Talk:Transference

Mess

This article is a total mess. Judging by this talk page, it wouldn't make much sense to try and make it more scientific because some people seem to see it as their playground.--87.162.46.6 (talk) 01:41, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Broadening the Scope of this article

This article deals with transference in a clinical setting. However, transference has applications beyond clinical settings. For example, if a person likes playing baseball, the experience of playing baseball is likely transference of some other experience. The baseball example though is indepedenent of a clincal setting; it may occur in a clinical setting, or it may not. Writerz (talk) 03:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I've got no idea of how to understand baseball in terms of transference. Sure, the concept is widely applicable outside the clinic, but it is not simply about the transfer of motor skills or forms of interest or expectations in general, but is (surely!) limited to how we unconsciously configure our emotionally engaged relationships with others (do we idealise them and diminish ourselves, do we give them huge power and authority over us without realising it, do we fear or adore these authorities, etc.) One area requiring clear expansion is an elucidation of the differences and similarities between POSITIVE and NEGATIVE transference. ... I have another concern regarding the scope. As I use the concept, and as I BELIEVE various others use the concept today, it's meaning has shifted away from focusing on the transfer of feelings from one person to another, to instead index the unconscious emotionally-charged expectations that we carry regarding how we will be met with by others. These are likely to occur in the same form from some relationships to others, and it may well be that certain kinds of relationships - e.g. those with older women or younger men - will be fraught with the same latent expectations. And of course these latent expectations of relationship will have first shown themselves somewhere - e.g. in relationship with mum or dad or sibling. Yet rather than the focus being on unconsciously transferring the form of one's engagement in a relationship from e.g. mum to wife, the phenomenological nub of it seems to be the curious loss of self-possession which obtains in a similar manner in both. User:RGipps 10:40, 23 February 2017 79.77.214.59 (talk) 10:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Opposites

Regarding Jung's theories, could someone please clarify what the 'opposites' in question actually are, or if this is not applicable, at least what they involve? I was left feeling like it needed a little more explanation. Prometheus912 13:01, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

AMT sentence

"There is, however, an experimental new theory of transference known as AMT (Abusive Multiple Transference), put forth by David W. Bernstein, in which the abuser not only transfers negative feelings directed towards their abuser to the victim, but also transfers the power and dominance of their own abuser to themselves.'"

I don't get this. Who is transfering what where? --Gbleem 02:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

This page beileve it or not, was not made by humphrey it was made by his sister florance who is just as smart but bot as knowleged on computers as him !They are both extremely pleased with there work and hope that it is a good and sucsesfull website to everyone in the world

AMT

Should read "...in which an abused subject transfers negative feelings about their abuser to a new victim, and also transfers the power and dominance of their own abuser to themselves." The article appears to abruptly jump into a disturbingly pathological version of transference, deemphasizing its commonality and even therapeutic value.

One paragraph about love and psychological growth leads into a large paragraph about serial killers. I think this article needs some counseling.

i edited this part to change proceeding to succeeding. Transfer of power to to proceeding abusers seems to be backwards. but now im pretty unhappy with the structure of the paragraph. someone please correct this. ta 125.63.130.114

Cybertransference

This section does not make much sense and indeed does not seem very serious in tone to me: I wonder if it should be removed? Rgas 15:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)rgas]

'Some good writing here this should be a good sucsess to the web ! this was writen by a writer who was looking for info and then read this page and it made her sucsesful in life and so it became clear to her that WILKEPIDIA was one of the best websites lets make the BEST website that has ever been created ! Identified by miss Jade Amies xxx

An artical about love OH HOW WONDERFULL <-- wrote by Taler roberts !

