maybe just exclusively clinical in my in my presentation. so I'm giving them a peek under the hood. So to speak.
speaker-1: Well, it really speaks to how much the ethos shifted over the years to empirical research.
speaker-0: And and the people so the course ⁓ ten people signed up for the first class. So so I was a little taken aback by it all. I don't know if it'll ⁓ the the vowels were good, but ⁓ you know it's har it's hard to know whether something will have traction. Why did it why was it, you know, popular the first time out or not? And ⁓ but it does speak to that. It does you know, so I started I I I mean I haven't made any Conclusions about it, but it does suggest that maybe the culture and the climate has changed. And and I see that with our students too. I I I think like this idea of pluralism and integration, that was a big deal in the 80s and the 90s. And maybe it's more baked into, you know, to how people think today and how students think today. And I'm very aware when I teach today, like, Am I teaching anything new? I I I don't know because I think that they're inherently ⁓ integrative. And they they may say, ⁓ no, I'm I'm analytic, but they don't realize that there's a lack of purity in those things. They don't even know. They don't even know
speaker-1: I don't need to What that means. Yeah. Well, I wanted to ask you about ⁓ pluralism because it keeps coming up as a theme. And I am thinking about like your background, you know, and kind of the different worlds that you had a foot in. And I I'm curious what you think, like if if someone, which you know, has become increasingly the case is really kind of only has a CBT education or knows that they want to do cognitive behavioral therapy as their main orientation. What what would you say that ⁓ training in psychoanalytic clinical work would offer them? Like what would be the bonus of that kind of ⁓ plural thinking?
speaker-0: That's great question. I mean, I let me step back and say, you know, I I I teach a relational class at Durner. And one of the things I do early on is I have this, I created this wacky chart of the history of psychotherapy because I wanted people to sort of see how how things really intersected, you know, that nothing, you know, so I mean it's an to some extent an interpretive history, but But you know, I'll have the Freudian path through the ego psychological tradition. And then you have like I'll have a ⁓ a more relational path that comes from forensic. And then, you know, I'll have the cognitive behavioral and then the humanistic. But then I kind of show and I have the specific leaders associated with those those threads. And then I show how things kind of intersect. And so for example, you know, one of the things I'll point out is that. Both Ellis and Beck were analysts originally. And they were, you know, and mostly from that the ego psychological tradition that when they were trained, that was the dominant voice. And that maybe another way to think about, you know, their innovation, in some ways, they conceptualized pathology and and changed to some extent in the same way. They were making the irrational. or the distortions available to the ego and the ego would adapt. They counted on the rational capacity of the individual to adjust when when what was what is irrational ⁓ is made plain. Or like when the id is made plain, then the ego will will adjust. They really stayed true to that. Where they were innovating was in the action of the therapist. And they saw the action of therapists in a very different way and they wanted to a more directive therapist. That was that was where it was really innovative. The and then when they when they when they were developing their ideas, maybe the most dominant voice in the psychotherapy research psychotherapy world, it's not actually a slip because I think he was the first psychotherapy process researcher, is Carl Rogers. ⁓ And Rogers' emphasis on experience and And the relationship and the relational factors, they responded to. They had to, because it was in the same way as people would respond to ideas from Freud. People in the 60s and 70s were responding to Rogers. And so the relationship was important to both of them. To some extent, maybe they took it for granted because they were analysts, they were trained, they understood the therapy relationship was complicated and and critical. ⁓ But they were concentrating more on other aspects they thought were deemphasized or or were were not ⁓ developed in the way they thought it should be developed. ⁓ but so they, you know, one of the great things about the supervision with Ellis was that I mean he was known to be quite radical and quite the character, and and he liked to really shake things up. But one on one, you could have you know, it wasn't about a show with him. Yeah. And and and he was a guy who who lived quite the professional life and and he was a workaholic and he could talk on anything. And I'll always prize those talks and and and he would talk about the things that were valuable from the analyte tradition as far as he was concerned, or the things he saw valuable in other perspectives. And it wasn't about banging the R E T drum. ⁓ So the other thing I always point out to the students is that Rogers himself was explicit about the influence of forensic and romp to his thinking. You can the the the emphasis on experience in the here and now and and the and relational factors gets traced back to those that experimentation in the in the 1920s. So you can see how Things really intersect. So for me, I'm not so boundaried or categorical. There are some things. There are expressions in the cognitive behavioral world that kind of are maybe more psycho-ed and it's a little worrisome that that. Because I think what what I think a lot of them, you know, I would say back in Alice appreciated this too. And the research speaks to this is that. experience the expressive expressiveness is a really important variable in change. and they understood that and the research actually points to that even in cognitive behavioral that the higher levels of experiencing or expressiveness is predictive of good outcome on the part of the patient. Yeah. Yes. I think it could be with the therapist, but we're not there. We don't have that data yet.
speaker-1: the part of the patient.
speaker-0: ⁓ although we have a little data in that regard, but that's do that's in the realm of rupture repair that therapist expressiveness may be really critical towards resolution. So so ⁓ and this is a sort of convoluted way to answer your question, but I don't get sort of overly bound by what's this or that. I I sort of think of things in more trans-theoretical or transdiagnostic ways. And so I think expressiveness. being you know experientially oriented are are critical ⁓ to change. And ⁓ I don't think in the analytic world those there was a way in it got very insight oriented for for a time. Or at least maybe it was read that way. but but I do think today maybe a reflection of the relational movement, the the concentration of experience in the room and and this notion of intersubjectivity ⁓ is kind of a contemporary postmodern ⁓ rendering of forenzy's experimentations back in the day. ⁓
speaker-1: Well, you it sounds like all these traditions have been, in your view, sort of in dialogue with each other, even if not explicitly there there's some conversation happening.
speaker-0: Yeah. And I think if if people start thinking that way, you can have better dialogues. You know, and I I I don't I think there's too much investment in in this is yours, this is mine. And as opposed to like trying to like like I'll I'll tell you another thing. When I was coming up through the academic ranks, I was interested in dialogue. I mean dialogue was really important to rupture repair, but I but I played it out in in in writings as well. So I I edited two book projects. ⁓ one called Self Relations in the Psychotherapy ⁓ Process, which got me a customer of the year award from Amazon. I was buying so many books. But it was ⁓ yeah, I was immersing myself in in in like postmodern thought and and the self-concept. And those are two huge areas. And I just again felt like I wanted to really understand that literature. ⁓ but I I I had this idea of inviting ⁓ different theorists, clinical theorists from different traditions, but have them dialogue with each other. ⁓ so that was one book project. The other one was ⁓ dialogues and difference and diversity studies of therapy relationship. and in there I had them, I I set up dialogues. And then the second one I actually set up, you know, chapter commentary, and then a response. So the original ch author of the chapter got the respond to the commentary, which was, you know, for an edited book, it's kind of complicated to get all that together. ⁓ but the reason why I'm bringing this up is it was a little difficult to court some of the analysts to participate in that project. and so what I discovered was, yeah, I could get the cognitive behaviorist to do it. ⁓ but I had trouble getting the analyst because for my read of that is that a lot of these analysts have very limited, you know, they're big practices, they have their institute affiliations.
speaker-1: interest.
speaker-0: And then they have their writing and they they want to be really targeted about their writing. So they're not so interested in dialogues with others. You know, they wanna they wanna have dialogues with their own community. Now I'm critical of that because I think that doesn't build bridges. ⁓ and therefore it they they they can have an impact on the cognitive behavioral community if they're if they're resistant to having dialogues with them in in in even these like kind of book enterprises. ⁓ so that was eye-opening to me and I got some really noteworthy people. But even at the end, I remember one came to me and said, So are anyone reading this book? And the funny thing is is that these book projects actually do a lot better. And edited book projects always do worse than authored. But
speaker-1: Ha ha ha.
