Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36684843›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2022

Differential neural response to psychoanalytic intervention techniques during structural interviewing: A single-case analysis using EEG.

Anna Buchheim, Otto F Kernberg, Nikolaus Netzer, Peter Buchheim, Corinna Perchtold-Stefan, Barbara Sperner-Unterweger, Fabian Beckenbauer, Karin Labek

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Anna BuchheimInstitute of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Otto F KernbergNew York-Presbyterian Hospital-Westchester Division, New York, NY, United States.
Nikolaus NetzerHermann Buhl Institute, University of Innsbruck, Eurac Research, Innsbruck, Austria.
Peter BuchheimDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Corinna Perchtold-StefanInstitute of Psychology, University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Barbara Sperner-UnterwegerDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Fabian BeckenbauerInstitute of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Karin LabekInstitute of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Universität Innsbruck · ATEurac Research · ITInnsbruck Medical University · ATNew York Hospital Queens · USTechnical University of Munich · DEUniversity of Graz · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Previous studies detected changes in the electroencephalographic (EEG) signal as an effect of psychoanalytic interventions. However, no study has investigated neural correlates of specific psychoanalytic interventions in the EEG power spectrum yet. In the present case study, we contrasted three types of interventions (clarification, confrontation, and interpretation) and a neutral control condition during a structural psychoanalytic interview conducted while EEG was recorded. Methods: A 27-year-old male patient diagnosed with major depressive disorder and borderline personality disorder with recurrent suicidal and self-injurious behavior underwent a structural interview while recording EEG. Two independent experts selected by consensus the characteristic episodes of the four conditions (clarification, confrontation, interpretation, and neutral control) within the interview, which were included in the EEG analyses. Fast Fourier transformation (FFT) was applied to subsegments of the intervention type to analyze the EEG power spectra. Alpha and beta power from central, frontal, and parietal sites were considered in linear mixed-effects models with segments as a random factor with maximum-likelihood estimates due to the lack of balance in the length of the interview segments. Results: The interventions "interpretation" and "confrontation" showed a significantly lower alpha power compared with the control condition in the central electrodes. In the frontal and parietal sites of the alpha power and all beta power sites, the omnibus tests (full model/model without intervention) and comparisons relative to control conditions showed no significant overall result or failed significance after alpha error correction. Conclusion: Incisive interventions, such as confrontation with discrepancies and interpretation of unconscious intrapsychic conflicts, may have provoked temporary emotional lability, leading to a change in psychic processing akin to interference from external stimuli. This conclusion is consistent with the finding that interpretations, which are potentially the most concise interventions, had the strongest effects on alpha power. Using EEG during therapeutic psychoanalytic intervention techniques might be a helpful tool to evaluate differential responses to the psychotherapeutic process on a neural level. However, this single-case result has to be replicated in a larger sample and does not allow generalizations.

Indexed as

alpha powerclarificationconfrontationEEG analysisinterpretationpsychoanalytic intervention techniquesstructural interviewing

Identifiers

PMID36684843
PMCPMC9846161
OpenAlexW4313584442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.