Projective identification (PI) is a complex process that can bridge the divide between individual psychodynamics and interpersonal systemic process. Consequently, it provides a powerful lens through which to examine couple conflict and unhappiness. This paper aims to clarify and demystify the concept and to illustrate its special utility for clinicians practicing individual psychoanalysis or psychotherapy, and for therapists who treat couples conjointly. It deconstructs PI into components of transference (projection), induction, and identification of both inducers and recipients; distinguishes subtypes; and then discusses some important topics surrounding the concept, including what is meant by “identification,” the importance of “containment,” and how induction is often accomplished by inaction. Clinical examples illustrate how patients use PI to manage grief, shame, past traumas, and current deficits. The utility of PI for understanding partner selection and marital polarities is illustrated, and guidelines for working with PI in psychodynamic couple therapy are provided.
AbseS. (2013). Further thoughts on “When a problem shared is a problem . . . whose illness is it anyway? Questions of technique when working with a borderline couple.”Couple & Family Psychoanalysis3:178–187.
2.
AbseS. (2014). Intimacy and the couple—the long and winding road. In Psychoanalytic Couple Therapy: Foundations of Theory and Practice, ed. ScharffD.E.ScharffJ.S.London: Karnac Books, pp. 35–43.
3.
BalintE. (1993). Unconscious communication between husbands and wives. In Psychotherapy with Couples, ed. RuszczynskiS.London: Karnac Books, pp. 30–43.
4.
BenjaminJ. (2004). Beyond doer and done to: An intersubjective view of thirdness. Psychoanalytic Quarterly73:5–46.
5.
BerkowitzD.A. (1999). Reversing the negative cycle: Interpreting the mutual influence of adaptive, self-protective measures in the couple. Psychoanalytic Quarterly68:559–583.
6.
BianchiniB.DallanegraL. (2011). Reflections on the container-contained model in couple psychoanalytic psychotherapy. Couple & Family Psychoanalysis1:69–80.
7.
BionW.R. (1959). Experiences in Groups. New York: Basic Books.
8.
BionW.R. (1962). Learning from Experience. London: Tavistock Publications.
9.
BohleberW.FonagyP.JiménezJ.P.ScarfoneD.VarvinS.ZysmanS. (2013). Toward a better use of psychoanalytic concepts: A model illustrated using the concept of enactment. International Journal of Psychoanalysis94:501–530.
10.
CartwrightD. (1998). The reversal of pathological projective identifications: The problem of patient receptivity. British Journal of Psychotherapy15:3–18.
11.
CatherallD. (1992). Working with projective identification in couples. Family Process31:355–367.
12.
ClulowC. (2014). Attachment, affect regulation, and couple psychotherapy. In Psychoanalytic Couple Therapy: Foundations of Theory and Practice, ed. ScharffD.E.ScharffJ.S.London: Karnac Books, pp. 44–58.
13.
ColemanW. (1993). Marriage as a psychological container. In Psychotherapy with Couples: Theory and Practice at the Tavistock Institute for Marital Studies, ed. RuszczynskiS.London: Karnac Books, pp. 70–96.
14.
CopenC.E.DanielsK.VespaJ.MosherW.D. (2012). First marriages in the United States: Data from the 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth. National Health Statistics ReportsNo. 49, March 22.
15.
CrispP. (1988). Projective identification: Clarification in relation to object choice. Psychoanalytic Psychology5:389–402.
16.
DicksH. (1967). Marital Tensions. New York: Basic Books.
17.
EllmanS.J.MoskowitzM., eds. (1998). Enactment: Toward a New Approach to the Therapeutic Relationship. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
18.
ErreichA. (2015). Unconscious fantasy as a special class of mental representation: A contribution to a model of mind. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association63:247–270.
19.
FeldmanT. (2014). From container to claustrum: Projective identification in couples. Couple & Family Psychoanalysis4:136–154.
20.
FelmleeD.H. (1998). “Be careful what you wish for . . . ”: A quantitative and qualitative investigation of “fatal attractions.”Personal Relationships5:235–253.
21.
FisherJ.V. (1995). Donald Meltzer in discussion with James Fisher. In Intrusiveness and Intimacy in the Couple, ed. RuszczynskiS.FisherJ.V.London: Karnac Books, pp. 107–144.
22.
FisherJ.V. (1999). The Uninvited Guest: Emerging from Narcissism towards Marriage. London: Karnac Books.
23.
