Cette recherche s’attache à saisir les logiques inconscientes qui président au besoin de mentir. Elle s’intéresse au type de vulnérabilité psychique que le sujet contre-investit ainsi qu’à la nature de la communication inconsciente qu’il instaure avec ceux qu’il trompe. Après avoir recensé les différentes approches métapsychologiques existantes, les fonctions psychiques du mensonge sont explorées en regard de son rôle au cours du développement de l’enfant. Ensuite, l’examen de cas d’adultes rencontrés dans un dispositif d’accueil pour personnes en errance permet d’expliquer comment les sujets se défendent d’un vécu d’empiètement et le font vivre à ceux qu’ils trompent. Enfin, des exemples d’adolescents, observés dans le contexte de la protection de l’enfance contribuent à l’analyse des dynamiques intersubjectives impulsées par cet acte-parlé. L’ensemble de cette thèse démontre que malgré la difficulté que cette configuration clinique pose à l’observation, sa prise en compte permet de saisir la manière avec laquelle le sujet exprime une souffrance autrement indicible. / This research tries to understand the unconscious logics that preside over the need to lie. It analyses the type of psychological vulnerability a subject counter-invests as well as the origin of the unconscious communication he establishes with those he misleads. After having drawn up an inventory of the existing metapsychological approaches, the author examines the psychological functions of lying by taking into account its role during the development of the child. Then the examination of some adult cases that occurred in a homeless resource center will explain how, some subjects protect themselves from a harassment victim background and have others live the same experience with their lies. Finally, the author examines how cases of teenagers observed within the framework of childhood protection contribute to the analysis of the intersubjective dynamics impulsed by this acte-parlé. This work demonstrates that even though this clinical configuration is difficult to observe, if the psychologist would take it into account, it could help him understand how a patient expresses a pain that he could not tell by other means.

No description available.

No description available.

This study tested the utility of three different models of personality, namely the social and personality model, the pathological personality traits model, and the psychological dysregulation model, in predicting overt aggression, relational aggression, and delinquency in a sample of detained boys (ages 12 to 18; M age = 15.31; SD = 1.16). Results indicated that the three personality approaches demonstrated different unique associations with aggression and delinquency. The psychological dysregulation approach, composed of behavioral dysregulation, emotional dysregulation, and cognitive dysregulation, emerged as the overall best predictor of overt aggression, relational aggression, and delinquency. After controlling for the Big Five personality traits, psychological dysregulation accounted for significant variance in overt aggression and delinquency, but not relational aggression. After controlling for callous-unemotional traits and narcissistic traits, psychological dysregulation also accounted for significant variance in overt aggression, relational aggression, and delinquency. Psychological dysregulation did not account for significant variance in aggression or delinquency after controlling for borderline traits. The pathological personality traits approach, comprised of callous-unemotional traits, narcissistic traits, and borderline traits performed second best. In particular, within this approach borderline traits accounted for the most unique variance, followed by narcissistic traits, then callous-unemotional traits. Borderline traits accounted for significant variance in overt aggression, relational aggression, and delinquency when controlling for the Big Five traits, but not after controlling for psychological dysregulation. Narcissistic traits only accounted for significant variance in overt aggression and relational aggression after controlling for the Big Five personality traits, but not after controlling for psychological dysregulation. CU traits only accounted for significant variance in overt aggression after controlling for the Big Five personality traits, but not after controlling for psychological dysregulation. The social and personality model, represented by the Big Five personality traits accounted for the least amount of variance in the prediction of aggression and delinquency, on its own, and when pitted against the other two personality approaches. The exception was that the Big Five personality traits accounted for significant variance in relational aggression beyond narcissistic traits, as well as psychological dysregulation. These findings have implications for assessment and intervention with aggressive and antisocial youth.