Quoting Masson on transference and countertransference

• As I saw my first patient, I began to discover something far more sinister than the transference. It is called the countertransference. All it means is that the analyst has just about as many feelings for the patient as the patient has for the analyst, only the analyst is not obliged to give voice to them, either to the patient or to himself. For example, I didn't particularly like this patient. She was attractive, and I could have had sexual feelings for her, no doubt, but she was not the kind of person I would have wanted to spend any time with. I was getting worried about this. And so I consulted a senior analyst for a supervisory session. I explained the problem. He told me this was the countertransference. "But why?", I asked. "Why isn't it that I just don't like her?" He explained to me that in the sacred space of the analytic room, "The analyst does not have normal feelings. Look, Jeff, it's not just that you don't like her, the way you would not like somebody on the street. You are an analyst. You cannot afford such simple feelings. Besides, if that were all there were to it, you would not feel yourself sexually attracted to her." Now it was my turn to set him straight. "Wrong, that is part of my problem. An old problem. I'm all to often attracted to women with whom I have nothing in common. This is just more of the same."

• "Well, then, Jeff, you are incompletely analyzed. You have never overcome this problem, and that is why it is surfacing now."

"Fair enough, but let's at least not blame her. By calling it my countertransference, it makes it sound as if she did something to create this problem in me. She did nothing. Except she's there. It's my problem, one I've always had, and maybe always will."

• "Well, maybe you shouldn't analyze anybody then."

"Yes, I've been thinking the same. But tell me, don't you have problems of your own, that also surface in your sessions with patients, or did you analyze them away?" "Of course I do. That is why I have followed Freud's suggestion, which most analysts take in jest, that one should be reanalyzed every five years."

• "Analysis is your whole life, then?"

"That's right."

In case this should be violation of copyright and therefore being deleted, I'll tell you where I have taken from: Final Analysis, The Making and Unmaking of a Psychoanalyst (pages 147, 148) , by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson, 1990, ISBN 0-201-52368-X

Austerlitz —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.72.11.58 (talk) 17:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

Article Improvement?

Anybody else think this article could use improvement? Being that it's one of the key tenets of psychodynamic psychology, I would expect a rock solid article. IMHO, this can be improved. --1000Faces (talk) 04:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes it seems very weak considering how central a concept it is. --Redwaterjug (talk) 21:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Who is this Carruthers guy?

In the same articles as Jung - shouldn't there be some link to who he is?

--Redwaterjug (talk) 21:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

psychoanalysis?

i've heard this term in psychology in highschool. why limit it to psychoanalysis in the lead? 212.200.243.116 (talk) 21:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

repetition compulsion ?.

Austerlitz -- 88.75.204.209 (talk) 13:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Issues

I have quite a few issues with this page that I feel need addressing. In no particular order. - It is quite misleading to write 'A therapist's attunement to their own countertransference is nearly as critical as understanding the transference'. I think many (most?) contemporary psychoanalysts would not employ such a stark distinction between transference and countertransference. The intersubjective perspective which is quite dominant these days often refers to the transference-countertransference. In any case, it is most misleading to write 'nearly as critical' - this implies that there is some kind of simple hierarchy of importance in psychoanalytic cases, which clearly is a fallacy and might lead people to believe that psychoanalysis is some kind of 'one size fits all treatment'

- I also object to the phrasing 'Transference is a phenomenon in psychoanalysis'. Transference is not a 'phenomenon' which 'belongs' exclusively to psychoanalysis, even if Freud came up with it. To write that it is 'a phenomenon in' implies to me that: a) it is limited to psychoanalytic encounters (and that opens a whole different area of discussion about what constitutes psychoanalysis - i.e. 3, 4, 5 times a week?); b) to call it a 'phenomenon' makes it sounds like some kind of scientifically observable artefact, whereas it is more useful to think of it as an organising concept - this discussion links to discussions about positivism v consructivism in psychoanalysis - see e.g. Rustin's papers in J. Of Child Psychotherapy - criticising the search for an 'evidence base'.

