MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947158313

A Delusion of Identity

2019· article· en· W2947158313 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
W. Clifford M. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of psychoanalysis · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProjective identificationFeelingIdentification (biology)PsychoanalysisIdentity (music)Projective testDelusionPhilosophyPsychologyEpistemologyAestheticsPsychoanalytic theory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scott was the first psychoanalyst to use the term and to describe the phenomenon of projective identification. He did so in this paper when he presented it to the British Psycho-Analytic Society, 21 November 1934, as an associate member, elected 1933. Melanie Klein’s footnote in “Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms” (1946, p. 102) said that Scott had “described three interconnected features which he came upon in a schizophrenic patient: a strong disturbance of her sense of reality, her feeling that the world around her was a cemetery, and the mechanism of putting all good parts of herself into another person—Greta Garbo— who came to stand for the patient.” She seemed to give Scott the credit for being the first person to name projective identification but then took it for herself instead when she wrote, “I suggest for these processes the term ‘projective identification’” (1946, p. 101) and “I suggested the term ‘projective identification’ for those processes that form part of the paranoid-schizoid position” (1957, p. 311). It is even more perplexing to read in that same paragraph from 1957, “Phenomena well known in psychiatry, e.g., a person’s feeling that he actually is Christ, God, a king, a famous person are bound up with projection.” This is the reverse of what Scott said. Scott’s patient believed “Greta Garbo is me” (projective identification) not “I am Greta Garbo” (introjective identification). Klein is giving “I am Christ” as an example of projective identification instead of the correct “Christ is me.” Phyllis Grosskurth interviewed Scott in 1981 (published in 1983) and asked him about those early days: I recall one earlier discussion of an early paper that I wrote in 1934, before the words “projective identification” were ever used. I presented a paper following which both Klein and Schmideberg spoke as to how they would understand this phenomenon of “projective identification.” I talked about projecting the personality into somebody else. A patient had claimed that Greta Garbo was her, not that she was Greta Garbo. Klein mentioned this case in the footnotes of one of her papers. I wonder what discussion that came from.… Grosskurth asked him if he remembered what Klein had said about the paper, and he answered, “She was certainly interested in this business of projection. (p. 14)

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of psychoanalysisSame topicPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207