Uruguayan Psychoanalytic Association Research Department: High and low frequency in our psychoanalytic practice today

Altmann, M., Garbarino, A., de Barbieri, A. M., de León, B., Frioni, M., Lamónaca, J., . . . Bernardi, R. (2002). Alta y baja frecuencia en nuestra práctica analítica actual {High and low frequency in our psychoanalytic  practice today}. Revista Uruguaya de Psicoanálisis, 95, 152-192.
Bernardi, R., Altmann, M., de León, B., De Barbieri, A. M., Garbarino, A., Frioni, M., . . . Telleria, E. (1996). Cambios de la interpretación entre 1960 y 1990 en el psicoanálisis uruguayo.  ISSN 1688-7247 (1996. Revista Uruguaya de Psicoanálisis, 84-85, 89-102.


The most significant change we have discovered is that frequency does not have the central place that it used to. In relation to this we found two tendencies among analysts: One that establishes a direct relation between high frequency and analytic process. This is produced in high frequency treatments and it is a necessary condition and another one that places frequency as a factor in the definition of the analytic process, but does not determine it. It is not a necessary condition.  For both tendencies of opinion, high frequency does not determine the production of the analytic process. It is also important to remark that both tendencies coexist many times in the discourse of an analyst. The hypothesis that analytic process is favored by high frequency was confirmed, so did the work with the transference.

The ideal model in our work is still the high frequency one, while the real model tends to low frequency in the sessions. Analysts point out and/or think that other parameters are important (transference, regression, neutrality) when we want to define an analytic process.


Dr. Marina Altmann de Litvan

Rambla Armenia 3783 piso 10, Montevideo 11326, Uruguay

Email: marina.altmann@gmail.com