FonagyP.GergelyG.JuristE.TargetM. (2002). Affect Regulation, Mentalization, and the Development of the Self. New York: Other Press.
24.
FreudS. (1914). Remembering, repeating and working-through. Standard Edition12:147–156.
25.
FreudS. (1920). Beyond the pleasure principle. Standard Edition18:7–64.
26.
FriendJ. (2013). Love as creative illusion and its place in psychoanalytic couple psychotherapy. Couple & Family Psychoanalysis3:3–14.
27.
GabbardG.O. (1995). Countertransference: The emerging common ground. International Journal of Psychoanalysis76:475–483.
28.
GarfinkleE. (2005). Towards clarity in the concept of projective identification: A review and a proposal (Part 1): Defining projective identification as an intra-psychic unconscious phantasy. Canadian Journal of Psychoanalysis13:202–229.
29.
GarfinkleE. (2006). Towards clarity in the concept of projective identification: A review and a proposal (Part 2): Clinical examples of definitional confusion. Canadian Journal of Psychoanalysis14:159–173.
30.
GoldsteinW.N. (1991). Clarification of projective identification. American Journal of Psychiatry148:153–161.
31.
GottmanJ.M.LevensonR.W. (1999). What predicts change in marital interaction over time? A study of alternative models. Family Process38:143–158.
32.
GrallerJ.NielsenA.C.GarberB.DavisonL.G.GableL.SeidenbergH. (2001). Concurrent therapies: A model for collaboration between psychoanalysts and other therapists. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association49:587–606.
33.
GrotsteinJ.S. (1994). Projective identification and countertransference: A brief commentary on their relationship. Contemporary Psychoanalysis30:578–592.
34.
GurmanA.S.BurtonM. (2014). Individual therapy for couple problems: Perspectives and pitfalls. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy40:470–483.
35.
JosephB. (1959). An aspect of the repetition compulsion. International Journal of Psychoanalysis40:213–222.
36.
JosephB. (1984). Projective identification: Some clinical aspects. In Psychic Equilibrium and Psychic Change: Selected Papers of Betty Joseph, ed. FeldmanM.SpilliusE.B.London: Routledge, 1989, pp. 168–180.
37.
KernbergO.F. (1975). Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism. New York: Aronson.
38.
KernbergO.F. (1987). Projection and projective identification: Developmental and clinical aspects. In Projection, Identification, Projective Identification, ed. SandlerJ.S.Madison, CT: International Universities Press, pp. 93–115.
39.
KleinM. (1946). Notes on some schizoid mechanisms. International Journal of Psychoanalysis27:99–110.
40.
KleinM. (1975). Envy and Gratitude and Other Works, 1946–1963. London: Hogarth Press.
LyonsA. (1993). Husbands and wives: The mysterious choice. In Psychotherapy with Couples: Theory and Practice at the Tavistock Institute for Marital Studies, ed. RuszczynskiS.London: Karnac Books, pp. 44–54.
43.
MainT.F. (1966). Mutual projection in a marriage. Comprehensive Psychiatry7:432–439.
44.
MendelsohnR. (2009). The projective identification of everyday life. Psychoanalytic Review96:871–894.
45.
MendelsohnR. (2011). Projective identification and countertransference in borderline couples. Psychoanalytic Review98:375–399.
46.
MiddelbergC.V. (2001). Projective identification in common couple dances. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy27:341–352.
47.
MorganM. (2016a). An object relations approach to the couple relationship: Past, present, and future. Couple & Family Psychoanalysis 6:194–205.
48.
MorganM. (2016b). Whose disgust is it anyway? Projection and projective identification in the couple relationship. Psychoanalytic Dialogues26:437–443.
49.
NathansS. (2017). Introduction: Core concepts of the Tavistock couple psychotherapy model. In Couples on the Couch: Psychoanalytic Couple Therapy and the Tavistock Model, ed. NathansS.SchaeferM.London: Routledge, pp. 1–29.
50.
NathansS.SchaeferM., eds. (2017). Couples on the Couch: Psychoanalytic Couple Therapy and the Tavistock Model. London: Routledge.
51.
NielsenA.C. (2016). A Roadmap for Couple Therapy: Integrating Systemic, Psychodynamic, and Behavioral Approaches. New York: Routledge.
52.
NielsenA.C. (2017a). From Couple Therapy 1.0 to a comprehensive model: A roadmap for sequencing and integrating systemic, psychodynamic, and behavioral approaches. Family Process56:540–557.
