View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

Chapter Two Part One – Literature review - Page 41
“…case studies on infant and young child observation, research papers,
and articles focusing on wider applications of the psychoanalytic observational
method, including its relevance to reflective professional practice in fields such
as social work, teaching and nursing”
(From the journal website, http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/13698036.asp,
retrieved 13 June 2010).
This aim of the journal has been borne out by the production of a special issue
(Hollway, 2007) which is a series of accounts of the experience of using the
psychoanalytic observation method as part of an empirical research project on becoming
a mother for the first time, claimed (Hollway, 2007 page 331) to be the first use of this
method in British funded research. In addition, conferences such as “From Baby to
Boardroom: The Tavistock-Bick Method of infant observation and its application to
organisations and in consultancy” held at the Tavistock Centre in 2008 (Miller, 2009)
have drawn together accounts of the application of the approach outside of its original
context.
There are clearly strong parallels with the current project, although there are also some
differences. One focus of these differences is linked to an ongoing debate in
psychoanalysis between alternative research paradigms, which is represented
particularly well by a debate between André Green and Daniel Stern.
The debate between Green and Stern
This debate, elaborated by Sandler et al (2000) in a report of a conference focussed on it
in 1997, symbolises a paradigm clash between ‘scientific’ and ‘psychoanalytic’
research. Put simply, Stern is a representative of those engaged in observational studies
of infants, and argues that these can inform and support psychoanalytic practice: Green
is one of the most vehement critics of this approach, arguing that it fails to take account