speaker-0: The authored books by analysts really don't sell that well. They don't it's a really small community and and these projects actually sell better. ⁓ but but I think from that person's point of view, it wasn't getting picked up by his usual audience. and I would say you gotta get a new audience or expand it.
speaker-1: I feel like that's been such a theme on the podcast and so many people that I so many academics that I've spoken to have said like there's a real existential risk if psychoanalysts aren't gonna engage in dialogue outside of this very narrow field, or even like if they're not willing to speak a language that can be understood outside. Yeah. And I and I
speaker-0: Right. One of the things that Jeremy and I would talk about, because in the 90s we did a lot of presenting of our stuff to the cognitive behavioral world. And so whenever there was discussions of therapy relationship, you know, they would roll out, you know, initially it was Safford and Siegel and then became Safford and Moran. And and and and one thing I appreciate when I was going through analytic training, that's where we really, that's where our audience is. That's where we can actually really have an impact. the l again, a lot of what we were saying, while it was it was empirically innovative, it wasn't like conceptually new. ⁓ and so I didn't think the analytic community really was gonna like, ⁓ Safram Moran, they're awesome. You know? ⁓ but Jeremy was really ⁓ enamored and really he wanted ⁓ for I think it's for a r variety of reasons, really be identified with the analytic world. So he then kind of morphed and spent more of his energies ⁓ you know, developing his ⁓ relationship with the relational world and at the forensic center in in in in New York. ⁓ but we would have talks about it. I said, you know, ⁓ and I I was devoted to the psychotherapy research world. So we both kind of moved away from the cognitive behavioral community in a significant way. And and ⁓ We'd have talks about it and I I always felt like that was a big mistake. That was because we were we were and we still may be, ⁓ but we were more of a bridge for analytic ideas to the cognitive behavioral world in the nineties than we are probably now. Although there there was a book that just came out on rupture repair and CPT, which is cool. And so I I I wrote the introductory chapter with my colleague Katherine Eubanks. So and that's where I got to talk about the diff, you know, like all this craziness about divisions between these different traditions and ⁓ kind of reminded people of, you know, Ellison Beck's origins, like Marv Goldfried, who wrote a seminal book on on cognitive behavioral ⁓ therapy in the 1970s. If you read the book, It is just chock full of Harry Staxullivan. It's really amazing. It's amaz And I I because he's still alive. He just turned 90, Marvin. ⁓ I think it was a year ago where I said to him, What were you thinking? And he laughed about it, but it it's it was all there. Now now the interpersonal tradition is an easier ⁓ marriage with CBT because they the interpersonal psychoanalysis
speaker-1: Yeah.
speaker-0: is such an American you know construct and it developed you know with exactly that was very pragma in fact it was criticized originally as behaviorism by ⁓ analytic orthodoxy so the pra the emphasis on pragmatism and operationalism and what can be seen you know in terms of the relationship it it lends itself quite well ⁓ and in some ways Paul
speaker-1: Certain pragmatism to it.
speaker-0: Paul Octell's efforts to to integrate kind of builds off of that, you know, and talks about feedback and reinforcement in terms of interpersonal patterns. That's there in the in the Sulvanian ⁓ and his descendants' world, you know. So so that so it's not a surprise that Marv went there. And then Marv became subsequently with Paul one of the leaders of the psychotherapy integration movement. ⁓
speaker-1: Well, I wanna ⁓ shift a little and talk about ⁓ psychotherapy training. Training future psychotherapists. And I'm curious what your research ⁓ and your focus on the change process and your focus on rupture repair, like what has it taught you about ro what really matters when it comes to training psychotherapists?
speaker-0: So I think I mean our our research began defining what are ruptures and what are what are possible pathways and then processes, patient states, behaviors, therapist states and behaviors, and so on. But and we wanted to understand how therapy works and we wanted to like address the sobering picture on treatment efficacy, which, you know, to to this day is still pretty sobering. ⁓ But what came from that naturally was ⁓ how to train therapists, ⁓ how to train therapists to recognize ruptures, how to train therapists to work effectively with them. And and so our our first NIMH grant in the 90s was the beginning of that. And then we got another grant ⁓ which ⁓ where we we where we ⁓ it was an indiv in kind of an interesting design, but but essentially we were training Trainees who had been trained in cognitive behavioral therapy, we were then introduced we introduced them to our alliance focused training, which was all about rupture recognition and rupture repair. What we what we thought in the nineties when we looked at the literature on training was that it was too didactic. ⁓ I mean, most training is didactic. You have a supervisor just sort of like listening and then telling you what you did wrong and
speaker-1: Make on it.
speaker-0: Yeah, what you should do instead. And and actually the one thing that was disappointing in my my postdoc training at NYU was that it was kind of traditional. And I thought I thought I was coming to the mothership and I was gonna get the state of the art of training and and I, you know, I got ⁓ you know, basically more more didactics. ⁓ and actually to to ⁓ to Ellis' credit, Ellis was interested in in in role playing and and not just telling you what to do. ⁓ and I don't know why I mean he was also a scholar of the sixties. So that kind of experiential work was, you know, really taking shape then. So I don't know if he was influenced by that. But anyway, so Jeremy and I realized, well, given what the literature was saying, given what the research was saying, actually, the limited research on training, we wanted to do something different. And ⁓ And then there was study that ⁓ was led by Hans Strapp, who's one of the you know early psychodynamic ⁓ psychotherapy researchers, ⁓ and they didn't have great results in terms of training their therapist to work with negative process, which is kind of what we were doing too. So
speaker-1: This would be like when the client's angry at you or
speaker-0: Yeah, or I mean, for for for Strupp it was maladaptive cycles, you know, negative cycles. It was defined in terms of cycles. ⁓ so we thought in our to some to partly arrogance, but but also we were reading the literature, we thought that, you know, especially the literature i you know, in education, that the emphasis should be on experiential learning. ⁓ And if you read the education literature, there's a lot of influence from like Rogers there and so on. So so somehow Ferenzi found his way. ⁓ so we wanted to develop a training program that emphasized ⁓ experiential work. And that included like not just exploring, you know, focusing on the trainees' experience, but actually engaging in role plays and two chair work and not Telling pati the trainees, I say patients, which is not again, not a bad sporting telling them what their counter transference is, but helping them discover it, helping them under you know, find their way with it, expanding their awareness. Because for us, like, you know, rupture is all about collapse of space. We're trying to expand their their space, their get their awareness of what's going on for them to sort of that would set the stage for them to. use their experience as a compass to what's going on. So we developed a program ⁓ that emphasized that. ⁓ it was and it was group based and and we got our second grant really to support that. And we were able to demonstrate that if you take young cognitive behavioral therapists and you introduce them to this, that you will see an effect on the on the interpersonal process with their patients. And then ultimately with micro and ultimate outcomes. so so that was so I'm a little long winded, but for me then when it came back to training, yeah, let's not just talk about what you should do. Let's actually let's play it out. Let's let's you know and and I also had ⁓ as a through college I I competed ⁓ as an athlete and so I knew that personally how important it was to to have simulated practice, to practice under pressure. and so that was very so when we were doing this, it felt to me like this was right. And later in my life, my son actually became a successful athlete. And you know, I unfortunately had to be there as he grew up through these different events, which is really torturous. But but I get, you know, in terms of trying to help them navigate, I realized that we were focusing on things that I helped my, you know, trainees with in psychotherapy. There was actually a lot of convergence. ⁓ so so I would so the short of is I would really exercise more experiential work. It's not that didactics aren't important, but so much depends on the on the on the the receiver, the information and their ability to translate it, you know, into action. So why does like insight sometimes work for patients? Because somehow they're able to translate it. ⁓ it's not that making an interpretation in and of itself or giving advice in and of itself isn't useful, but so much depends on how they receive and then translate into action. But if you can do it in training and have people role play or practice or or explore their expectations, explore their their fears, which ultimately helps them regulate their own emotions, which we know that that's like hugely important. And that's kind of the contemporary expression of counter transference, like helping people manage their countertransference. It's really helping them regulate their emotions. ⁓ so that's that's kind of the lesson from the research, I think.
