The Social-Cognitive Model of Transference: Experiencing Past Relationships in the Present Author(s): Susan M. Andersen and Michele S.

Berk Source: Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol. 7, No. 4 (Aug., 1998), pp. 109-115 Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of Association for Psychological Science Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20182518 . Accessed: 16/10/2013 23:50
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Sage Publications, Inc. and Association for Psychological Science are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Directions in Psychological Science.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:50:48 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE

clarify the psychometric properties of the drug use screening inventory for adolescent alcohol and drug abusers. Alcoholism: Clinical and Ex perimental Research, 18, 1335-1341. the Levine, M.V., & Rubin, D.B. (1979). Measuring test scores. of multiple-choice appropriateness , Journal of Educational Statistics, 4, 269-290. Levine, M.V., & Tsien, S. (1997). A geometric ap measurement. In proach to two dimensional A.J. Marley (Ed.), Choice, decision, and measure ment (pp. 207-223). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Reckase, M.D. (1997). The past and future of mul item response tidimensional theory. Applied 21, 25-36. Psychological Measurement, issues in item re Roskam, E.E. (1985). Current sponse theory. In E.E. Roskam (Ed.), Measure ment and personality assessment (pp. 3-19). Am sterdam: Elsevier Science. for speed and time Roskam, E.E. (1997). Models limit tests. In W.J. van der Linden & R.K. Ham bleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 187-208). New York: Springer Verlag. Roznowski, M. (1989). An examination of the mea surement properties of the Job Descriptive In dex with experimental items. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 74, 805-814. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability us ing a response pattern of graded scores. Psy chometrika, 34(Suppl. 17).

109

D., & Steinberg, L. (1988). Data analysis using item response theory. Psychological Bul letin, 104, 385-395. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the rationality of choice. Sci ence, 221, 453^58. F. (1996). Detecting fak Zickar, M.J., & Drasgow, instrument using appro ing on a personality priateness measurement. Applied Psychological 20, 71-87. Measurement, S. (1998). Looking Zickar, M.J., & Highhouse, closer at the effects of framing on risky choice: An item response theory analysis. Organiza tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 75-91. Thissen,

The Social-Cognitive
Transference:

Model

of
Past

ment

Experiencing
and Mich?le

Relationships
Susan M. Andersen
Department of Psychology,

in the Present
S. Berk1
New York, New York

1969; theory (e.g., Bowlby, & Read, & 1990; Hazan Shaver, 1987), to those concerned with the self (e.g., Aron, Aron, Tu dor, & Nelson, 1991), close relation Collins & 1994; Murray (Berscheid, ships Holmes, 1993), and basic processes in social cognition 1996; (Higgins, & Bang, 1981). Higgins an In this article, we provide overview of this research. To begin, we describe the basic tenets of the its social model, highlighting and and clinical cognitive origins, also outline our experimental para

New York University,

Personal

experience,

as well

as

psychological theory and research, that with suggests relationships individuals one's from significant a have past may impact profound on present-day The relationships. notion that aspects of past relation in later social reemerge ships may relations also forms the basis of the clinical of transference concept Sullivan, (Freud, 1912/1958; 1953), which involves old issues in past in new re emerging relationships in lations, especially analysis. in everyday life is the Transference focus of our research, even though has been transference historically, examined mainly and theoretically as it pertains to psychotherapy its 1989). Despite (e.g., Ehrenreich, to social rela potential importance Recommended

in daily life, until recently, little empirical work of any kind has examined transference (al see Luborsky & Crits though 1990). Christoph, In our work, we have developed a social-cognitive model of transfer ence in social relations everyday & Glassman, 1996; (Andersen Andersen, Reznik, & Chen, 1997; in press; for re Chen & Andersen, see Singer, lated models, 1988; tions 1981; Westen, Wachtel, 1988). We have shown that mental represen are tations of significant others in memory, stored and that the processes underlying are the activation and of these representa application tions to new people. Such activa occur particu tion and application new when the person larly transference resembles the significant other. This research provides the first ex demonstrations of the perimental transference and is rel concept evant to a variety of related litera from those dealing tures, ranging with relational sch?mas (Baldwin, 1992; Bugental, 1992) and attach fundamental

then summarize the ex digm. We research the perimental supporting which has demonstrated model, as measured transference by infer ence and memory derived from representations, representation derived evaluation. We also review that shows the pervasive research on interper of transference impact sonal relations, find summarizing affect, motivation, ings involving expectancies, interpersonal and self-definition. roles, significant-other as well as by

Reading (1998).
N.S.

