| Melanie Klein's term, projective identification, introduced over four decades ago has remained a source of controversy within the psychoanalytic community. Recent investigators have questioned its conceptual and clinical usefulness. This paper adopted a comparative focus in order to address these issues. The works of four major writers on projective identification (Klein, Bion, Grotstein, and Ogden) are compared on the content, purpose and reception of projective identification. Much of the controversy and confusion regarding this subject can be traced to insufficient recognition of these aspects and their evolution over the years. It is suggested in conclusion, therefore, that the most useful framework for the continued study and use of projective identification is a descriptive one, in which its content, purpose and reception are specified.; The historical perspective in Appendix A examines the transformation of Freud's concept of projection to Klein's introduction of projective identification, highlighting the increased relational emphasis inherent in projective identification. Following Bion's expansion of the term with the metaphor of container-contained, three trends emerged: a limiting view, a broadening view, and eliminating its use altogether. An examination of the clinical use of projective identification in Appendix B supports its usefulness as a means of conceptualizing psychological change both as an interaction between relational factors and increased understanding through interpretation. As a term that bridges the intrapsychic and interpersonal realms of human interaction, projective identification offers a unique perspective in conceptualizing the analytic process. |