speaker-1: ⁓ It does feel I'm remembering in when I was in psychoanalytic training, I I didn't have any experiential learning. And and then afterwards I got kind of more into experiential models or like the emotion focused therapy world. And it was all experiential. And it was in a way it almost feels like ⁓ inst psychoanalytic institutes in terms of their teaching haven't quite caught up to how they think about their own theory, like which is very often very experience focused.
speaker-0: No, yeah. And and and one thing I remember Lou Aron always saying to me, what are theories anyway? But they're they're emotion regulation strategies. Why do all these theories somehow help people? Because it helps us organize how how to navigate ambiguity and chaos. And ⁓ so it's not so much that one theory is better than the other, but it it just may help you manage your experience better.
speaker-1: Well, I I know you exist in a very trans theoretical space, but I do want to ask specifically about psycho you know, introducing psychoanalytic thought to students and and if you have any thoughts on how what we could do to increase their exposure to it, their interest in it.
speaker-0: I know we w w I think what I'm I haven't spent a lot of time reflecting on that. It's a great question. I I mean my impulse when we first when you first broached that with me was early, early, you know, like not I mean ⁓ undergrad for sure, but if if it could be earlier, it could be earlier. Like for me, I was you know, I was reading existentialists and in as an adolescent, and you know, that was really informative to me. I still kind of am a existentialist in in many respects. ⁓ so if you know if we could strengthen our presence ev as early as possible, ⁓ I think that would be important. ⁓ I think to succeed in academia ⁓ I I I think writing is so important. So I I I I would really advise if someone Yeah, so that's more academic than psychoanalysis per se, but developing your writing skills, getting comfortable with writing, and there are all kinds of, by the way, there's all kinds of writing challenges. Writing an empirical report's very different than writing a a a clinical piece. it demands a different skill set. But getting comfortable with that, getting feedback, get becoming fearless, I think is really important. ⁓ be a player, don't be a critic, you know, like get in there. you know, get be, you know, I I think there are a lot of critics and ⁓ it try to find a way where you can you can be in play and and and and Get out on the field. Don't be in the crowd or you know, build bridges. I think building bridges is really important. ⁓ trying to like communicate. So the the book, that edited book was an example. I I've been, I I think I told you, I've been serving on the ⁓ clinical practice guidelines committee for APA and and it it's kind of interesting because it it for me, it exposes me to what else. other people are thinking. I'm getting exposed to psychologists who work in the VA system, so on. So and and and then I remember when I first walked into the room, I had a sense that everyone saw me like with a beard and a cigar.
speaker-1: You're dragging the couch behind you.
speaker-0: No. As I alluded to earlier, I I don't really feel that comfortable with any one particular identity, but then to be sort of seen as psychoanalytic, I was like, well, I guess. I mean but then, you know, there are definitely, you know, there I mean I what I was impressed is the people on the on this panel are so curious and I mean there are their academics, they're curious and they were open and they were really receptive. And and so what was, you know, for me to be able to expand how they think about evidence, how they think about the change process research, because there was this sort of orientation towards RCTs and and and privileging that as evidence. But now now they're the the the base of evidence is expanded and And I do think, and maybe I wasn't explicit about this, I think analytic ideas and humanistic ideas, which were informed by analytic ideas, they they get demonstrated in change process research. It's much harder to demonstrate that in the outcome world. I mean, there there are all these time limited psychodynamic models, some of which are maybe cognitive behavioral in some respects. But but but I think that the really the ideas around alliance, rupture, ⁓ you know, emotional experience, that stuff can get really studied and demonstrated in the change process world. And so for me to be able to like, you need to look at this too. People need to see, you know, this research as well. That should be part of the evidence-based ⁓ discussion. So getting involved in that way is really important. And And most of all, because I'm not big on identities, but if you're gonna be anything, be a scholar, be curious. I think that that's that's that should be first and foremost. So I I mean, th think big, think small, be part of big communities, be part of small communities. But don't be so small, don't be exclusively small, as I said earlier, where you're just writing for a few or you know I mean if you're gonna do that, then don't complain about it. You know, that C B T Yeah, the C B T's dominant, you know, like ⁓ because I do think the analytic world has to take some responsibility for their position with regard to the empirical evidence. Right. ⁓ a lot of it's they've lost by default. They haven't showed up. ⁓ and that's I think an artifact of their ambivalence about the tournament itself.
speaker-1: Yeah. I like that interpretation. Well, the the last thing I wanna ask you, Chris, is cause we like we do like to give people sort of a peek behind the curtain of a life in the academy. And I'm wondering if you could say a little bit about what a day in your life is like, like how you balance writing and research and teaching and and all the numerous things you do.
speaker-0: Yeah, and I and I think what I came to appreciate late in life, I like for me it was more eos ego syntonic to be doing a lot of things at once, whether it's research, administration, clinical practice. I I liked ⁓ diversity training and and so on. So okay, so what does it look like? I actually got a book recently about routines of of like writers and artists. I was always curious, like what do people do? And And so I'm a little reinforced. I actually thought some of my things were just because of my idiosyncratic nature. But I think routines are important and you you see that in a lot of people who I don't really consider myself an artist, but people who produce. ⁓ so a lot of my days start with something athletic. I'll I still play tennis or squash, or I'll I'll run or I'll work in a gym. ⁓ I'm trying to fight the old age. But then my my morning is really devoted to writing and research and editing stuff. And like so I'll I'll spend two to three hours during the day with that and I don't and I and now I have, you know, I have a executive exclusive executive system. So in my schedule I have this like orange zone. I said do not schedule anything. Yeah. So I and then I'll start having meetings, whether they're administrative or or ⁓
speaker-1: Down there.
speaker-0: supervision meetings either late morning, midday, into the afternoon. I think for me, writing ⁓ I'm most alert, most creative in the morning. ⁓ and then I can sit in meetings and be a little less alert thereafter. in terms of I I do will address emails small throughout the day, big ones I'll I'll I always like try to sit on a little longer and think about it. Although I think people say to me they're amazed I how quick I am because I don't this is the skinarian thing. I I don't like my email box to be so big. So I usually feel good when it's at a certain number. ⁓ and then at the I I end my day now with ⁓ I'll see ⁓ one or two patients at the end of the day. So for the last I think the last 15 years, my practi I drew my practice down. I think ⁓ when I was at the hospital for like 20 years, I was, you know. around twenty hours of clinical practice. ⁓ and then when I went transferred to working at the university, I brought it down to to eight ⁓ hours a week. And but it but it's still hugely important to me and and to some extent that it's driven by I I still have to be in touch with that. It's still really important. And it's not and not just that though, I actually of all things I do, it it it's relatively the most peaceful peaceful thing. It's like an oasis for me. ⁓ there's something about it that I I I always, you know, I'll joke to myself, you know, if I devoted more time, I could be really good. So I, you know, but ⁓ so that's kind of my day. And then at the end of the day I'll I'll I'll I'll I end the day usually by reading something and and and nowadays I've been trying to read get back to fiction again. but there was a a It was funny for someone who was a an English major and also I was I I could have been a a French minor because I read a lot of French literature too. I I went through a a stretch where it was just everything was professional. ⁓ you know, so ⁓ so now I'm kinda getting back to some Yeah. ⁓ and I'm doing my ⁓ I did a a little deep dive on Hemingway last year and and so we have spring break coming up. So my wife and I are going to the Key West.
speaker-1: nice. ⁓ I didn't realize this till you use the word peaceful, but I it made me think that people sometimes have asked me, like, Well, why do you why do you see patients when you're sick? And I realize it's 'cause it is the most peaceful part of my life. Like it's yeah in comparison. So yeah.
speaker-0: There's something kind of very grounding about it, even though it obviously can be really difficult and challenging, but I don't know. There's something about it.
speaker-1: Well, I just thank you so much for joining ⁓ us and joining me today. It was just a great conversation and I'm really glad we were able to connect.