THE SOCIAL-COGNITIVE MODEL OF TRANSFERENCE

Andersen, S.M., & Berk, M.S. (See References)

Andersen, Andersen, S.M., S.M., & Glassman,

Basic Assumptions Research that the acti suggests vation and use of significant-other

(1996). (See References)

Reznik, I., & Chen,

S. (1997). (See References)

Copyright

1998 American

Psychological

Society

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:50:48 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

110 VOLUME 7, NUMBER 4, AUGUST 1998

to new in relation representations are the basic processes by people occurs in every which transference & (Andersen day social relations & Chen Andersen, 1996; Glassman, in press). Basic principles of social and social-construct cognition, (e.g., Higgins, theory in particular

I Manzella,

1996; see also Baum & in press). Both represen Andersen, and repre tation-derived memory are evaluation sentation-derived basic indices of transference.

I emotionally laden and that rela tional the self between linkages and other exist and are activated trans with new people, producing ference and its various effects et al., 1997). (Andersen to our model Fundamental that

Clinical

Origins

1996;Higgins & King, 1981;Kelly,

that people should suggest the information given" "go beyond about a new person using an exist 1955), (Bruner, 1957). ing social construct a Thus, when rep significant-other as a construct, is used resentation, to interpret a new individual, rep inferences about him or her, should be made to him or qualities by attributing her that are in fact part of the sig This nificant-other representation. on is exactly what the findings have shown. Perceiv transference resentation-derived that they to believe appear learned about a new person what on the basis of they simply inferred a representation, significant-other "as the new person remembering like the sig if" he or she were more the nificant other than is actually
case.

of transference concept in the of Freud work originates In his view, a person (1912/1958). in analysis transfer experiences ence with his or her analyst, and this scious a past parent). edged transference psychosexual significant involves conflicts other uncon with a

The

is the oc transference assumption curs in daily life, as well as in psy assume that the We chotherapy. occurs uni process of transference but that formly across individuals, the content of transference?that is, the content of significant-other rep across indi resentations?differs & Berk, 1998). viduals (Andersen that this content We also assume may change over time (i.e., it is not fixed or static; Horney, entirely 1939; Wachtel, 1981). In addition, we oc that transference contend curs for all types of significant oth or not and ers, only for primarily as in assumed many psy parents, models. Our work has chodynamic transference based demonstrated on a wide of significant variety other representations (i.e., sibling, best friend, spouse). Of course, nu merous of transfer clinical models as well as empirical ence exist, work repetitive interper tracking that are reported by sonal patterns and in psychotherapy patients to be transference-based thought & Crits-Christoph, (e.g., Luborsky model Our 1990). social-cognitive to these and research are relevant even though we lines of thinking, focus on everyday life, and then of the clinical implications consider our findings Andersen & Berk, (see 1998).

ers

model (i.e., the id, ego, and superego, driven by libido; see & Mitchell, 1983), psy Greenberg conflict and defense un chosexual an assumption derlie transference, with do not agree. We with the basic concur, however, of that past rela aspects premise in the resurface present tionships in press). (Chen & Andersen, is simi Our view of transference In Sulli lar to Sullivan's (1953). which of van's model, "personifications" others are the self and significant formed on the basis of early rela tions with significant others, as are (or dynamics) repre "dynamisms" patterns senting typical relational self and other. When between distortion" (transfer "parataxic is ex the new person occurs, ence) in terms of the signifi perienced cant other, and the interpersonal the signifi learned with patterns in the cant other are experienced new relationship. Sulli Although van did not conceive of personifi in social cations and dynamisms can terms, they easily be cognitive with accordingly, conceptualized Sul out altering his model. Hence, livan's model nicely corresponds in our social-cognitive with view, that significant which we assume are highly I other representations we

daily structure

(typically he acknowl Although occurs in that transference in his drive life as well,

theory of schema-triggered says that the "summary" or of a social category evaluation a new to is transferred stereotype in terms of that classified person The affect (S.T. Fiske & Pavelchak, category with this In accordance 1986). our a central assumption of theory, that is model trig social-cognitive represen gering a significant-other derived lead representation should to be activated evaluation a new person. The and used with tone of the sig overall evaluative tation

nificant-other representation to the new should be transferred and this is in transference, person occurs. what Participants exactly like a new person more when he or a toned positively a negatively toned representation significant-other from their own lives (Andersen & Reznik, & 1994; Andersen, Baum, she triggers than rather

