Objective: To compare the educational philosophy, structure and contents of psychoanalytic training institutions, members of the I.P.A., which correspondence to a five geographic areas so their similarities and differences could be establish. Development: This comparison was able to be established from the information provided to the author, by those responsible for analytic training in each one of the institutes studied: Britain, France, USA, Uruguay, and Colombia. Conclusions: It was determinate that there are differences in the process of the psychoanalytical training. This differences are in previous requirements, duration of the training, structure, sequence, contends, minimum number of sessions admitted to performance a psychoanalytical cure, analyzed one's self and to analyze; as well as the function or status to be a didactic analyst. However, there is a basic common ground: The Eitingon triangle (personal analysis for the training, a supervised clinical paper and theories and clinical seminars). It concludes that this common denominator that prevails on every institute mentioned, permits the education of an autonomous analyst and one`s own construction of psychoanalytical identity, in spite of theories, cultural and geographic differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]