speaker-0: I hope it was useful. Sometimes I worry I ramble a little bit, but
speaker-1: I thought it was great. Thank you so much. Thank you for listening to in-depth. Academics for the Advancement of Psychodynamic Psychology is a community-driven organization working to shape the future of psychoanalytic education, from undergraduate study through postdoctoral training. We have ongoing projects devoted to improving mentorship and educational resources, supporting psychoanalytic research, and changing the public discourse around psychoanalytic and psychodynamic training. Join one of our existing projects or suggest one of your own. We're actively looking for volunteers and we especially encourage students to get involved. If this work resonates with you, visit a2p2group.org or reach out to us at a squaredp squared at group.org and take part in shaping what comes next.
speaker-1: What is profound change in psychotherapy? This is the question that has preoccupied Dr. Christopher Moran since the beginning of his career. While the vast majority of psychotherapy research is attempting to address the matter of whether or not psychotherapy works, Dr. Moran's process research focuses on a vital concern. How does psychotherapy work? Dr. Moran's scholarship on the Alliance is extremely clinically relevant and can inform how we might respond to moments of rupture in ways that help our patients. Dr. Moran comes by his passionate belief in pluralism, honestly. He is a psychoanalytically trained researcher and clinician who was also taught by Albert Ellis. He makes a strong case for engaging in dialogues outside of analytic communities and says that today's students are hungry for an integrationist perspective. Additionally, you'll want to hear Dr. Moran's thoughts on what we need to change about training the next generation of psychotherapists. I think you'll find this conversation to be an engaging one. I know I did. Enjoy. J. Christopher Moran, PhD, is Dean and Professor at the Gordon F. Derner School of Psychology, Adelphi University, and co director of the Center for Alliance Focused Training. He is principal investigator of the Psychotherapy Research Program at Mount Sinai, Beth Israel, where he is also on faculty at ICANN School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. He has had postdoctoral training in Cognitive, University of Toronto, and Psychoanalytic Therapies, New York University. He is a fellow of APA and has served on its Clinical Practice Guidelines Advisory Steering Committee. He is also past president of the Society for Psychotherapy Research and past editor of its journal Psychotherapy Research. He has served on several editorial boards, held other faculty appointments, and received multiple honors, including distinguished courier awards from APA, SPR, and the National Register. He has published over 200 papers, 10 books, and four videos, generally on rupture, repair, and alliance focused training. ⁓ thank you so much, Chris, for joining me today. I'm really excited to be speaking to you.
speaker-0: My pleasure. I am honored for the invitation and hopefully I can say something meaningful.
speaker-1: Well, I wanted to start by just having you tell us a bit about how you entered into academia and what your sort of professional trajectory has been.
speaker-0: Okay. ⁓ I guess to be fully transparent, I know you gave me some questions to think about and and that was that was the starter, and that's a it's a tricky one for me, ⁓ because I'm very aware of, you know, how arbitrary it is, how you define things. And but the thing that came to mind first and foremost was it all began on my grandfather my grandmother's lap, actually. ⁓ she in in many respects was ⁓ my first academic mentor and ⁓ she was the one who ⁓ you know really introduced me to the arts and sciences and and and how to think about things in different ways. ⁓ so so I think of her as launching my academic career ⁓ and also shaping my orientation towards pluralism. I think she was very important in that and that theme is has been fundamental to my journey. it, you know, in in retrospect, I I see it very clearly. ⁓ and one one early expression of it, not that early, but ⁓ but these days maybe early is in in in undergrad I was a double major in in psychology and and English. and the the institution I went to The psychology department was very behavioral. ⁓ it was the alma mater of BF Skinner. so we were all issued our our skinner boxes and our rat coming right in and worked with the rat all across our years there. And it also had a very neuroscience bent. So at some point we we implanted ⁓ electrodes in our rat and and examined behavior. So it was very, you know,
speaker-1: As behavioral as it gets.
speaker-0: Yeah, very behavioral, very neuroscience. ⁓ but it was in the English department where I was able to sort of explore more philosophical and and psychoanalytic themes. And it's where I really, you know, came to appreciate personality, ⁓ and existential themes. And so so I've always had those sides to me and you know, one's philosophical and one's super practical. And I think that that I think I don't see that as contradictions. I just see that as like ⁓ they work in in compliment for me. ⁓ so and then going forward, you know, for a variety of reasons and I know I'm being ⁓ selective in terms of the details here, but ⁓ I ended up in a in a doctoral program that was cognate behavioral. ⁓ my dissertation was involved ⁓ Pretty sophisticated statistical multivaried applications. I was working with a program that was developed in in in Sweden. So all the codes were in Swedish. But but but that sort of was very influential in terms of my research skills and and then clinically speaking, during my time in graduate school, I got to work with Albert Ellis and I was supervised by him for almost two years among other people at his at his institute who were very important to me. and you know that was I I think that they were I I think when I was there I was aware that I I didn't quite fit. ⁓ I was always struggling to find my voice within things. And so I always felt like somewhat of a misfit. But I think that's true wherever I am. So I don't think that that's particular to that ⁓ place. But I also appreciated that ⁓ you know, how supportive everyone was with regard to my difference. ⁓ and so recently I I I changed offices, and when you change offices, you get to look at files and things that you've been collecting, and and I found ⁓ an evaluation from from Al saying basically, you know, it was very positive, but his his comment was. does it his own way. Which, you know I took it yeah. I I didn't take that as a critical. I thought I was always really supportive. ⁓ but I know that I was very interested early on with this idea of I I know it sounds ambitious, but this idea of what is profound change. And and that's what I kind of struggled with.
speaker-1: Getting that framed.
speaker-0: within the cognitive behavioral world. And that's what kind of made me kind of, you know, bounce around the, you know, against the edges of it. ⁓ I did a postdoctoral training in in Toronto and ⁓ at the Clark Institute of Psychiatry and the cognitive therapy unit. And my cognitive therapy supervisor was Zindel Siegel. And Zindel was one of those that was very interested in in, you know, underlying structure, schema theory. Schema theory like was a way in which ⁓ well actually was considered as having ⁓ integrative potential because there were dynamic researchers using the schema construct and ⁓ there was all this hope that it would be a bridge between all these traditions. And Zindel was one of the more sophisticated types within the cognitive world, ⁓ studying it and and studying its implications for change. And and so he was very influential. But also my postdoc I I started my collaboration with Jeremy Saffron and and Jeremy was the director of the cognitive therapy unit, but he was not a true blue cognitive therapist. He had a lot of other interests. And ⁓ but first and foremost, he introduced me to s the psychotherapy research world, and and he was just beginning ⁓ to study this notion of rupture. and so he introduced me to the notion. You know, of the alliance, alliance rupture, and again, constructs that had great integrative potential. ⁓ and so that kind of launched me in that world. shortly thereafter, I I took the position as director of the psychotherapy research program at Beth Israel Medical Center. And it that was the beginning of formal academic appointments. I was initially part of Mount Sinai, then the medical centers shifted to Einstein and then came back to Sinai again. ⁓ but I really cut my academic teeth as director of this research program. I was also at at some point I I was appointed chief psychologist, which actually was really formative in terms of my ⁓ clinical skills. ⁓ and I was, you know, helped develop a externship program, internship program and a postdoc there. ⁓ so I was steeped in training. ⁓ and it was in that role ⁓ as as director of the research program that I dove deeper into the study of the therapic relationship and the notion of rupture. And Jeremy came to New York himself. And so we continued our collaboration there. ⁓ and I realized that I I wanted to ⁓ really understand that literature. ⁓ And and so I decided to go into analytic training because I thought that's where it was richer. And I I had the sense that I I would do better in a structured environment and full immersion in in that world. And ⁓ I wasn't actually looking to be an analyst. I think I might have told you that when we first talked. ⁓
speaker-1: So you wanted a like a curriculum.