Social-Construct and Transference

Theory

Research includes

in social a growing

cognition literature

now on

significant-other their links to the role and their et al., (Andersen

representations, self in memory, in transference 1996; Andersen,

I Glassman, & Gold, 1998; Hinkley &

Published

by Cambridge

University

Press

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:50:48 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE 111

on so Andersen, 1996). Research in particular, cial constructs, has constructs examined des typically (i.e., the ignating groups of people and trait-based notions stereotype and inter people use to categorize Andersen & others; e.g., pret & 1987; Higgins King, Klatzky, 1981; Wyer & Martin, 1986). Rela tively less work has been done on
"n-of-one" vidual-person constructs, exemplars or indi (e.g.,

social

relations.

At

the same

time,

significant-other representations are still more likely to be activated in responding and used to new others when transient activation
also occurs. In particular, we sug

ture of the content of significant other representations. In our research, we hold a pre test session in which each partici a series of sentences pant generates to describe a significant other (in a sentence-completion procedure), and sometimes various control rep a as resentations (e.g., stereotype) In the experimental well. session, held at least 2 weeks later and al to unrelated the legedly pretest, the a se is with participant presented one or ries of sentences describing In the several new target persons. one of condition, experimental so as to these targets is portrayed resemble the significant other, by in terms of characterized being some of the sentences in provided in combination the pretest session, with irrelevant filler items. We re as an analogue stimuli these gard for the types of cues perceivers in a new person encounter would in a real social encounter. In the no resemblance control condition, to the significant other exists in the or persons. In some target person in the con studies, each participant trol condition is yoked with a par in the condi ticipant experimental tion, so that the control participant is presented with the experimental participant's significant-other scriptors (e.g., Andersen are yoked 1996). Participants
way on a one-to-one basis,

a new person re gest that when sembles the significant other, ap transient activation plicability-based of the significant-other representa tion occurs. Indeed, we speculate that the phenomenon may be par occur to in face-to ticularly likely with and face encounters others, cues emanating thus emphasize in triggering from a new person
transference. Overall, then, we as

Smith & Zarate, 1992; see also Hig gins & King, 1981), which denote a and are also used single individual to interpret new individuals when activated. We argue that this pro cess is especially likely to occur when the exemplar is a significant
other, as shown in our research

Glassman, Chen, & (e.g., Andersen, Cole, 1995). on social-construct Research has identified both chronic theory sources of construct and transient activation (e.g., Bargh, Bond, Lom bardi, & Tota, 1986; Higgins, 1996). A construct can be activated by vir tue of its chronic accessibility, that is, to be its chronically high readiness arises which from the activated, of its past activation frequency & King, 1981). In (e.g., Higgins is associ deed, chronic activation as is ated with the same effects occurs which transient activation, on the basis advanced of either or cues in the priming applicability stimulus person.2 There is also an between additive relationship and transient activation chronicity in transference (i.e., for significant et Andersen other representations; al., 1995), just as there is for other social constructs (Bargh et al., 1986; & Brendl, 1985). Higgins significant-other Specifically, have been shown representations in that to be chronically accessible a are new to used interpret they in the absence of any tran person these rep sient activation. Hence, readi resentations have a general ness to be used, that suggesting in transference may be ubiquitous

chronic and appli activation cability-based typically to the activation and use contribute of significant-other representations new in interpreting and people, much research on transference sup ports this view sen, in press). (see Chen & Ander

sume

that both

THE BASIC TRANSFERENCEPARADIGM

One distinguishing of feature our transference that is paradigm we use idiographic research meth in considered crucial measurement personality (Allport, 1937; Kelly, 1955), in combination a nomothetic with (standard across ods, often all participants) de experimental & Glassman, (Andersen 1996). sign Given that experiences with signifi cant others are highly personal and it is essential that each par unique, or her own describe his ticipant other. These significant idiographic are (or idiosyncratic) descriptions then used in a standard, nomothet inwhich ic paradigm the basic pro cess of transference is examined across participants. The use of this idiographic-nomothetic allows measurement methodology of the uniform process of transfer ence while at the same time ac na the idiosyncratic for counting combined

