Back to Table of Contents
Additionally, from Ego Psychological point of view, object relations have at times been considered part of ego functioning (e.g., Bellak, 1989), and at times as supraordinate (Boesky, 1983) but based on autonomous ego functions (perception, memory and integration of self and others), and dynamically constituted by drives (pleasurable experiences of gratifications with objects) and defensive processes (internalization/introjection to relieve painful affects). While many of the ego functions are investigated and quantified within the purview of psychological tests (Rapaport, Gill and Schafer 1945; Wollman, 1965), Ego Psychology places them firmly in the context of psychoanalytic interest as part of structural theory of personality organization and development. III. Bdaa. Example of a Major Ego Function: Reality Testing, Reality Sense and Related Conceptualizations Historically among the first, Reality Testing (RT) was designated by Sigmund Freud (1895, 1911a) as a major function of the ego (Freud, 1917), and a key basis for distinguishing psychosis from non-psychosis. Defined as “...the constant attempt to reconcile discrepancies between inner and outer experience” (Moore & Fine, 1990, p. 162), RT is central to adaptation (Hartmann, 1939), and includes the related processes of anticipating, attending, concentrating, remembering, feeling, and developing concepts (Schafer, 1968). Freud’s work on the components of RT can be summarized as: 1. The ability to distinguish between perceptions and ideas [outer-inner, perceptions-hallucinations] (Freud 1895, 1915); 2. The accuracy of perception (Freud 1925); and 3. Self observation (Freud 1933). David Rapaport ’s (1951) reflective awareness informs and ties in with Hartmann ’s (1947, 1953, 1956) addition of inner RT . In “Instincts and their Vicissitudes”, Freud (1915) held that the basis for differentiating internal from external is the result of the repeated experience that some stimuli are evaded by motor action (external), while others (internal) are not. David Rapaport (1950) later hypothesized that safeguarding RT beyond motor differentiation depends on conceptual, spatial and temporal frames of reference. Freud (1911b) formulated that a psychosis developed when RT was lost as a result of total withdrawal of libidinal cathexes from the object representation. A subsequent formulation based on the structural model assumed a regressive/defensive decrement in RT to defend against anxiety and other dysphoric affects (Arlow and Brenner, 1964). The distortion of RT among psychotics is also attributed to the negation of the painful perception of others’ emotional states (Modell, 1968). Impairments in RT can result from defects in self observation. Here Freud (1923, p. 28) came to distinguish RT and self observation as an ego function whereas he considered self reproach as a function of the conscience (Freud, 1914, p. 95; 1918) later named the superego function (Freud, 1921). Intactness of the superego is necessary for adequate RT (Waelder, 1936b), and in favorable development, self-observation/self evaluation progressively become more an ego than a superego function (Hartmann, 1956; Stein, 1966).
274
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online