Empirical Study: Methods and Results
The empirical part of this project surveys a significant number of analysts throughout the country. We discuss first the development of our survey instrument. We then discuss our most general hypotheses and explain how our subjects were randomly selected. Then we describe demographic characteristics of the sample respondents.
We then lay out the data, both descriptive and inferential, in the Results section. We describe our data analytic methods here. We report descriptively the findings on the survey questions. For example, what percentage of survey participants gives an informed consent and what percentage includes malignant regression as a risk? In an inferential portion of the Results section, we look to test whether ambivalence in analysts is behind the variability in our findings by exploring possible conflict revealed in analysts’ answers. In reviewing these things, we produce tables as well as descriptive presentations of the data, and comment on both intuitive and counterintuitive findings.
Our survey instrument (see Appendix C) was developed in response to our theoretical consideration of informed consent to psychoanalysis in the previous chapter, as well as the law and literature on the topic. It is a pen-and-paper survey with forty items in question form, most of which have quantifiable components—involving either a Likert scale or a yes-no format. (The Likert scale’s range includes Always, Frequently, Sometimes, Rarely, and Never.) The questions cover what analysts actually do in general (for example, do you give an informed consent?) to specific aspects of what has been typically included in IC procedures for