53.
NielsenA.C. (2017b). Psychodynamic couple therapy: A practical synthesis. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy43:685–699.
54.
OgdenT.H. (1979). On projective identification. International Journal of Psychoanalysis60:357–373.
55.
OgdenT.H. (1982). Projective Identification and Therapeutic Technique. New York: Aronson.
56.
OrnsteinA. (1995). The fate of the curative fantasy in the psychoanalytic treatment process. Contemporary Psychoanalysis31:113.
57.
PinesA. (2005). Falling in Love: Why We Choose the Lovers We Choose. 2nd ed.New York: Routledge.
58.
RuszczynskiS. (1993). The theory and practice of the Tavistock Institute of Marital Studies. In Psychotherapy with Couples: Theory and Practice at the Tavistock Institute for Marital Studies, ed. RuszczynskiS.London: Karnac Books, pp. 3–23.
59.
RuszczynskiS.FisherJ.V., eds. (1995). Intrusiveness and Intimacy in the Couple. London: Karnac Books.
60.
SandlerJ.S. (1976). Countertransference and role-responsiveness. International Review of Psychoanalysis3:43–47.
61.
SandlerJ.S. (1987). The concept of projective identification. In Projection, Identification, Projective Identification, ed. SandlerJ.S.Madison, CT: International Universities Press, pp. 13–26.
62.
SandlerJ.S. (1993). On communication from patient to analyst: Not everything is projective identification. International Journal of Psychoanalysis74:1097–1107.
63.
ScarfM. (1987). Intimate Partners: Patterns in Love and Marriage. New York: Random House.
64.
ScharffJ.S. (1992). Projective and Introjective Identification and the Use of the Therapist’s Self. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
65.
SeligmanS. (1999). Integrating Kleinian theory and intersubjective infant research observing projective identification. Psychoanalytic Dialogues9:129–159.
66.
SiegelJ.P. (1992). Repairing Intimacy: An Object Relations Approach to Couples Therapy. Lanham, MD: Aronson.
67.
SiegelJ.P. (2010). A good-enough therapy: An object relations approach. In Clinical Handbook of Couple Therapy, ed. GurmanA.S.4th ed.New York: Guilford Press, pp. 134–152.
68.
SlippS. (1988). The Technique and Practice of Object Relations Family Therapy. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
69.
SpilliusE.B. (1992). Clinical experiences of projective identification. In Clinical Lectures on Klein and Bion, ed. AndersonR.New York: Routledge, pp. 59–73.
70.
SpilliusE.B.O’ShaughnessyE., eds. (2012). A Review of Projective Identification: The Fate of a Concept. New York: Routledge.
71.
SternS. (1994). Needed relationships and repeated relationships: An integrated relational perspective. Psychoanalytic Dialogues4:317–346.
72.
StolorowR.D.OrangeD.M.AtwoodG.E. (1998). Projective identification begone! Commentary on paper by Susan H. Sands. Psychoanalytic Dialogues8:719–725.
73.
TanseyM.J.BurkeW.F. (1989). Understanding Countertransference: From Projective Identification to Empathy. Hillsdale, NJ: Analytic Press.
74.
TolpinM. (2002). Doing psychoanalysis of normal development: Forward edge transferences. Progress in Self Psychology18:167–190.
75.
WachtelP.L. (2014). Cyclical Psychodynamics and the Contextual Self: The Inner World, the Intimate World, and the World of Culture and Society. New York: Routledge.
76.
WeissJ.SampsonH. (1986). The Psychoanalytic Process: Theory, Clinical Observation, and Empirical Research. New York: Guilford Press.
77.
WhismanM.A.BeachS.R.SnyderD.K. (2008). Is marital discord taxonic and can taxonic status be assessed reliably? Results from a national, representative sample of married couples. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology76:745–755.
78.
WiebeS.A.JohnsonS.M. (2016). A review of the research in emotionally focused therapy for couples. Family Process55:390–407.
79.
WilliJ. (1984). The concept of collusion: A theoretical framework for marital therapy. Family Process23:177–186.
80.
ZeitnerR.M. (2003). Obstacles for the psychoanalyst in the practice of couple therapy. Psychoanalytic Psychology20:348–362.
81.
ZinnerJ. (1989). The implications of projective identification for marital interaction. In Foundations of Object Relations Family Therapy, ed. ScharffJ.S.Northvale, NJ: Aronson, pp. 155–174.