Cette thèse émerge de la clinique des agirs violents à l’adolescence à la Protection Judicaire de la Jeunesse et nous conduit au cœur de la clinique du conflit narcissique. Une large excursion sur le fil de huit accompagnements d’adolescents dans un cadre Pénal illustre cette clinique, support à la modélisation. L’enjeu inaugural de ces travaux de recherche est de modéliser un dispositif d’accompagnement de ces adolescents dont on dit fréquemment qu’ils n’ont pas de demande de soin psychique. La perspective est d’accueillir et de transformer le commettage, langage subjectif de l’agir violent, effet d’une détresse infantile, tissée à l’héritage transgénérationnel et aux remaniements psychiques propres à l’adolescence. Les racines, intrapsychique et intersubjective, du commettage sont envisagées sous trois prismes de lecture théorique : le paradoxe et les enjeux narcissiques ; la faillite de la fonction contenante ; le traumatisme et la dépression latente. Le focus théorique est ensuite mis sur les effets de la violence fondamentale (Bergeret) dans les liens adolescents-professionnels ; sur la professionnalité et les groupes institués. Les fragments bruts de la subjectivité de ces adolescents sont expulsés par et dans l’agir violent, sur et dans la scène psychique externe de l’accompagnement. Ils circulent dans un mouvement transféro-contre-transférentiel. On peut parler aussi d’identification projective, d’alliances inconscientes et de fonction phorique pour éclairer le processus de circulation des pans de subjectivité brute dans les trois espaces psychiques (Kaës). L’approche transdisciplinaire constitue l’essence du dispositif. Cette posture soutient l’éthique, la démocratie et l’humour, vecteur démocratique qui préserve le narcissisme. Cet état d’esprit et méthodologie est adossé aux trois opérateurs de reliance de la pensée complexe définie par le sociologue Edgar Morin : dialogique, boucle récursive et principe hologrammatique. Le dispositif de rencontre transdisciplinaire en tout petit groupe (RTPG) réunit l’adolescent, son éducateur référent et le psychologue de l’unité : les frontières se décloisonnent, au cœur de relations non hiérarchisées, tout en préservant notre singularité subjective. Cette posture prend en compte l’effet de la dilution des frontières intersubjectives et disciplinaires. Cette dilution correspond à la part trans-subjective (Wainrib) du lien, particulièrement dilatée dans les cliniques de l’agir violent et du conflit narcissique. Ces rencontres, co-construites avec l’adolescent (durée, fréquence), se déploient sous forme de conversations ordinaires (Winnicott). L’enjeu est de rassembler hic et nunc les pans de subjectivité brute que l’adolescent expulse hic et ubique sur la scène interinstitutionnelle. Soutenant l’idée que si l’adolescent est absent physiquement, il ne l’est pas subjectivement, la rencontre transdisciplinaire se déroule en présence ou l’absence de l’adolescent. Ce travail en l’absence répond au défaut de portage psychique dans les liens primaires de ces adolescents et impulse un travail de l’absence. La groupalité transdisciplinaire qui émerge au fil des rencontres a des effets de contenance externe, puis interne par introjection du lien au dispositif et finalement, d’apaisement des agirs violents et de relance du processus de subjectivation. Au cœur de ce dispositif, l’accompagnement de ces adolescents conduit à exporter l’esprit transdisciplinaire de la rencontre sur la scène interinstitutionnelle. La modélisation de la clinique permet de définir cette scène comme une scène psychique singulière et plurielle, propre à chaque adolescent, avec des groupes internes, des espaces interstitiels et une enveloppe. Les groupes internes interinstitutionnels (GII) constituent des organisateurs de la groupalité de la scène psychique interinstitutionnelle. Les GII sont des modalités de rencontre groupale qui émergent de l’intérieur de l’accompagnement des adolescents... / This thesis emerges from violent acts clinical situations to Youth Judicial Protection Service, and leads us to narcissistic conflict clinical situations. A broader excursion into eight clinical supports of adolescents in penal framework illustrates this clinical situation, support of modelling.The inaugural issue on this research studies is to model a clinical support consultation for these adolescents, as are frequently heard that they haven’t a demand for mental care. The prospect is to receive and transform “commettage”, subjective langage of violent act, resulting of infant distress, weaved with transgenerational heritage and psychic readjustments characteristic of adolescence.Intrapsychic and intersubjective roots of “commettage” are looked at it from three perspectives : paradox and narcissistic issues ; disorder of containing function ; traumatism and latent depression.The theorical focus informs of the fundamental violence (Bergeret) effects to adolescents-professionals intersubjective links ; to professionalism and established groups.Subjectivity raw fragments of these adolescents are expelled through and in violent act, into extern psychic extern scene of clinical support. They move in a transferential and countertransferential movement. Projective identification, unconscious alliances and phoric function give an understanding of circulation process of subjectivity raw fragments into three psychic spaces (Kaës).Transdisciplinary approach constitutes a substance of clinical support. This clinical posture maintains ethic, democracy and humor, democratic factor that protect narcissism. This state of mind and methodology is couples to three reliance operators of complex thinking (Morin) : dialogic, recursive loop, hologram principle.Small group of transdisciplinary meeting (SGTM) gathers adolescent, educator and service psychologist : borders are decompartmentalized into not hierarchical relationships, but preserving subjective singularity. This clinical posture receives the effect of intersubjective and disciplinary borders dilution. This dilution ties with trans-subjective (Wainrib) share of link, particularly expanded into clinical situations of violent act and narcissistic conflict.These meetings, co-thought with adolescent (duration, frequency), unfold themselves in form of ordinary conversations (Winnicott). The issue is to bring together hic et nunc subjectivity raw fragments, expelled by the adolescent hic et ubique into interinstitutional scene.Supporting the idea that if the adolescent is absent physically, he isn’t subjectively, the transdisciplinary meeting takes place in the presence of or without the adolescent. This clinical support in the absence replies to psychic portage disorder into primary links, and drives a work of absence.Transdisplinary groupality, which emerges over meetings, has effects of extern containing, then intern containing through support link introjection. Finally, violent acts are appeased and subjectivation process can restart.Into this consultation, the clinical support of these adolescents can get to export of transdisciplinary state of mind into interinstitutional scene. Clinical modelling defines this scene as a psychic singular and plural scene, characteristic at each adolescent, with intern groups, interstitial scenes and envelope. The intern interinstitutionals groups (IIG) constitute the organizers of groupality of interinstitutional psychic scene. These IIG are groupal meetings that emerge inside clinical support. The SGTM is one of them. These IIG have articular function between interinstitutional, institutional et intrapsychic scenes and, function of metapsychic and metasocial guarantor (Kaës)....

