r Boston, Columbia, and New York Psychoanalytic Institutes studies. An early Boston study (1960) reported on 100 psychoanalytic cases. Questionnaires addressed the analysis one year later and judges were blind. Limitations of the study included its screening of unsuitable cases and early testing of results. A later study analyzed treatment after 675 hours for 130 patients, and included outcome criteria. Both studies did not distinguish therapeutic benefit. The Columbia also screened more for its participants than for therapeutic benefit; the margin of gain was as predictable as the initial evaluation. The New York studies focused more on treatment with more experienced analysts; outcomes were comparable to earlier studies of clinic patients.
Other studies included pre- and post-treatment rating scales. All studies failed to separate outcome results at treatment termination with regard to results at a follow-up point; therefore outcome stability was not shown. Although studies point to effective patient screening with positive therapeutic outcomes for these individuals, these findings offer valuable information regarding efficacy of psychoanalysis and psychotherapy for particular patients.
Third-generation studies looked at longitudinal examination of cases and included follow-up analysis. An example includes the Psychotherapy Research Project of the Menninger Foundation. This project followed treatment and life careers of patients (42), half were in psychoanalysis and half were in other psychoanalytic psychotherapies. The goal was to determine what changes took place and how they came about. Findings showed that across all treatment spectrums, supportive elements accounted for more of the changes found than had been anticipated. This longitudinal study offers empirical analysis of treatment outcome, dem
...