English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

If we were to launch a survey among psychoanalysts of different schools in different societies about the goals of psychoanalysis, my hypothesis is that a large majority, irrespective of school or society, would include some concept of structural change among the most important ones, if not as the most important. Time and again when I have presented our findings to psychoanalytic audiences the question has been asked if – or, why – we did not measure “structural change”. So it is partly in response to that question from a couple of colleagues on that occasion that I take the opportunity to offer in this chapter a more extensive answer than I was able to do then.

XI. STRUCTURAL CHANGE AND ITS ASSESSMENT. EXPERIENCES FROM THE STOCKHOLM OUTCOME OF PSYCHOANALYSIS AND PSYCHOTHERAPY PROJECT