Another primary defense mechanism is projection. Introjection and projective identification will
be discussed as well.
Projection and introjection represent opposite sides of the coin. In both, there is a deficient psychological
boundary between the self and the other. In normal development, the infant has not yet developed a sense of which experience
occurs outside the self or inside the self. It cannot discriminate between the pain of diaper pin sticking him/her which
originates externally and the pain of ear infection, which is internally located. From this period of development (undifferentiation)
come the defenses of projection and introjection.
Projection involves misunderstanding that what in reality, comes
from inside as coming from outside. In its mature use, it is the basis for understanding, intuition, and empathy.
In its immature form, projection creates misunderstanding when the projected feelings and attitudes distort the person on
whom they are being projected. Others resent being misperceived and may retaliate when treated as if they are, for example,
angry or dishonest, when the person projecting is actually the angry or dishonest person. (It is interesting to observe
the reaction of each party. The person being falsely projected upon frequently appears upset and emotional, trying to
justify and explain why they are not guilty. When they confront the person projecting onto them, the projecting person
often flies into a immediate rage, as if to bully the accuser from the accusations, which are in fact true. This often
indicates who is the projector and who is the person receiving the projections.) It has been thought by some
psychologists, that projection is not always completely unconscious, due to the extreme protestations of the projecting
party. As in Shakespeare's example from on of his plays: "Methinks the lady doeth protesteth too much",
there must be some level of conscious acknowledgement in order for the person to know what to project and to rage when caught.
There are differing theories including the belief that when the person projecting his/her unacceptable feelings onto someone
else, and that someone does not accept the projections, then the projector cannot 'get rid' of the unacceptable feelings and
is very threatened by the feelings, thus the rage reaction may be due to having no acceptable psychological space to contain
the feelings, which are so threatening to the projector.
Introjection involves misunderstanding that what is coming from
outside as coming from inside. It is the opposite of projection. In its benign form it involves identifying with important
others. Children take in attitudes of teachers, heros, and significant people in their lives. Many long to be
like mommy and daddy. In its extreme forms, is very destructive. The most notorious form in psychoanalytic literature
is 'identification with the aggressor" where the victim takes on behaviors of the perpetrator in order to feel less helpless
and more powerful. The victim in effect, becomes one with the aggressor. Another maladaptive situation occurs
when one is unable to move past a death due to a deep attachment to the departed. The result is sometimes permenant
depression as the person feels diminished as if part of the self has died. (An example from literature would be Mary
Shelley, who was unable to overcome her identification with her deceased mother and wrote almost exclusively about death,
deterioration of the human body, and grief, in her early years.) Another example would be the case of a parent taking
on the mistakes of their child as a reflection of their own lack of competency. This also implies boundary distortion.
Projective identification is a process where projecton and introjection
are fused. The person doing the projecting onto another, not only projects in a distorted way that is determined by
their past introjections, but also pressures the person to behave in a way that reflects this fantasy. The person both
projects what is inside (anger, fear, envy, etc.) onto the target person and works to get the person to act as if they have
the same internalized introjects. It is a very primitive form of projection and differs from more mature forms in that
there is a lack of adequate boundaries as well as separation from parents psychologically.
An example of projective identification would be a person who feels they may be unattractive to the
opposite sex, yet projects this feeling onto the partner thinking the partner is actually the unattractive one, thus disowning
the feelings. (Perhaps it was triggered by the partner's overconfidence in appearance that triggered envy in the
projector and or due to detection of a subtle, ocassional feeling of being unattractive at times, that the projector picked
up on.) The projector then works to get the partner to respond likewise, if the partner fails to comply, and continues
to act confidently, the projector will subtly provoke feelings in the partner, by actions that suggest/imply the
partner is not attractive to the projector (by making flattering statements about others' level of attractiveness but not
the partner's, etc.) thereby creating or eliciting the partner to feel unattractive in the relationship. One can readily
see who is projecting onto whom, when the partner/victim leaves the relationship and no longer feels unattractive.
The projector then, upon crisis or abandonment, may become aware of the personal feeling of unattractiveness in themselves,
until they find another partner/victim to project it upon. Thus the repetitive nature of relationships involving projection.
Generally, the projector refuses to consider that the projections originate within. It is a way of protecting the self
from unacceptable feelings.
A similar example is seen in the case of a person who doubts his/her own intelligence level and attempts
to manipulate others perceptions/opinions by using complicated phrasing while communicating, or by referring to themselves
as having a high IQ. They attempt to lead others to feel unintelligent by their intellectualizations due to
their own doubts about their own intelligence. They may be highly critical of others and belittle their accomplishments
to compensate for their inferior feelings.
Splitting is another defense mechanism originating from a preverbal
time where the infant is unable to understand that good and bad qualities reside in the same individual (caretaker).
Until object constancy is established in the infant, splitting will occur. In everyday life, examples of splitting can
easily be seen in cartoon depictions of good vs evil, in political campaigns, racism, and corporate factions. Splitting
can be effective in maintaining self-worth and in reducing anxiety. However, since it involves a distortion of reality,
it is not considered to be an effective defense. It is a tendency to make gross good-bad distinctions. Examples
of splitting would be the belief that all republicans are bad, all persons of an ethnic group or particular socioeconomic
class are inferior, etc.
