Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Difficult Patients in Group Analysis: The Personification of (ba) I:A/M

  • Published:
Group

Abstract

Following a discussion of the treatment of “difficult patients” in group analysis, two theories are proposed concerning a fourth basic assumption in the unconscious life of groups, called “Incohesion: Aggregation/Massification” or “(ba) I:A/M” and the personification of basic assumption processes, in particular that of (ba) I:A/M by difficult patients. These theories are illustrated with clinical data. Special attention is given to crustacean and amoeboid forms of encapsulation as a defence against the fear of annihilation within the context of the traumatogenic process. It is suggested that for difficult patients the treatment of choice is dyadic psychotherapy/psychoanalysis followed by group analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Agazarian, Y. & Carter, F. (1993). Discussions of the large group. Group, 17(4): 210–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, F. (1942). Our age of unreason. Philadelphia: Lippincott.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anzieu, D. (1981). Le groupe et l'inconscient: L'imaginaire groupal. Paris: Dunod.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battegay, R. (1973). Defective developments of therapeutic groups, in A. Uchtenhagen, R. Battegay & A. Friedmann (eds.) Group therapy and social environment. Berne/Stuttgart/Vienna: Hans Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battegay, R. et al. (1992). Trends in group psychotherapy with borderline patients. Group Analysis, 25: 66–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bion, W. R. (1958). On hallucination. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 39, 144–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bion, W. R. (1961). Experiences in groups and other papers. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bion, W. R. (1967). Second thoughts. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blatner, A. (2000). Foundations of psychodrama: History, theory and practice, 4th Edition. New York: Springer Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure. NewYork/ London: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleger, J. (1966). Psychoanalysis of the psychoanalytic frame. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 48: 511–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollas, C. (1993). Being a character. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britton, R. (1994). The blindness of the seeing eye: Inverse symmetry as a defence against reality. Psychoanalytical Inquiry, 14 (3): 365–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bychowski, G. (1948). Dictators and disciples from Caesar to Stalin. New York: International Univer-sities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camus, M. (1983). The outsider. London: Penguin Books. First published in French as L'Etranger in 1942.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chasseguet-Smirgel, J. (1985). Creativity and the perversions. London: Free Association Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Mare, P. (1972). Perspectives in group psychotherapy. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Mare, P. (1991). Koinonia. London: Karnac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Zulueta, F. (1993). From pain to violence: The traumatic roots of destructiveness. London: Whurr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elias, N. (1995). The civilizing process. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erikson, E. (1948). Hitler's imagery and German youth, in C. Kluckhorn and H. Murray (eds.) Person-ality in nature, society and culture. New York: Knopf, pp 485–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foulkes, S. H. & Anthony, E.J. (1964). Group psychotherapy: The psychoanalytic approach. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganzarain, R. (1989). Object relations group psychotherapy: The group as an object, a tool and a training base. Madison: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gans, J. & Alonso, A. (1998). Difficult patients: Their construction in group therapy. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 48: 311–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasser, M. (1979). Some aspects of the role of aggression in the perversions, in I. Rosen (ed.), Sexual deviation. Oxford University Press, pp 278–305.

  • Hillenbrand, F.K. (1995). Underground humour in Nazi Germany 1933–1945. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, E. (1975). A sociological view of large groups, in L. Kreeger (ed.) The large group: Dynamics and therapy. Reprinted Edition 1994, London: Karnac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, E. (1977). Correspondence. Group Analysis, 10(3).

  • Hopper, E. (1981). Social mobility: A study of social control and insatiability. Oxford: Blackwells.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, E. (1982). Group analysis: The problem of context. Group Analysis, XV(2).

  • Hopper, E. (1985). The problem of context in group analytic psychotherapy: A clinical illustration and brief theoretical discussion, in M. Pines (ed.) W.R. Bion and group psychotherapy: A critical reappraisal. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, E. (1987). Anti-Semitic sentiment in the transference and countertransference. Unpublished paper prepared for the Association of Child Psychotherapists.