speaker-0: Yeah, I I wanted to make sure I really understood it. And so it was kind of an anthropological initiative. Full immersion, really understand it. I didn't I I, you know, what when I was gonna write about it or or present about it, I I I didn't want to pretend or ⁓ so in some ways it was driven my own anxiety. I wanted to really under you know be somewhat authoritative about that. ⁓ and the liturgy in the cognitive behavioral world was quite limited. And and Jeremy himself was a bridge, he was actually introducing some of that into the cognitive behavioral world. ⁓ and at the time he was self-taught, self, you know, read in some sense. ⁓ later on he would go on to analytic training as well. but I thought that was that would be best for me. So
speaker-1: Can we just clarify when you say that kind of research? Cause you're actually the f you know, the first scholar we we've had on the podcast that focuses on psychotherapy research, process research. And I think most people are more familiar with the idea of outcome research. Right. Right. Can you just kind of define what you mean by that or how what that means?
speaker-0: Thank you. I mean in a gross sense, the outcome research or the research that's really been driven by randomized clinical trials is really trying to answer the question, does does the does a treatment work? Right. And and but then there's this other arm of research that's actually looking at how does it work? And that's the process research. And in in in in truth, like for me, they really go hand in hand. ⁓ The research on on efficacy or effectiveness is actually quite sobering. And actually most of it is dominated by the cognitive behavioral world because there's a a fuller buy-in to ⁓ to empirical research. So the the analytic world's always been at best ambivalent about it. ⁓ so but but for me because of the the interest in in in in process. You wanted to study process in the context of outcome. You know, and and outcome is actually like I said at the beginning, it's another one of those words that gets used in so many different ways. So there's outcome from pre to post to follow up, but then there's outcome from session to session. And then there's these what could be described as micro outcomes, these these movements within the session. And that's that's the area I I've really studied. carefully with regard to this notion of rupture and repair. ⁓ but but you do have to have it, you do have to relate what you're doing in session to post session to overall outcome. Otherwise, you don't really know whatever you're looking at, whether it has any relevance for overall change. So so they do kind of, they're all nested together and they're all relevant for each other. But for me, the the the richness was in the process and and And what makes it rich is that you can actually ⁓ yield data that's clinically user-friendly. You can actually point to phenomena that are actually happening and and processes around that. And so that can be more informative for therapists. ⁓ so what is a rupture? What do I need to do when when it comes to a rupture? Now you're in the world of clinically user-friendly data and you're not Just kicking out some overall coefficient that clinicians don't know what to do with.
speaker-1: So it's a I I hadn't thought about that so succinctly, but outcome research doesn't necessarily inform what you do in any individual session.
speaker-0: No, no. And especially these days you have a lot a lot of treatments that are packages. So you don't really and I don't think people really know what aspects of the package are actually effective. so i mean it's they're they're constructed from clinical expertise and clinical expertise shouldn't be minimized, but but the definition of evidence based is the best available empirical evidence, clinical expertise. and patient values and preferences. So you really need to actually be considering all three ⁓ domains at once. ⁓ so yes, yes, we don't yes. So I I do think that would be my criticism of psychotherapy research is we don't ⁓ yield enough ⁓ data that's actually that actually moves the needle, that actually really helps clinicians. And that's the that's the criticism of of psychotherapy research, but
speaker-1: Well, you you mentioned, you know, h psychoanalysis' attitude or how it regards empirical research. And I'm curious what you experienced about that. So you went to psychoanalytic training, you were a researcher. Like how did people receive you?
speaker-0: I mean it you know it was interesting. I mean There were a lot of prejudices that you would encounter. Like even it with when it came to CBT, people assumed that CBT meant you only worked in a very time-limited way. And that's not actually true. ⁓ but that's that's the kind of prejudice you would encounter. And ⁓ and same with research. But I'll I have to say that at least most of the senior faculty I worked with were were very supportive. And and what do I mean by that? I think that they were curious and and actually encouraging. so when it came to, for example, the rupture repair, I think they appreciated that while the ideas weren't necessarily new, they hadn't been empirically demonstrated. And so that was kind and and and operationalized the way we had. So it gives it, you know, makes it in some sense more accessible and more translatable. And the potential is to have an impact on other orientations because they can understand it better. Right. ⁓ and I think some of the people I worked with really got that. ⁓ and ⁓ and so that would include ⁓ Lou Aron and and say Basescu, who I worked with closely. but there were others who I think saw psychoanalysis as as ⁓ as more or maybe exclusively hermeneutic and and didn't and then resisted. And I I and I ⁓ I actually kind of thought to some extent there was some professional hypocrisy there because on one hand some of these people were big advocates for pluralism. Mm-hmm. But there was no seat at the table for the empirical voice. and then one example, which I think I mentioned to you, is Lou, ⁓ after I graduated, he he wanted to set up and that was when he became ⁓ became director after Bernie Kalinkowitz. And he wanted to integrate ⁓ research into the postdoc, NYU postdoc. ⁓ and so he set up a a a task force with some notable people like Morris Siegel, Bert Friedman, Doris Silverman, ⁓ and Jeremy and me. And he, you know, we met regularly, I can't remember how often, but then we Produced a proposal of how to integrate research in a stepwise way. And some of it had to do with the clinic and trying to build in measures that we could start using as a sort of infrastructure to study the process further. And then we brought it to the following protocol to the to the Senate. And it got roundly shut down. And that actually was kind of. Not that I was bitter about it, but I i i you know that just marked like okay, there's not a place for this, even at a program that was all about pluralism. so but but but what is also true about one's you know, when you when you choose your path, there's just so many communities you can actually fully devote yourself to. So I still kept a foot in the cognitive behavioral committee, I still a community, I still kept a foot in ⁓ the analytic world. But I I chose to immerse myself in the in the ⁓ psychotherapy research world. And the Society for Psychotherapy Research is an international society. And that's where I really focused my career. And and you know I became an officer, edited a journal, became you know president at some point. And And so that's where I concentrated my efforts. But I will say this too, and getting back to your original question. Maybe ⁓ just a few years back, ⁓ I was approached by Steve Asselrod at NYU postdoc to actually come back home in some sense. ⁓ and I use home because so many of the ideas that that informed our rupture repair comes from the relational tradition. So so I I know how important. NYU postdoc in particular and the relational movement was to what got crystallized in the rupture repair. that was never lost on me. And and so I did a few colloquia ⁓ and then and and what they they were explicit. I mean, Steve wanted me to actually talk about research. And he wanted me to teach a course that I think the
speaker-1: Mm-hmm.
speaker-0: It's from empirical research to clinical practice and using the rupture repair our our research program as an illustration. And I was at the time I was thinking, like, are you crazy? Because I'm thinking about 1999. ⁓ And I'm thinking, like, that's just not gonna fly. And I'm thinking, you know, if I were there, would I do take that? And I I my memory was ⁓ you know, everyone at the postdoc was all clinical. ⁓ and And and and the and the course is interesting because it it is clinical. It does, you know, as I alluded to, it does get extraordinarily practical. So I'm looking at the products of the work, but I'm also showing how we got there. So there so I keep the the research maybe even more explicit than I would when I do workshops. And I'm I'm maybe just exclusively clinical in my in my presentation. so I'm giving them a peek under the hood. So to speak.
speaker-1: Well, it really speaks to how much the ethos shifted over the years to empirical research.
