The Psychodynamics of Self-Observation

Abstract

A framework for thinking about self-observation in relational psychoanalytic terms is described, in which three different levels of self-observation are distinguished. These levels are differentiated according to the kind of intrapsychic relationship enacted (monadic, dyadic, or triangular). Each level of observation is discussed separately with focus on the dynamic forces inhibiting or facilitating self-observation within each level. Dyadic and triangular levels of self-observation are well known in psychoanalytic theories, but a monadic, or one-dimensional level in which the ego is not split, is also described. This form of observation and the psychodynamics involved is discussed in relation to Bion's concept “O” and theory from Buddhist psychology. Finally, the interrelatedness of levels is described, and a brief case description from a session of psychoanalytic psychotherapy is used to illustrate how the three levels of observation interact.

Notes

¹Self-analysis and self-observation are obviously related phenomena. As used in this paper, self-analysis is a broader term that includes self-observation as its most important part. Self-observation is defined as the capacity to observe the self and its relations to others in the present moment (Safran, 2002), whereas self-analysis is a more complex activity that may also include, for example, reflections on the historical development of the self.

²As used by Fonagy et al. (2002), mirroring refers to the external manifestations of containment. The term containment is often used to refer to the internal processing of the caregiver or therapist, whereas mirroring in this context refers to the process of reflecting back what has been processed.

³I use the term projective identification here in the interpersonal sense (e.g., Ogden, 1979), not in the more general sense used by Kleinians.

⁴These formulations are consistent with Benjamin's (1990) writings on recognition and destruction.

⁵I use the term objective in the sense of third person perspective, rather than as unbiased truth (Gabbard, 1997; Britton, 1998).

⁶ Maternal and paternal are used here as archetypal metaphors and should not be interpreted as necessarily innate gender attributes.