  • Hopper, E. (1989). Psychotic anxieties and society: Fission (fragmentation)/fusion and aggrega-tion/ massification. Conference paper for The Royal College of Psychiatry. Cambridge, UK.

  • Hopper, E. (1991). Encapsulation as a defence against the fear of annihilation. The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 72(4): 607–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, E. (1994). L'incapsulamento come difesa contro II timore di annientamento. Plexus... Lo spazio del gruppo.

  • Hopper, E. (1995a). A psychoanalytical theory of drug addiction: Unconscious fantasies of homosexu-ality, compulsions and masturbation within the context of traumatogenic processes. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 76(6): 1121–1142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, E. (1995b). La politica della mente: L'inconscio sociale tra convervazione e cambiamento. Lecture for A.P.R.A.G.I. Turino.

  • Hopper, E. (1995c). Incohesion (aggregation/massification): A fourth basic assumption of unconscious life in social systems. Public Lecture, London Centre for Psychotherapy. Summarised by Sally Baldwin in Reflections. Issue No. 14, Winter 1996.

  • Hopper, E. (1996). The social unconscious in clinical work. Group, 20(1): 7–43, and (2000) in C. Oakley (ed.) What is a group? London: Rebus Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, E. (1997). 21st S H Foulkes Annual Lecture: Traumatic Experience in the Unconscious Life of Groups: A Fourth Basic Assumption. Group Analysis, 30(4): 439–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, E. (2000a). L'esperienza traumatica nella vita inconscia dei gruppi: Un quarto assunto di base. Rivista Italiana di Gruppoanalisi, Vol XIV-n.1.

  • Hopper, E. (2000b). From objects and subjects to citizens: Group analysis and the study of maturity. Group Analysis, 33(1): 29–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, E. (In Press, a). Incohesion: Aggregation/ Massification: The fourth basic assumption in the unconscious life of groups and group-like social systems, in R. Lipgar and M. Pines (eds.) Building on Bion. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

  • Hopper, E. (In Press, b). Incohesion: Aggregation/ Massification or (ba) I:A/ M: A study of the vicissi-tudes of false reparation in the unconscious life of groups. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

  • Issroff, J. (1979). The phenomenon of affect contagion as an ongoing effect following massive trauma-tisation. Unpublished paper presented at the First International Congress of Children of Survivors of the Holocaust, New York.

  • Kauff, P. (1991). The unique contributions of analytic group therapy to the treatment of preoedipal character pathology, in S. Tuttman (ed.) Psychoanalytic group theory and therapy. Madison: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kernberg, O. (1978). Leadership and organizational functioning: Organisational regression. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 28(1): 3–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kernberg, O. (1984). The couch at sea: The psychoanalysis of organisations. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 34(1): 5–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khaleelee, O., & Miller, E. (1985). Beyond the small group, in M. Pines (ed.), Bion and group psychotherapy. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, P. (1969). The concept of regression to more primitive forms of social behaviour as applied to institutions, societies and communities. Unpublished paper.

  • Klein et al. (eds.) (1992). Handbook of Contemporary Group Psychotherapy. Madison: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohut, H. & Wolf, E. (1978). The disorders of the self and their treatment. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 59: 414–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, G. (1993). Signals of transcendence in large groups as systems. Group 17(4): 254–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence et al. (1996). The fifth basic assumption. Free Associations, 6(1): 28–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Main, T. (1975). Some Psychodynamics of Large Groups, in L. Kreeger (ed.) The large group: Dynamics and therapy. Reprinted Edition 1994, London: Karnac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menzies-Lyth, I.E.P. (1981). Bion's contribution to thinking about groups, in J. Grotstein (ed.) Do I dare disturb the universe? Beverley Hills: Caesura Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orwell, G. (1949). Nineteen eighty four. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pines, M. (1983). Psychic Development and the Group Analytic Situation. Keynote Address to the Canadian Association of Group Psychotherapy, Banff. Group, (1985) 9(1): 24–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pines, M. (1986). Coherency and disruption in the sense of the self. British Journal of Psychotherapy, 2(3): 180–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pines, M. (1987). Shame—What psychoanalysis does and does not say. Group Analysis, 20(1): 16–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, J. (1991). Saddam Hussein of Iraq: A political profile. Political Psychology, 12: 279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redl, F. (1942). Group emotion and leadership. Psychiatry, 5: 573–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rickman, J. (1938). Unity and diversity in groups. Unpublished paper.

