The growth and transformation of American ego psychology

The roots of ego psychology trace back to Sigmund Freud's The Ego and the Id (1923) and "Inhibitions, Symptoms and Anxiety" (1926), works followed by two additional fundaments, Anna Freud's The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defense (1936) and Heinz Hartmann's Ego Psychology and the Problem of Adaptation (1939). It was brought to full flowering in post-World War II America by Hartmann and his many collaborators, and for over two decades it maintained a monolithic hegemony over American psychoanalysis. Within this framework the conceptions of the psychoanalytic psychotherapies evolved as specific modifications of psychoanalytic technique directed to the clinical needs of the spectrum of patients not amenable to psychoanalysis proper. This American consensus on the ego psychology paradigm and its array of technical implementations fragmented several decades ago, with the rise in America of Kohut's self psychology, geared to the narcissistic disorders, and with the importation from Britain of neo-Kleinian and object-relational perspectives, all coinciding with the rapid growth of the varieties of relational psychoanalysis, with its shift in focus to the two-person, interactive, and co-constructed transference-countertransference matrix. Implications of this intermingled theoretical pluralism (as contrasted with the unity of the once dominant ego psychology paradigm) for the evolution of the American ego psychology are spelled out.     

Cognitive ego psychology and the psychotherapy of learning disorders

The single most common referral problem in middle childhood and adolescence is academic underachievement and learning failure. Yet, the term “learning disorder” lacks specificity as a diagnostic entity and offers no guidelines for psychotherapy. An appreciation of the developmental processes by which the undifferentiated, unstructured, self-less and objectless newborn becomes a more fully developed, self-sufficient individual, capable of adaptive functioning and formal academic learning is encompassed in contemporary psychoanalytic conceptions of the separation-individuation process. This theory provides an organizing, theoretical base for diagnosis and treatment of learning disorders. Based on these conceptions, we discuss therapeutic techniques which are appropriate to the level of developmental arrest at each of the phases of the separation-individuation process.     

The contribution of ego psychology to understanding the process of termination in psychoanalysis and psychotherapy

Ego psychology is presented as an integrated psychoanalytic developmental theory, including a theory of object relations. The process of termination is employed as one of the many possible illustrations of the usefulness of this theory. Termination is regarded as a process that pervades the treatment from the outset, rather than as the final phase of treatment only, because the treatment process, whether psychoanalysis or psychotherapy, includes continuous promotion of ever-increasing autonomy. Ideally, by the time termination proper takes place, maximum autonomy has been attained. To the definition of autonomy as intersystemic, involving relative independence of the ego from the drives (and from the super-ego), an object-relations dimension is added which extends that definition to include an intrasystemic consideration--namely, relative independence of the self-representation from the object representations. Especially in the treatment of the borderline conditions is the intrasystemic factor cogent because borderline states are characterized by varying degrees of incompletely differentiated self- and object representations. The objective, in the psychoanalysis of neurosis, where self- and object constancy already exist to a large degree, is ego autonomy in the intersystemic sense. In the psychotherapy of the borderline conditions, the objective is greater differentiation of the self-representation from the object representations.     

Modern dialectics in social psychology: A reappraisal

The current status of dialectic theory in social psychology is critically examined. Its basic and interdependent assumptions are discussed and recent misconceptions analyzed. An attempt is made to clarify major confusions and misinterpretations of dialectics regarding such issues as dialectics as a conceptual versus a methodological tool, dialectics as a form of cognitive process, dialectics as a firm of interactionism, and dialectical contradictions as semantic opposites. To illustrate the relevance of dialectic theory to current issues a major dualism in social psychology is examined, namely that of individual versus social theorizing. Drawing liberally from Marxist social theory it is shown how the traditional dualism is resolved through dialectics. Finally, a response is firmed to criticisms addressed to the current status of social psychology. It is shown that dialectics not only incorporates most of the demands raised by these criticisms, but also enhances the field by pointing toward new perspectives and directions.     

Bullies and victims: Their ego picture, ideal ego picture and normative ego picture

The ego picture, ideal ego picture and normative ego picture of bullies and their victims in a school situation were measured with semantic differentials. The bullies considered themselves to be dominant, had high ideals concerning dominance and thought this was what the social norms require. They felt themselves to be impulsive and lacking in self-control. The victims considered themselves to be depressed, lacking in intelligence and personal attractiveness, and displayed in general feelings of inferiority. These characteristics can be partly a cause and partly an effect of the bullying situation. Girls scored in general lower than boys on socially valued characteristics and higher on socially undesirable ones.