speaker-0: And and the people so the course ⁓ ten people signed up for the first class. So so I was a little taken aback by it all. I don't know if it'll ⁓ the the vowels were good, but ⁓ you know it's har it's hard to know whether something will have traction. Why did it why was it, you know, popular the first time out or not? And ⁓ but it does speak to that. It does you know, so I started I I I mean I haven't made any Conclusions about it, but it does suggest that maybe the culture and the climate has changed. And and I see that with our students too. I I I think like this idea of pluralism and integration, that was a big deal in the 80s and the 90s. And maybe it's more baked into, you know, to how people think today and how students think today. And I'm very aware when I teach today, like, Am I teaching anything new? I I I don't know because I think that they're inherently ⁓ integrative. And they they may say, ⁓ no, I'm I'm analytic, but they don't realize that there's a lack of purity in those things. They don't even know. They don't even know
speaker-1: I don't need to What that means. Yeah. Well, I wanted to ask you about ⁓ pluralism because it keeps coming up as a theme. And I am thinking about like your background, you know, and kind of the different worlds that you had a foot in. And I I'm curious what you think, like if if someone, which you know, has become increasingly the case is really kind of only has a CBT education or knows that they want to do cognitive behavioral therapy as their main orientation. What what would you say that ⁓ training in psychoanalytic clinical work would offer them? Like what would be the bonus of that kind of ⁓ plural thinking?
speaker-0: That's great question. I mean, I let me step back and say, you know, I I I teach a relational class at Durner. And one of the things I do early on is I have this, I created this wacky chart of the history of psychotherapy because I wanted people to sort of see how how things really intersected, you know, that nothing, you know, so I mean it's an to some extent an interpretive history, but But you know, I'll have the Freudian path through the ego psychological tradition. And then you have like I'll have a ⁓ a more relational path that comes from forensic. And then, you know, I'll have the cognitive behavioral and then the humanistic. But then I kind of show and I have the specific leaders associated with those those threads. And then I show how things kind of intersect. And so for example, you know, one of the things I'll point out is that. Both Ellis and Beck were analysts originally. And they were, you know, and mostly from that the ego psychological tradition that when they were trained, that was the dominant voice. And that maybe another way to think about, you know, their innovation, in some ways, they conceptualized pathology and and changed to some extent in the same way. They were making the irrational. or the distortions available to the ego and the ego would adapt. They counted on the rational capacity of the individual to adjust when when what was what is irrational ⁓ is made plain. Or like when the id is made plain, then the ego will will adjust. They really stayed true to that. Where they were innovating was in the action of the therapist. And they saw the action of therapists in a very different way and they wanted to a more directive therapist. That was that was where it was really innovative. The and then when they when they when they were developing their ideas, maybe the most dominant voice in the psychotherapy research psychotherapy world, it's not actually a slip because I think he was the first psychotherapy process researcher, is Carl Rogers. ⁓ And Rogers' emphasis on experience and And the relationship and the relational factors, they responded to. They had to, because it was in the same way as people would respond to ideas from Freud. People in the 60s and 70s were responding to Rogers. And so the relationship was important to both of them. To some extent, maybe they took it for granted because they were analysts, they were trained, they understood the therapy relationship was complicated and and critical. ⁓ But they were concentrating more on other aspects they thought were deemphasized or or were were not ⁓ developed in the way they thought it should be developed. ⁓ but so they, you know, one of the great things about the supervision with Ellis was that I mean he was known to be quite radical and quite the character, and and he liked to really shake things up. But one on one, you could have you know, it wasn't about a show with him. Yeah. And and and he was a guy who who lived quite the professional life and and he was a workaholic and he could talk on anything. And I'll always prize those talks and and and he would talk about the things that were valuable from the analyte tradition as far as he was concerned, or the things he saw valuable in other perspectives. And it wasn't about banging the R E T drum. ⁓ So the other thing I always point out to the students is that Rogers himself was explicit about the influence of forensic and romp to his thinking. You can the the the emphasis on experience in the here and now and and the and relational factors gets traced back to those that experimentation in the in the 1920s. So you can see how Things really intersect. So for me, I'm not so boundaried or categorical. There are some things. There are expressions in the cognitive behavioral world that kind of are maybe more psycho-ed and it's a little worrisome that that. Because I think what what I think a lot of them, you know, I would say back in Alice appreciated this too. And the research speaks to this is that. experience the expressive expressiveness is a really important variable in change. and they understood that and the research actually points to that even in cognitive behavioral that the higher levels of experiencing or expressiveness is predictive of good outcome on the part of the patient. Yeah. Yes. I think it could be with the therapist, but we're not there. We don't have that data yet.
speaker-1: the part of the patient.
speaker-0: ⁓ although we have a little data in that regard, but that's do that's in the realm of rupture repair that therapist expressiveness may be really critical towards resolution. So so ⁓ and this is a sort of convoluted way to answer your question, but I don't get sort of overly bound by what's this or that. I I sort of think of things in more trans-theoretical or transdiagnostic ways. And so I think expressiveness. being you know experientially oriented are are critical ⁓ to change. And ⁓ I don't think in the analytic world those there was a way in it got very insight oriented for for a time. Or at least maybe it was read that way. but but I do think today maybe a reflection of the relational movement, the the concentration of experience in the room and and this notion of intersubjectivity ⁓ is kind of a contemporary postmodern ⁓ rendering of forenzy's experimentations back in the day. ⁓
speaker-1: Well, you it sounds like all these traditions have been, in your view, sort of in dialogue with each other, even if not explicitly there there's some conversation happening.
speaker-0: Yeah. And I think if if people start thinking that way, you can have better dialogues. You know, and I I I don't I think there's too much investment in in this is yours, this is mine. And as opposed to like trying to like like I'll I'll tell you another thing. When I was coming up through the academic ranks, I was interested in dialogue. I mean dialogue was really important to rupture repair, but I but I played it out in in in writings as well. So I I edited two book projects. ⁓ one called Self Relations in the Psychotherapy ⁓ Process, which got me a customer of the year award from Amazon. I was buying so many books. But it was ⁓ yeah, I was immersing myself in in in like postmodern thought and and the self-concept. And those are two huge areas. And I just again felt like I wanted to really understand that literature. ⁓ but I I I had this idea of inviting ⁓ different theorists, clinical theorists from different traditions, but have them dialogue with each other. ⁓ so that was one book project. The other one was ⁓ dialogues and difference and diversity studies of therapy relationship. and in there I had them, I I set up dialogues. And then the second one I actually set up, you know, chapter commentary, and then a response. So the original ch author of the chapter got the respond to the commentary, which was, you know, for an edited book, it's kind of complicated to get all that together. ⁓ but the reason why I'm bringing this up is it was a little difficult to court some of the analysts to participate in that project. and so what I discovered was, yeah, I could get the cognitive behaviorist to do it. ⁓ but I had trouble getting the analyst because for my read of that is that a lot of these analysts have very limited, you know, they're big practices, they have their institute affiliations.
speaker-1: interest.
speaker-0: And then they have their writing and they they want to be really targeted about their writing. So they're not so interested in dialogues with others. You know, they wanna they wanna have dialogues with their own community. Now I'm critical of that because I think that doesn't build bridges. ⁓ and therefore it they they they can have an impact on the cognitive behavioral community if they're if they're resistant to having dialogues with them in in in even these like kind of book enterprises. ⁓ so that was eye-opening to me and I got some really noteworthy people. But even at the end, I remember one came to me and said, So are anyone reading this book? And the funny thing is is that these book projects actually do a lot better. And edited book projects always do worse than authored. But
speaker-1: Ha ha ha.
speaker-0: The authored books by analysts really don't sell that well. They don't it's a really small community and and these projects actually sell better. ⁓ but but I think from that person's point of view, it wasn't getting picked up by his usual audience. and I would say you gotta get a new audience or expand it.
