{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028426395939086295, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.1625, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A ‘complementarist’ approach to the group as matrix and as psychic apparatus

This article presents an epistemological reflection on two models of the group: S.H. Foulkes’ matrix model and René Kaës’ less well-known group psychic apparatus model. These two models are viewed as complementary, in the sense of George Devereux’s ‘complementarist’ approach, provided that each is conceived of as constituting a ‘vertex’, as Bion used this term. After showing that the two models are neither in competition nor coextensive, we explore their complementarity. The concepts of the ‘internal group’ and ‘unconscious alliances’ proposed by Kaës provide a way to understand how communication networks emerge and are structured in the matrix. Conversely, the concept of the network of communication can also be thought of as a metaphor for the psychic spaces of the group psychic apparatus. A clinical illustration involving a group supervision session is presented in support of these proposals.