Quantitative Research On the Primary Process: Method and Findings

Abstract

Freud always defined the primary process metapsychologically, but he described the ways it shows up in dreams, parapraxes, jokes, and symptoms with enough observational detail to make it possible to create an objective, reliable scoring system to measure its manifestations in Rorschach responses, dreams, TAT stories, free associations, and other verbal texts. That system can identify signs of the thinker's efforts, adaptive or maladaptive, to control or defend against the emergence of primary process. A prerequisite and a consequence of the research that used this system was clarification and elaboration of the psychoanalytic theory of thinking. Results of empirical tests of several propositions derived from psychoanalytic theory are summarized. Predictions concerning the method's most useful index, of adaptive vs. maladaptive regression, have been repeatedly verified: People who score high on this index (who are able to produce well-controlled “primary products” in their Rorschach responses), as compared to those who score at the maladaptive pole (producing primary-process-filled responses with poor reality testing, anxiety, and pathological defensive efforts), are better able to tolerate sensory deprivation, are more able to enter special states of consciousness comfortably (drug-induced, hypnotic, etc.), and have higher achievements in artistic creativity, while schizophrenics tend to score at the extreme of maladaptive regression. Capacity for adaptive regression also predicts success in psychotherapy, and rises with the degree of improvement after both psychotherapy and drug treatment. Some predictive failures have been theoretically interesting: Kris's hypothesis about creativity and the controlled use of primary process holds for males but usually not for females. This body of work is presented as a refutation of charges, brought by such critics as Crews, that psychoanalysis cannot become a science.