No description available.

No description available.

<p>The dissertation describes a crucial step in the development of a modern writer's identity in Sweden. It applies the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’s theories of the autonomous ”literary field” to the development in eighteen-eighties, one of the most important periods in Swedish literary history.</p><p>During this decade a large group of authors appeared, with August Strindberg in the front. In accordance with the dominating esthetical view of the nineteenth century, ”ideal realism”, the writers had an ethical responsibility. But they differed from their predecessors by not being loyal to the bourgeois society and its values, as codified in the concept of ”decency”, that contained, among other things, rules for what could be said in public. On the contrary, the new generation of authors attacked the bourgeoisie in novels, dramas and articles, especially in the singularly most controversial area, the regulation of sexuality and the ideals of bourgeois women.</p><p>This study argues that the new authors in their radical criticism aimed at the position of power in society traditionally upheld by the State church, which supervised education and ethical values. They did this by creating a role for themselves as young and oppressed, something that made it possible to deny any responsibility for the present state and furthermore to speak up, despite their own bourgeois background, for other oppressed groups like the working classes, the poor and women. But this also meant that they could not be successful in their ambitions to gain influence without loosing their identity. This was especially the consequence of the fact that an autonomous ”literary field” did not yet exist. That is, there were no internal literary institutions that, seemingly independent of the rest of society, decided what was ”good literature.” Instead, the singularly most important judge of interesting literature was the bourgeois public. Strindberg seems to have realised this early, and achieved an identity as ”uncontrolled”. He thereby lost his intellectual credibility, but gained a much bigger freedom to write and also got the attention of the large audience. At the same time, his writing undermined the values of decency by breaking the bourgeois society’s fundamental wall between the private and the public sphere, not least by writing what was regarded as facts about his own private life. </p><p>The conservative reaction accelerated towards the end of the decade while the authors grew more and more bitter about the public’s lack of understanding. At this point the author Verner von Heidenstam took the opportunity to declare a new literary era, dissociating his aesthetics from the one of the Eighties and proclaiming the necessity of an aristocratic, ethically indifferent literature (with himself as its leader). </p><p>Confronted with the new concept of what ought to be regarded as “modern”, the established male authors were generally quick to separate themselves from the female authors, and to identify the attacked literature solely with the one that critically discussed the situation of women in society - a description that has been largely adopted in the history of literature. A number of male authors also wrote novels separating themselves from the Eighties. Thus, they could continue into the new period, while female authors in general were silenced or forced to write in less esteemed genres (”popular literature”, children’s books). </p><p>Ultimately the result was a more distinct male domination coupled with a growing contempt for the large audience. This, in turn, created a need for internal institutions that could interpret, value and support literature - scholarships, elitist critics, and a writers’ union. These institutions subsequently were founded or developed during the nineties – all of them steps towards autonomy.</p>