de et al., in this
to en

sure that all participants in the ex and control conditions perimental are exposed to the same set of tar so that stimulus get descriptors, content is controlled entirely. Al other types of repre ternatively, such as nonsignificant sentations, and traits, have others, stereotypes, as controls also been used (e.g., et al., 1995). Andersen the new After about learning in all the ex person, participants a series of de periment complete the measures, pendent including basic transference indices of repre and sentation-derived inference
memory, as well as evaluation.

Copyright

1998 American

Psychological

Society

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:50:48 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

112 VOLUME 7, NUMBER 4, AUGUST 1998

Measures

pectancies, also examined

of affect, motivation, and self-definition selectively.

ex are

transference

effect toned

occurs and

for both

I deed,

OVERVIEW OF EXPERIMENTAL EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH TRANSFERENCE

negatively positively and the toned significant others, of the effect is shown in robustness to persist the fact that it appears over time (as and to be exacerbated measured Andersen, in weeks; in press). Glassman &

significant-other should be linked to representations the self via relational (see linkages also Baldwin, 1992), affect, motiva
tion, expectancies, roles, and as

because

pects

of self experienced

in the re

Representation-Derived and Memory Inference in Transference

Representation-Derived in Transference Evaluation

with the significant lationship and ex other should be activated a significant-other perienced when a with activated is representation new person and should be used in relation ference. tested to this new person The following these assumptions in trans research in depth.

this experimental para Using we the have demonstrated digm, occurrence of representation derived based other and memory inference on an activated significant

toward a Evaluative responses new person derived from an acti vated significant-other representa tion also serve as a basic index of
transference. To examine such rep

Facial Affect

in Transference

Participants representation. a standard recognition complete test consisting of repre memory sen sentation-derived descriptive tences (as well as filler items), some earlier to presented the new target person and describe some of which were not. Partici that rate their confidence pants of which were seeing scriptor about the target. Of inter that were est are those descriptors the about not presented target, but are that representation-derived (i.e., from the original significant listed in the pre other descriptors test). These not-presented descrip to "go tors index the tendency the information given" beyond about the target (Bruner, 1957) in they ways. representation-derived several studies, participants Across exhibited reliably greater memory for representation confidence not actu derived target descriptors ally presented when he or she resembled own significant ticipant's rather than a yoked participant's other or another type of significant control (Andersen representation & Cole, & Baum, 1994; Andersen et Andersen 1996; 1995, al., 1990; in press; Hin Baum & Andersen, kley & Andersen, 1996). This basic about the target the par other remember each de

in resentation-derived we in ask transference, participants a to the pretest significant identify other whom posi they evaluative so that evalu tively or negatively, from the ative responses deriving evaluation significant-other can be assessed. shows representation The evidence

emotional responses be par may fleeting, we examined of af facial expressions ticipants'

fect?as an immediate, nonverbal

Because

a evaluate that participants own their target person resembling other toned significant positively a target re more than favorably their own negatively sembling other toned significant (Andersen et al., Andersen & Baum, 1994; in Baum & Andersen, 1996; press). do not occur in a These findings in which the tar control condition a yoked participant's get resembles other; thus, these evalu significant on significant are based ations in the new per other resemblance with in accord and transference, schema of the theory & Pavel Fiske affect (S.T. triggered to n-of-one extended chak, 1986), son
representations.

transference affect et al., 1996). Partici (Andersen co were facial expressions pants' while the partici vertly videotaped to learn read each pants descriptor and were about the target person later rated by trained, independent participants' judges. As predicted, were to facial expressions judged when be more partici pleasant a target were pants learning about their own posi who resembled other rather tively toned significant toned than their own negatively et other al., (Andersen significant in facial This 1996). expres pattern sions did not occur in the control in which the target re condition, a yoked participant's sembled sig
nificant other. Hence, representa

index

of

in

Although triggered
on evaluative

the model affect focuses

of schema primarily
we argue

affect, as indexed by facial affect, occurs this same Because in transference. not find did self-reported study tion-derived instantaneous mood effects?as reports ticipants' states after mood assessed by par of their current

responses,

that affect, motivation, ancies should emerge

ence via a similar

and expect in transfer

schema

triggering

process,

because

representations significant-other laden are highly emotionally In et 1997, al, 1998). (Andersen

the target?it Prior work be fleeting. fect may of represen found some evidence in states mood tation-derived on the overall based transference, I tone of the activated significant

about learning that this af suggests

Published

by Cambridge

University

Press

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:50:48 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE 113

