Concept and percept formation in object relations theory.
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22924166 |
|---|---|
| Authors | J Reid Meloy (0000-0002-3826-332X, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1985 |
| Volume | 2 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 35-45 |
| Publication date | 1985-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Psychoanalytic Psychology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0736-9735 • E-ISSN: 1939-1331 |
| Publisher | American Psychological Association (APA) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1037//0736-9735.2.1.35 |
| OpenAlex | W1977683076 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 6 |
A theoretical model is presented which differentiates between concept and per cept formation in object relations theory. The model is composed of ten units of experience that are derived from the psychological variables of identity, space, and time. Its construct validity in relation to current psychoanalytic theory is discussed. The aim of this paper is to introduce a theoretical model that distinguishes be tween concept and percept formation in object relations theory. The differ entiation between concept and percept formation has not been emphasized in the writings of the major object relations theorists in the United States during the past decade (Kohut, 1971; Kernberg, 1975; Masterson, 1981); and prior to this time a relatively small body of psychoanalytic literature was devoted to an understanding of the role of percept formation in relation to the self (Lewis, 1968; Spiegel, 1959), to hallucinations (Fischer, 1969), space (Schilder, 1935), thought (Guttman & Sloane, 1962), regression (Leovici, 1960; Lewis, 1968; Sperling, 1959; Szalita, 1958), and, of course, as a devel opmental precursor of self-object differentiation in the work of Mahler (1968, 1975). I will assert the central role of percept formation in delineating an inter nally consistent and externally valid object relations theory. Before proceed ing, however, it is important to note that any distinction between concept and percept formation, however critical as an explanatory model for the purpose of this paper, is empirically an arbitrarily dichotomous division. The per ception-conception formative process is psychologically, phenomenologi cally, and probably neurophysiologically, a continuous variable that is obvi ously disparate only at its extremes. Rapaport noted this in the cogwheeling Requests for reprints should be sent to J. Reid Meloy, Ph.D., 7966 Caminito del Cid, La Jolla, CA 92037.
Epistemology · Linguistics · Object (grammar) · Object relations theory · Percept · Perception · Psychoanalysis · Psychoanalytic theory · Relation (database) · Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology · Computer Science · Philosophy · Psychoanalysis and Social Critique · Psychology · Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications · Social Psychology
Controlled and automatic human information processing
On Human Symbiosis and the Vicissitudes of Individuation
Thought organization and primary process in the parents of schizophrenics
The Ego and the Vestibulocerebellar System
Some Observations on Reality Testing as a Clinical Concept
Introduction To The Work Of Bion
| Highly cited | No |
|---|