Emergence of Psychoanalysis and Impact on Psychotherapy

In the late nineteenth century, the treatment of mental suffering looked very different from what your counselling room will look like today. A young neurologist in Vienna, Sigmund Freud, was working with patients who had paralysis, blindness or chronic pain that could not be explained by any known medical disease. These cases were labelled “hysteria” and were often dismissed, minimized or relegated to asylums. What changed the history of psychotherapy was Freud’s audacious idea that such symptoms might have meaning and that talking about one’s life, memories and conflicts could alter the body’s distress.

The famous “talking cure” grows out of the case of Bertha Pappenheim, known in the literature as Anna O., who was treated by Freud’s colleague Josef Breuer. As she spoke in a semi‑hypnotic state about painful events, her physical symptoms temporarily eased. Freud took this seriously, moved beyond hypnosis and began to experiment with free association, inviting patients to say whatever came to mind without censorship. This simple but radical invitation shifted psychiatry from a purely biological model to a psychological, relational and meaning‑based approach.

Psychoanalysis as a New Lens on the Mind

Psychoanalysis introduced several claims that continue to shape counselling today. It asserted that much of mental life is unconscious and that what we consciously think is only the tip of the iceberg. It argued that symptoms have a history, often in childhood relationships, and that they are compromises between forbidden wishes, fears and internal prohibitions. It also proposed that the therapeutic relationship itself is the primary arena in which healing occurs, not just advice or education.

Imagine a young adult client, “Leah,” who comes to therapy because she keeps sabotaging relationships just as they become more intimate. She insists she wants closeness but chooses partners who are emotionally unavailable and then erupts in anger when they pull away. A non‑psychodynamic approach may focus mainly on skills or communication, which can be very helpful. A psychodynamic lens also asks a different kind of question: what unconscious story about attachment and danger might Leah be replaying, and where did it begin? This line of inquiry traces her patterns back to early experiences of an unpredictable, sometimes engulfing caregiver, and invites those dynamics to show up and be understood in the therapeutic relationship itself.

Psychodynamic and psychoanalytic therapies have evolved far beyond Freud’s original formulations, yet research suggests that these approaches can be effective across a range of disorders. Meta‑analyses show that psychodynamic therapies help reduce symptoms and that gains often continue to grow after treatment ends, which is consistent with the idea that deep structural changes in personality and relational patterns are taking place. They now exist alongside cognitive behavioural, systemic and third‑wave therapies, contributing a historically rich and clinically nuanced perspective rather than a single dominant model.

Conflict, Meaning and the Birth of Depth Psychologies

Freud was not the only figure working on these problems. Others, like Pierre Janet in France, were exploring dissociation and traumatic memory, while later figures such as Alfred Adler and Carl Jung would break with Freud and develop their own systems. Henri Ellenberger, in his classic historical work on “dynamic psychiatry,” argued that psychoanalysis was part of a larger movement interested in forces, conflicts and motivations outside conscious awareness. This broader tradition included debates about suggestion, hypnotism, somatic treatments and moral management, and it unfolded differently across national contexts, including resistance in some medical and academic circles.

The rise of psychoanalysis also intersected with wider cultural struggles. In some places, such as mid‑century France, psychoanalysis became a dominant intellectual framework, while in others, especially the English‑speaking world, it lost ground to behaviourism and, later, cognitive approaches. Nevertheless, psychoanalytic ideas about the unconscious, defence, childhood and transference escaped the consulting room and entered literature, film and popular culture. Terms like “Freudian slip” or “defence mechanism” now appear casually in everyday conversation, illustrating how this once controversial framework has shaped our language for inner life.

Why This History Still Matters in a Modern Clinic

For contemporary counselling psychologists, the emergence of psychoanalysis is more than a quaint origin story. It set up enduring questions about how much time to spend on the past, how to think about unconscious motivation, and how to balance symptom relief with deeper personality change. It also raised ethical issues that remain highly relevant, such as the power imbalance in long‑term therapy, potential for dependency and the dangers of dogmatic adherence to theory despite evidence to the contrary.

Current scholarship stresses a more integrative, evidence‑informed psychodynamic practice. Contemporary psychodynamic therapists draw on emergent fields such as attachment theory, neuroscience and trauma studies, and they actively question earlier assumptions that were misogynistic, heteronormative or culturally biased. The history of psychoanalysis becomes a cautionary tale about how powerful ideas can both liberate and constrain, urging modern clinicians to hold their own frameworks with curiosity, humility and a commitment to ongoing empirical evaluation.

In practical terms, this means that when you sit with a client today, you inherit a lineage that emphasizes listening for what is not said, attending to subtle relational patterns and treating the therapeutic relationship as a living laboratory for change. The original psychoanalytic consulting room with its couch and extended silence may not be your setting, but the questions raised there about meaning, desire, fear and embodiment continue to shape clinical decision making, formulation and the ethical use of psychological knowledge.

Sources

1. An Introduction and Brief Overview of Psychoanalysis. (2023). Cureus, 15(9), e. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.45032​
2. Ellenberger, H. F. (1970). The discovery of the unconscious: The history and evolution of dynamic psychiatry. Basic Books.​
3. Freud, S., & Breuer, J. (2000). Studies on hysteria (A. A. Brill, Trans.). Basic Books. (Original work published 1895)​
4. Kealy, D., & Ogrodniczuk, J. S. (2021). Efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. L’Encéphale, 47(2), 157–165. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32928529/​
5. Leichsenring, F., Leibing, E., Kruse, J., New, A. S., & Leweke, F. (2003). The effectiveness of psychodynamic therapy and cognitive behavior therapy in the treatment of personality disorders: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160(7), 1223–1232. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12832233/​
6. Psychoanalysis. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved February 7, 2026, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysis​
7. Solms, M. (2018). The neuropsychoanalytic approach: Using neuroscience as the basic science of psychoanalysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1459. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01459​
8. Thoma, N. C., et al. (2022). The efficacy of psychodynamic therapy for social anxiety disorder: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research, 309, 114407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2022.114407​
9. Vodanovich, S. J. (2024, May 21). Sigmund Freud: Theory & contribution to psychology. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/sigmund-freud.html​
10. Weinstein, S., & Kahn, P. (2019). Freudian slip? The changing cultural fortunes of psychoanalytic concepts. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1521. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6611072/​