(Andersen representation these Baum, 1994). However,

fects were weak, and hence, mood

other

& ef

derived

from significant-other rep tone resentations (from the overall in transfer of the representations) ence appears to be inconsistent at

other?and thus pro significant vide evidence that the activation of a representation significant-other in transference also activates role in transference, structures with for current mood consequences states. This work is relevant to the literature on interpersonal roles in A.P. Fiske, relationships (e.g., & Fiske, & Haslam, 1991; Mills Clark, 1993), as well as to the gen eral notion lationships are activated nificant-other
activated.

lationships with significant in transference. also emerge in Transference

others

Expectancies

best.

about the signifi Expectancies cant other's to likely responses ward the self should also be stored in the linkages between the signifi cant-other and the representation in trans self, and should be used As anticipated, ference. partici indicated pants targets expecting who resembled their own posi tively toned significant other to like and accept them more than targets their own negatively resembling toned significant other, and tone of the significant other did not have an effect with in yoked participants the control condition et (Andersen derived al., 1996). Expectancies from the significant-other repre sentation vated is of to be acti appear in transference. This finding to social relations relevance thus directly behavior influ

Roles Interpersonal in Transference

and Mood

that aspects with

to how relevance potential states emerge in transference mood are the normative interpersonal roles held by the self in relation to Of the significant should other, which be stored in linkages between the in self and the significant other in and hence activated memory, the significant transference. When and relation other representation are the ship positive, interpersonal role with is this significant other positive feeling. if this role is activated in Hence, and it appears feasible transference to pursue itwith the new person, a mood should result. By positive if not ap this role does contrast, mood and pear feasible, negative should result. This disappointment is exactly what have findings shown in & Andersen, (Baum the participant's press). When posi rep tively toned significant-other
resentation was activated in trans

of past re others significant when the relevant sig are representations

Motivational in Transference

Responses

Our sumes

model

of

transference

as

that motivational

informa

tion regarding the significant other is stored in the linkages between the significant-other representation and the self (as roles are) and thus to should be activated and applied a new person when the significant other is activated representation and applied (Andersen et al, 1996). our focus has been on In particular, motivation ness?that close interpersonal to the desire be close is, and emotionally connected to, and liked or loved by, the significant of central im other, a motivation for

associated

with

(e.g., Olson, Roese, & Zanna, 1996). Re cent work has in fact found evi that representation-derived dence occurs in transference behavior (Berk & Andersen,
tant extension.

because expectancies ence interpersonal

1996), an impor

The

Self

in Transference:

ference with
new person's

a new person
role was

and this
incongru

ent, rather than congruent, with the other's role, the partici significant pant came to be in a more negative mood. this occurred be Perhaps cause the incongruent role signaled a potential in the posi disruption interaction tively regarded goals and interaction patterns typically in that particular role with pursued that particular other. significant These findings occurred only in the transference condition?that is, when the new person resembled own the participant's significant other and not a yoked participant's

in close portance relationships et al., 1996). It is also a (Andersen basic human motivation (see et al., 1997; Bakan, 1966; Andersen & Leary, 1995; Bowlby, Baumeister in 1969). As expected, participants dicated greater motivation to emo (and not increase approach from) a target if the target their own positively resembled toned significant other than if the resembled their own nega target toned other; posi tively significant tive versus negative tone of the sig nificant other did not have an effect tionally distance in the control participants
Hence, motivations

Working Self-Concept Self-Evaluation

The and

Research described thus far sup the contention that ports linkages between the self and significan tother exist in memory and are tra a premise in transference, versed to our model. central In another these linkages were assessed the shifts that occur in directly?in the working self-concept (e.g., Lin study, & Carlston, & 1994; Markus a when Wurf, 1987) significant other representation is activated. If between self and the linkages sig nificant other exist, then the activa tion of significant-other representa ville

condition (Andersen

with

yoked et al., 1996).