The dissertation describes a crucial step in the development of a modern writer's identity in Sweden. It applies the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’s theories of the autonomous ”literary field” to the development in eighteen-eighties, one of the most important periods in Swedish literary history. During this decade a large group of authors appeared, with August Strindberg in the front. In accordance with the dominating esthetical view of the nineteenth century, ”ideal realism”, the writers had an ethical responsibility. But they differed from their predecessors by not being loyal to the bourgeois society and its values, as codified in the concept of ”decency”, that contained, among other things, rules for what could be said in public. On the contrary, the new generation of authors attacked the bourgeoisie in novels, dramas and articles, especially in the singularly most controversial area, the regulation of sexuality and the ideals of bourgeois women. This study argues that the new authors in their radical criticism aimed at the position of power in society traditionally upheld by the State church, which supervised education and ethical values. They did this by creating a role for themselves as young and oppressed, something that made it possible to deny any responsibility for the present state and furthermore to speak up, despite their own bourgeois background, for other oppressed groups like the working classes, the poor and women. But this also meant that they could not be successful in their ambitions to gain influence without loosing their identity. This was especially the consequence of the fact that an autonomous ”literary field” did not yet exist. That is, there were no internal literary institutions that, seemingly independent of the rest of society, decided what was ”good literature.” Instead, the singularly most important judge of interesting literature was the bourgeois public. Strindberg seems to have realised this early, and achieved an identity as ”uncontrolled”. He thereby lost his intellectual credibility, but gained a much bigger freedom to write and also got the attention of the large audience. At the same time, his writing undermined the values of decency by breaking the bourgeois society’s fundamental wall between the private and the public sphere, not least by writing what was regarded as facts about his own private life. The conservative reaction accelerated towards the end of the decade while the authors grew more and more bitter about the public’s lack of understanding. At this point the author Verner von Heidenstam took the opportunity to declare a new literary era, dissociating his aesthetics from the one of the Eighties and proclaiming the necessity of an aristocratic, ethically indifferent literature (with himself as its leader). Confronted with the new concept of what ought to be regarded as “modern”, the established male authors were generally quick to separate themselves from the female authors, and to identify the attacked literature solely with the one that critically discussed the situation of women in society - a description that has been largely adopted in the history of literature. A number of male authors also wrote novels separating themselves from the Eighties. Thus, they could continue into the new period, while female authors in general were silenced or forced to write in less esteemed genres (”popular literature”, children’s books). Ultimately the result was a more distinct male domination coupled with a growing contempt for the large audience. This, in turn, created a need for internal institutions that could interpret, value and support literature - scholarships, elitist critics, and a writers’ union. These institutions subsequently were founded or developed during the nineties – all of them steps towards autonomy.