speaker-1: I feel like that's been such a theme on the podcast and so many people that I so many academics that I've spoken to have said like there's a real existential risk if psychoanalysts aren't gonna engage in dialogue outside of this very narrow field, or even like if they're not willing to speak a language that can be understood outside. Yeah. And I and I
speaker-0: Right. One of the things that Jeremy and I would talk about, because in the 90s we did a lot of presenting of our stuff to the cognitive behavioral world. And so whenever there was discussions of therapy relationship, you know, they would roll out, you know, initially it was Safford and Siegel and then became Safford and Moran. And and and and one thing I appreciate when I was going through analytic training, that's where we really, that's where our audience is. That's where we can actually really have an impact. the l again, a lot of what we were saying, while it was it was empirically innovative, it wasn't like conceptually new. ⁓ and so I didn't think the analytic community really was gonna like, ⁓ Safram Moran, they're awesome. You know? ⁓ but Jeremy was really ⁓ enamored and really he wanted ⁓ for I think it's for a r variety of reasons, really be identified with the analytic world. So he then kind of morphed and spent more of his energies ⁓ you know, developing his ⁓ relationship with the relational world and at the forensic center in in in in New York. ⁓ but we would have talks about it. I said, you know, ⁓ and I I was devoted to the psychotherapy research world. So we both kind of moved away from the cognitive behavioral community in a significant way. And and ⁓ We'd have talks about it and I I always felt like that was a big mistake. That was because we were we were and we still may be, ⁓ but we were more of a bridge for analytic ideas to the cognitive behavioral world in the nineties than we are probably now. Although there there was a book that just came out on rupture repair and CPT, which is cool. And so I I I wrote the introductory chapter with my colleague Katherine Eubanks. So and that's where I got to talk about the diff, you know, like all this craziness about divisions between these different traditions and ⁓ kind of reminded people of, you know, Ellison Beck's origins, like Marv Goldfried, who wrote a seminal book on on cognitive behavioral ⁓ therapy in the 1970s. If you read the book, It is just chock full of Harry Staxullivan. It's really amazing. It's amaz And I I because he's still alive. He just turned 90, Marvin. ⁓ I think it was a year ago where I said to him, What were you thinking? And he laughed about it, but it it's it was all there. Now now the interpersonal tradition is an easier ⁓ marriage with CBT because they the interpersonal psychoanalysis
speaker-1: Yeah.
speaker-0: is such an American you know construct and it developed you know with exactly that was very pragma in fact it was criticized originally as behaviorism by ⁓ analytic orthodoxy so the pra the emphasis on pragmatism and operationalism and what can be seen you know in terms of the relationship it it lends itself quite well ⁓ and in some ways Paul
speaker-1: Certain pragmatism to it.
speaker-0: Paul Octell's efforts to to integrate kind of builds off of that, you know, and talks about feedback and reinforcement in terms of interpersonal patterns. That's there in the in the Sulvanian ⁓ and his descendants' world, you know. So so that so it's not a surprise that Marv went there. And then Marv became subsequently with Paul one of the leaders of the psychotherapy integration movement. ⁓
speaker-1: Well, I wanna ⁓ shift a little and talk about ⁓ psychotherapy training. Training future psychotherapists. And I'm curious what your research ⁓ and your focus on the change process and your focus on rupture repair, like what has it taught you about ro what really matters when it comes to training psychotherapists?
speaker-0: So I think I mean our our research began defining what are ruptures and what are what are possible pathways and then processes, patient states, behaviors, therapist states and behaviors, and so on. But and we wanted to understand how therapy works and we wanted to like address the sobering picture on treatment efficacy, which, you know, to to this day is still pretty sobering. ⁓ But what came from that naturally was ⁓ how to train therapists, ⁓ how to train therapists to recognize ruptures, how to train therapists to work effectively with them. And and so our our first NIMH grant in the 90s was the beginning of that. And then we got another grant ⁓ which ⁓ where we we where we ⁓ it was an indiv in kind of an interesting design, but but essentially we were training Trainees who had been trained in cognitive behavioral therapy, we were then introduced we introduced them to our alliance focused training, which was all about rupture recognition and rupture repair. What we what we thought in the nineties when we looked at the literature on training was that it was too didactic. ⁓ I mean, most training is didactic. You have a supervisor just sort of like listening and then telling you what you did wrong and
speaker-1: Make on it.
speaker-0: Yeah, what you should do instead. And and actually the one thing that was disappointing in my my postdoc training at NYU was that it was kind of traditional. And I thought I thought I was coming to the mothership and I was gonna get the state of the art of training and and I, you know, I got ⁓ you know, basically more more didactics. ⁓ and actually to to ⁓ to Ellis' credit, Ellis was interested in in in role playing and and not just telling you what to do. ⁓ and I don't know why I mean he was also a scholar of the sixties. So that kind of experiential work was, you know, really taking shape then. So I don't know if he was influenced by that. But anyway, so Jeremy and I realized, well, given what the literature was saying, given what the research was saying, actually, the limited research on training, we wanted to do something different. And ⁓ And then there was study that ⁓ was led by Hans Strapp, who's one of the you know early psychodynamic ⁓ psychotherapy researchers, ⁓ and they didn't have great results in terms of training their therapist to work with negative process, which is kind of what we were doing too. So
speaker-1: This would be like when the client's angry at you or
speaker-0: Yeah, or I mean, for for for Strupp it was maladaptive cycles, you know, negative cycles. It was defined in terms of cycles. ⁓ so we thought in our to some to partly arrogance, but but also we were reading the literature, we thought that, you know, especially the literature i you know, in education, that the emphasis should be on experiential learning. ⁓ And if you read the education literature, there's a lot of influence from like Rogers there and so on. So so somehow Ferenzi found his way. ⁓ so we wanted to develop a training program that emphasized ⁓ experiential work. And that included like not just exploring, you know, focusing on the trainees' experience, but actually engaging in role plays and two chair work and not Telling pati the trainees, I say patients, which is not again, not a bad sporting telling them what their counter transference is, but helping them discover it, helping them under you know, find their way with it, expanding their awareness. Because for us, like, you know, rupture is all about collapse of space. We're trying to expand their their space, their get their awareness of what's going on for them to sort of that would set the stage for them to. use their experience as a compass to what's going on. So we developed a program ⁓ that emphasized that. ⁓ it was and it was group based and and we got our second grant really to support that. And we were able to demonstrate that if you take young cognitive behavioral therapists and you introduce them to this, that you will see an effect on the on the interpersonal process with their patients. And then ultimately with micro and ultimate outcomes. so so that was so I'm a little long winded, but for me then when it came back to training, yeah, let's not just talk about what you should do. Let's actually let's play it out. Let's let's you know and and I also had ⁓ as a through college I I competed ⁓ as an athlete and so I knew that personally how important it was to to have simulated practice, to practice under pressure. and so that was very so when we were doing this, it felt to me like this was right. And later in my life, my son actually became a successful athlete. And you know, I unfortunately had to be there as he grew up through these different events, which is really torturous. But but I get, you know, in terms of trying to help them navigate, I realized that we were focusing on things that I helped my, you know, trainees with in psychotherapy. There was actually a lot of convergence. ⁓ so so I would so the short of is I would really exercise more experiential work. It's not that didactics aren't important, but so much depends on the on the on the the receiver, the information and their ability to translate it, you know, into action. So why does like insight sometimes work for patients? Because somehow they're able to translate it. ⁓ it's not that making an interpretation in and of itself or giving advice in and of itself isn't useful, but so much depends on how they receive and then translate into action. But if you can do it in training and have people role play or practice or or explore their expectations, explore their their fears, which ultimately helps them regulate their own emotions, which we know that that's like hugely important. And that's kind of the contemporary expression of counter transference, like helping people manage their countertransference. It's really helping them regulate their emotions. ⁓ so that's that's kind of the lesson from the research, I think.
speaker-1: ⁓ It does feel I'm remembering in when I was in psychoanalytic training, I I didn't have any experiential learning. And and then afterwards I got kind of more into experiential models or like the emotion focused therapy world. And it was all experiential. And it was in a way it almost feels like ⁓ inst psychoanalytic institutes in terms of their teaching haven't quite caught up to how they think about their own theory, like which is very often very experience focused.
speaker-0: No, yeah. And and and one thing I remember Lou Aron always saying to me, what are theories anyway? But they're they're emotion regulation strategies. Why do all these theories somehow help people? Because it helps us organize how how to navigate ambiguity and chaos. And ⁓ so it's not so much that one theory is better than the other, but it it just may help you manage your experience better.