in re

pursued

Copyright

1998 American

Psychological

Society

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:50:48 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

114 VOLUME 7, NUMBER 4, AUGUST 1998

aspects of the linked with the signifi self-concept in cant other, producing changes re that the working self-concept the self-when-with-the flect & (Hinkley significant-other tions should act?vate 1996; see also Ogilvie & Ashmore, 1991). As the research expected, re that significant-other showed in the target person did semblance in the in fact produce changes Andersen, reflecting self-concept working self-when-with-the-significant these changes assessed other. We by examining the participant's the

in transference, driven by the over tone all of the significant-other rep That is, those aspects resentation. in that changed of the self-concept the direction of the significant-other in the positive transference positive transference. than in the negative The effect did not occur in the no resemblance condition, that the effect was limited control self-with-the more became

transference.

The

new

person's

re

to the significant other semblance use to leads the activation and of representations significant-other is reflected by the perceiver, which in inference and memory, evalua and expec tion, affect, motivation, tancy effects, as well as effects as sociated with the roles activation and with of interpersonal in rela in self-definition changes tion to the new person (relative to
the no-significant-other-resem

showing to the transference findings the self with

condition. These that demonstrate clearly in conjunction is activated

in the experi self-concept working ment. That is, after learning about in the experiment, the new person self each participant provided or himself of descriptors generated we the and then herself, computed with of these descriptors overlap de self-with-significant-other the scriptors participant provided at pretest, before learning about the new person. To tap change in the the self-concept working we examined ment, score while covarying at (i.e., the overlap pretest overlap the participant's between pretest and self self-concept working in the experi this overlap out the same

that transference, revealing and the self is indeed interpersonal in part by the self-with defined (Andersen et each-significant-other al, 1997; see also Aron et al., 1991; Baldwin, 1992; Ogilvie & Ashmore,

In short, transfer blance baseline). ence has wide-ranging, multifac that demonstrate the eted effects role of past interpersonal in present ones (Chen relationships in press). & Andersen, pervasive to the lit contributes This work es on close relationships, on attach the literature pecially common ment. It also shares on relational with work ground sch?mas and on linkages between self and others in memory. Clearly, to also contributes the research erature long-standing with theories of personal Per transference. fo and measures

1991).

CONCLUDING COMMENTS
We of the have provided an overview

of model social-cognitive and presented transference experi research mental demonstrating occurs in every that transference The experi relations. day social from the mental findings stemming show that activation of men model tal representations
others and the use

descriptors). with-significant-other that in the revealed The findings

transference condition, a reliably

of
of

significant
these repre

ity dealing sonality models are also cused on the idiographic Fi to work. the present relevant to contribute these findings nally, on literature the social-cognitive and exem how social constructs
plars constrain interpersonal per

in the increase emerged greater the self-with self's overlap with changes showing significant-other, in the in the working self-concept with direction. Coupled predicted demonstrat evidence independent in occurred ing that transference in which the new the condition the participant's resembled person own significant these data other, that changes self-concept suggest as predicted in the con occurred & text of transference (Hinkley in rela In short, Andersen, 1996). one be tion to the new person, comes of self one is the version with other. the significant self relevant Furthermore, occurred also evaluation changes

in relation to new underlie viduals transference, occurs thus that transference sentations

indi and as a

that gov result of basic principles ern the activation and use of social constructs. repre Significant-other are chronically acces sentations sible?that is, they have a chronic to be used in social per readiness even when the new person ception, the significant does not resemble that transfer other?suggesting in inter ence is rather ubiquitous et al., relations (Andersen personal also research the 1995). However, of the the importance demonstrates new person's to the resemblance cues other (applicability significant in triggering I in the new person)

the spe ception, while highlighting cific role of significant-other in such basic pro representations cesses. of discussion (For detailed with the model's convergence see Andersen & other literatures, Berk, Chen et al., 1997; In in press.) with sum, past experiences signifi cant others appear to have a broad and profound impact on present is and transference relationships, critical in this process as it occurs in social relations. everyday 1998; Andersen & Andersen,
like to would Acknowledgments?We Noah thank Serena Glassman, Chen, on a for their comments and Inga Reznik draft of this article.