- I do appreciate that much of the rest of the article attempts to reach a non-specialist readership, with simple, clear e.g.s and that's to be commended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.2.83.52 (talk) 22:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I readily agree that transference is not something limited to situations where the subject is undergoing psychoanalysis. I made a copy edit to correct the article intro, which (as noted by the editor at IP 82.2.83.52) was giving the wrong impression. Transference isn't just something that starts happening when you walk into a psychiatrist's or psychologist's office. As far as the rest of the comments by the editor at IP 82.2.83.52, I'm probably not knowledgeable enough to help much. 22:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Empirical section

Is there any empirical evidence that supports the concept of transference? or is it just something that has been theorized about? There should be a section for empirical evidence that supports this concept, and I think that that section should be included even if there is no empirical evidence. If there is no empirical evidence, this fact is important in and of itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.1.110 (talk) 05:30, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

The question "Is there any empirical evidence that supports the concept of transference?", asked above, may not be the best question, because in psychotherapy, as in any kind of observational field research, there is always empirical evidence. There are at least two different issues here:

1. Is the concept of transference the best explanation of the kind of data that the concept purports to explain, or are there plausible rival concepts that provide better explanations? (This is the issue of conceptual analysis.)
2. How closely does a particular set of data correspond to the kind of data that one or more of these plausible rival concepts purport to explain? (This is the issue of clinical formulation.)

Both questions relate empirical evidence to explanations. Regarding the first question (conceptual analysis), see the section below, § Criticism of the concept. Biogeographist (talk) 02:33, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Criticism of the concept

I added Template:POV because this article should include criticism of the concept of transference. The template can be removed once critical perspectives are included. Here are a couple of sources with which I am familiar that criticize the concept (and I imagine that other sources exist):

• Menaker, Esther (1991). "Questioning the sacred cow of the transference". In Curtis, Rebecca Coleman; Stricker, George (eds.). How people change: inside and outside therapy. The Plenum series in social/clinical psychology. New York: Plenum Press. pp. 13–20. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-0741-7_2. ISBN 0306437848. OCLC 23254079. {{cite book}}: External link in |chapterurl= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help)
• Bacal, Howard A.; Carlton, Lucyann (2011). "How specificity theory alters our view of psychoanalytic concepts and principles and how this affects therapeutic action". The power of specificity in psychotherapy: when therapy works and when it doesn't. Lanham, MD: Jason Aronson. pp. 89–116. ISBN 9780765707697. OCLC 663370217. {{cite book}}: External link in |chapterurl= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help)

Thanks, Biogeographist (talk) 19:26, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Transference in analysis

I think there should be a separate topic in the article to discuss transference in regards to analysis. It plays a very unique role in analysis different often from other areas of psychology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.58.17.129 (talk) 00:07, 25 October 2017‎ (UTC)

Transference is a psychoanalytic concept. Is the concept even used by mainstream psychologists who are outside of the analytic tradition, or outside of whichever schools of clinical psychology are still heavily influenced by the analytic tradition? That's a rhetorical question, but if you choose to respond affirmatively please provide plenty of sources. Thanks, Biogeographist (talk) 04:24, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

This article contradicts itself constantly

After reading this article I am actually now less certain as to what exactly is transference, and I wasn't exactly overconfident in my ability to accurately define it to begin with. Combining it with prior knowledge, I seem to have the following contenders: 1. Experience of feelings towards a psychotherapist whose origin is in a previous or current relationship other than the therapeutic relationship (almost, but not quite, a special case of projection) 2. Experience of feelings towards anyone whose origin is in a previous or current relationship other than with that individual (this, to me, despite similarities to the previous option, is more reminiscent of cognitive priming) 3. Experience of feelings towards a psychotherapist whose origin could be anything other than as a direct reaction to the psychotherapist in isolation 4. Experience of feelings towards a psychotherapist, the utility of which is that the genuine relationship between the members of the therapeutic alliance permits the analysis of how the patient tends to relate to others. 5. Sexual and/or romantic attraction to a psychotherapist. Any experts want to chime in on how to define transference? I suppose that in any case, half the article is going to have to be rewritten to match what transference actually is. Anditres (talk) 04:26, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

This should have a textbook definition included in references

You learn this term in intro psych from a textbook -alongside projection and translation. If there’s some language barrier thing going on … anyway 71.178.33.122 (talk) 17:59, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Psychotherapy should not be in the intro

It is also not correct to describe transference as a therapeutic concept, because it can occur in daily life 71.178.33.122 (talk) 18:08, 2 December 2023 (UTC)