speaker-1: Well, I I know you exist in a very trans theoretical space, but I do want to ask specifically about psycho you know, introducing psychoanalytic thought to students and and if you have any thoughts on how what we could do to increase their exposure to it, their interest in it.
speaker-0: I know we w w I think what I'm I haven't spent a lot of time reflecting on that. It's a great question. I I mean my impulse when we first when you first broached that with me was early, early, you know, like not I mean ⁓ undergrad for sure, but if if it could be earlier, it could be earlier. Like for me, I was you know, I was reading existentialists and in as an adolescent, and you know, that was really informative to me. I still kind of am a existentialist in in many respects. ⁓ so if you know if we could strengthen our presence ev as early as possible, ⁓ I think that would be important. ⁓ I think to succeed in academia ⁓ I I I think writing is so important. So I I I I would really advise if someone Yeah, so that's more academic than psychoanalysis per se, but developing your writing skills, getting comfortable with writing, and there are all kinds of, by the way, there's all kinds of writing challenges. Writing an empirical report's very different than writing a a a clinical piece. it demands a different skill set. But getting comfortable with that, getting feedback, get becoming fearless, I think is really important. ⁓ be a player, don't be a critic, you know, like get in there. you know, get be, you know, I I think there are a lot of critics and ⁓ it try to find a way where you can you can be in play and and and and Get out on the field. Don't be in the crowd or you know, build bridges. I think building bridges is really important. ⁓ trying to like communicate. So the the book, that edited book was an example. I I've been, I I think I told you, I've been serving on the ⁓ clinical practice guidelines committee for APA and and it it's kind of interesting because it it for me, it exposes me to what else. other people are thinking. I'm getting exposed to psychologists who work in the VA system, so on. So and and and then I remember when I first walked into the room, I had a sense that everyone saw me like with a beard and a cigar.
speaker-1: You're dragging the couch behind you.
speaker-0: No. As I alluded to earlier, I I don't really feel that comfortable with any one particular identity, but then to be sort of seen as psychoanalytic, I was like, well, I guess. I mean but then, you know, there are definitely, you know, there I mean I what I was impressed is the people on the on this panel are so curious and I mean there are their academics, they're curious and they were open and they were really receptive. And and so what was, you know, for me to be able to expand how they think about evidence, how they think about the change process research, because there was this sort of orientation towards RCTs and and and privileging that as evidence. But now now they're the the the base of evidence is expanded and And I do think, and maybe I wasn't explicit about this, I think analytic ideas and humanistic ideas, which were informed by analytic ideas, they they get demonstrated in change process research. It's much harder to demonstrate that in the outcome world. I mean, there there are all these time limited psychodynamic models, some of which are maybe cognitive behavioral in some respects. But but but I think that the really the ideas around alliance, rupture, ⁓ you know, emotional experience, that stuff can get really studied and demonstrated in the change process world. And so for me to be able to like, you need to look at this too. People need to see, you know, this research as well. That should be part of the evidence-based ⁓ discussion. So getting involved in that way is really important. And And most of all, because I'm not big on identities, but if you're gonna be anything, be a scholar, be curious. I think that that's that's that should be first and foremost. So I I mean, th think big, think small, be part of big communities, be part of small communities. But don't be so small, don't be exclusively small, as I said earlier, where you're just writing for a few or you know I mean if you're gonna do that, then don't complain about it. You know, that C B T Yeah, the C B T's dominant, you know, like ⁓ because I do think the analytic world has to take some responsibility for their position with regard to the empirical evidence. Right. ⁓ a lot of it's they've lost by default. They haven't showed up. ⁓ and that's I think an artifact of their ambivalence about the tournament itself.
speaker-1: Yeah. I like that interpretation. Well, the the last thing I wanna ask you, Chris, is cause we like we do like to give people sort of a peek behind the curtain of a life in the academy. And I'm wondering if you could say a little bit about what a day in your life is like, like how you balance writing and research and teaching and and all the numerous things you do.
speaker-0: Yeah, and I and I think what I came to appreciate late in life, I like for me it was more eos ego syntonic to be doing a lot of things at once, whether it's research, administration, clinical practice. I I liked ⁓ diversity training and and so on. So okay, so what does it look like? I actually got a book recently about routines of of like writers and artists. I was always curious, like what do people do? And And so I'm a little reinforced. I actually thought some of my things were just because of my idiosyncratic nature. But I think routines are important and you you see that in a lot of people who I don't really consider myself an artist, but people who produce. ⁓ so a lot of my days start with something athletic. I'll I still play tennis or squash, or I'll I'll run or I'll work in a gym. ⁓ I'm trying to fight the old age. But then my my morning is really devoted to writing and research and editing stuff. And like so I'll I'll spend two to three hours during the day with that and I don't and I and now I have, you know, I have a executive exclusive executive system. So in my schedule I have this like orange zone. I said do not schedule anything. Yeah. So I and then I'll start having meetings, whether they're administrative or or ⁓
speaker-1: Down there.
speaker-0: supervision meetings either late morning, midday, into the afternoon. I think for me, writing ⁓ I'm most alert, most creative in the morning. ⁓ and then I can sit in meetings and be a little less alert thereafter. in terms of I I do will address emails small throughout the day, big ones I'll I'll I always like try to sit on a little longer and think about it. Although I think people say to me they're amazed I how quick I am because I don't this is the skinarian thing. I I don't like my email box to be so big. So I usually feel good when it's at a certain number. ⁓ and then at the I I end my day now with ⁓ I'll see ⁓ one or two patients at the end of the day. So for the last I think the last 15 years, my practi I drew my practice down. I think ⁓ when I was at the hospital for like 20 years, I was, you know. around twenty hours of clinical practice. ⁓ and then when I went transferred to working at the university, I brought it down to to eight ⁓ hours a week. And but it but it's still hugely important to me and and to some extent that it's driven by I I still have to be in touch with that. It's still really important. And it's not and not just that though, I actually of all things I do, it it it's relatively the most peaceful peaceful thing. It's like an oasis for me. ⁓ there's something about it that I I I always, you know, I'll joke to myself, you know, if I devoted more time, I could be really good. So I, you know, but ⁓ so that's kind of my day. And then at the end of the day I'll I'll I'll I'll I end the day usually by reading something and and and nowadays I've been trying to read get back to fiction again. but there was a a It was funny for someone who was a an English major and also I was I I could have been a a French minor because I read a lot of French literature too. I I went through a a stretch where it was just everything was professional. ⁓ you know, so ⁓ so now I'm kinda getting back to some Yeah. ⁓ and I'm doing my ⁓ I did a a little deep dive on Hemingway last year and and so we have spring break coming up. So my wife and I are going to the Key West.
speaker-1: nice. ⁓ I didn't realize this till you use the word peaceful, but I it made me think that people sometimes have asked me, like, Well, why do you why do you see patients when you're sick? And I realize it's 'cause it is the most peaceful part of my life. Like it's yeah in comparison. So yeah.
speaker-0: There's something kind of very grounding about it, even though it obviously can be really difficult and challenging, but I don't know. There's something about it.
speaker-1: Well, I just thank you so much for joining ⁓ us and joining me today. It was just a great conversation and I'm really glad we were able to connect.
speaker-0: I hope it was useful. Sometimes I worry I ramble a little bit, but
speaker-1: I thought it was great. Thank you so much. Thank you for listening to in-depth. Academics for the Advancement of Psychodynamic Psychology is a community-driven organization working to shape the future of psychoanalytic education, from undergraduate study through postdoctoral training. We have ongoing projects devoted to improving mentorship and educational resources, supporting psychoanalytic research, and changing the public discourse around psychoanalytic and psychodynamic training. Join one of our existing projects or suggest one of your own. We're actively looking for volunteers and we especially encourage students to get involved. If this work resonates with you, visit a2p2group.org or reach out to us at a squaredp squared at group.org and take part in shaping what comes next.