  • Rioch, M. (1971). All we like sheep (Isaiah 53:6): Followers and leaders. Psychiatry, 34(3): 258–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. & Pines, M. (eds) (1991). The Practice of Group Analysis. London: Tavistock/ Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roller, B. & Nelson, V. (1999). Group psychotherapy treatment of borderline personalities. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 49(3): 369–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, C. (1994). The Osiris Complex: Case studies in multiple personality disorder. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, B. et al. (1990). The difficult patient in group. Madison: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, B., (1999). Notes on shame and the counter-transference. Unpublished paper.

  • Rutan, S. & Stone, W. (2000). Psychodynamic group psychotherapy, 3rd Edition. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharff, D. & Scharff, J. (1987). Object relations family therapy. Northvale, N.J: Jason Aronson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharff, D. & Scharff, J. (1998). Object relations individual therapy. London: Karnac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheidlinger, S. (1980). Psychoanalytic group dynamics. Madison: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schermer, V.L. & Pines, M. (1994). Rings of fire: Primitive affects and object relations in group psychotherapy. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlachet, P. (1992). The capacity to join in the formation of shared group-dispositional space. Unpublished paper presented at the 11th International Congress of Group Psychotherapy, Montreal, Canada.

  • Segal, H. (1957). Notes on symbol formation. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 38: 391–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, R. & Zinner, N. (1979). The adolescent, the family and the group: Boundary considerations, in G. Lawrence (ed.) Exploring individual and organizational boundary. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Springmann, R. (1970). A large group. The International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 20: 210–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Springmann, R. (1975). Psychotherapy in the large group, in L. Kreeger (ed.) The large group: dynamics and therapy. Reprinted Edition 1994, London: Karnac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, R. (1999). Some notes on the heroic self and the meaning and importance of its reparation for the creative process and the creative personality. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 80(4).

  • Thucydides (1954). History of the Peloponnesian War. London: Penguin Classics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turquet, P. (1974). Leadership: The individual and the group, in G.S. Gibbard et al, (eds.) Analysis of group. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turquet, P. (1975). Threats to identity in the large group, in L. Kreeger (ed.) The large group: Dynamics and therapy. Reprinted Edition 1994, London: Karnac Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tustin, F. (1981). Autistic states in children. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuttman, S. (1990). Principles of psychoanalytic group therapy applied to the treatment of borderline and narcissistic disorders, in Roth et al. (eds.) The difficult patient in group. Madison: International University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkan, V. (1980). Narcissistic personality organisation and “reparative” leadership. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 30: 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkan, V. (1981). Immortal Ataturk Narcissism and creativity in a revolutionary leader, in W. Muensterberger, L.B. Boyer and S. Grolnick (eds.) The Psychoanalytic Study of Society. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkan V. & Itzkowitz, N. (1984). The Immortal Ataturk: A psycho biography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wexler et al. (1984). Group psychotherapy with schizophrenic patients: An example of the oneness group. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 34(3).

  • Winnicott, D. (1988). The maturational process and the facilitating environment. New York: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winnicott, D. (1971). Mirror-role of mother and family in child development, in Playing and reality. London: Tavistock Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, R. (1953). The outsider. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yalom, I. (1985). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelaskowski, P. (1998). The Suboptimal Group. Group Analysis, 31(4): 491–504.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zalesnik, A. (1979). Psychoanalytic knowledge of group processes. Panel Report. Journal of the American Psychoanalytical Association, 27, 146–50.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. private practice, USA

    Earl Hopper (Psychoanalyst and group analyst)

Authors
  1. Earl Hopper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hopper, E. Difficult Patients in Group Analysis: The Personification of (ba) I:A/M. Group 25, 139–171 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012221300761

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012221300761

Search

Navigation