Published

by Cambridge

University

Press

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:50:48 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE 115

Notes
1. Address san M. Andersen, correspondence Department to Su of Psy

6 chology, New York University, New 4th PL, Floor, York, Washington NY 10003.
2. involves of presentation Priming a stimulus men to a related particular

in social relations. Journal of repr?sentations Personality and Social Psychology, 71,1108-1129. Aron, A., Aron, E.N., Tudor, M., & Nelson, G. (1991). Close relationships and including other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psy chology, 60, 241-253. Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence. Chicago: Rand-McNally. Baldwin, M.W. (1992). Relational sch?mas and the processing of information. Psychological Bulle tin, 122,461-484. Bargh, J.A., Bond, R.N., Lombardi, W.L., & Tota, M.E. (1986). The addictive nature of chronic and temporary sources of construct accessibil ity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 869-878. S.M. (in press). Interper Baum, A., & Andersen, sonal roles in transference: Transient mood ef fects under the condition of significant-other resemblance. Social Cognition. Baumeister, R.F., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to for interpersonal attachments belong: Desire as a fundamental human motivation. Psycho logical Bulletin, 117, 497-529. Berk, M.S., & Andersen, S.M. (1996, July). Eliciting behavioral confirmation by activating significant other representations. Poster presented at the an nual meeting of the American Psychological Society, San Francisco. Berscheid, E. (1994). Interpersonal relationships. Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 79-129. Vol. 1. At Attachment and loss: Bowlby, J. (1969). tachment. New York: Basic Books. Bruner, J.S. (1957). Going beyond the information & R. given. In H.E. Gruber, K.R. Hammond, Jessor (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to cogni tion (pp. 41-60). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press. University and cognitive pro Bugental, D. (1992). Affective cesses within threat-oriented family systems. In I.E. Sigel, A. McGillicuddy-de Lissi, & J. Goodnow (Eds.), Parental belief systems: The psychological consequences for children (pp. 219 248). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. S.M. (in press). Relation Chen, S., & Andersen, ships from the past in the present: Significant other representations in in and transference terpersonal life. InM.P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 31). San Diego: Academic Press. Collins, N.L., & Read, SJ. (1990). Adult attach ment, working models, and relationship qual ity in dating couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 644-663. Ehrenreich, J.H. (1989). Transference: One concept or many? The Psychoanalytic Review, 76, 37-65. Fiske, A.P., Haslam, N., & Fiske, S.T. (1991). Con fusing one person with another: What errors reveal about the elementary forms of social re lations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol ogy, 60, 656-674. Fiske, ST., & Pavelchak, M. (1986). Category based versus piecemeal-based re affective in schema-triggered sponses: Developments affect. In R.M. Sorrentino & E.T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 167-203). New York: Guilford Press. Freud, S. (1958). The dynamics of transference. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The standard edi tion of the complete psychological works of Sig mund Freud (Vol. 12, pp. 99-108). London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1912) S.M. (in press). N.S., & Andersen, Glassman, in social cognition: Persistence Transference and exacerbation of significant-other based in ferences over time. Cognitive Therapy and Re search. J.R., & Mitchell, S.A. (1983). Object re Greenberg,

tal representation
information encountered, about with

(or construct) before

the the new result person that used is the to ac

is activated representation this new person. interpret

and

Transient

tivation based on cues in the stimulus

when

person?applicability?occurs

information
person tation

presented
related

about
again

the new

is in itself (or construct), used to

to a represen with the re

sult that the representation

and interpret

is activated
person.

the new

References
Allport, G. (1937). Personality: A psychology inter pretation. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Win ston. Andersen, S.M., & Baum, A.B. (1994). Transference in interpersonal relations: Inferences and af fect based on significant-other representations. Journal of Personality, 62, 460-497. & M.S. Andersen, S.M., Berk, (1998) Transference in everyday of ex experience: Implications research for relevant clinical phe perimental nomena. Review of General Psychology, 2, 81 120. Andersen, S.M., & Cole, S.W. (1990). "Do I know you?": The role of significant others in general social perception. Journal of Personality and So cial Psychology, 59, 384-399. N.S. Andersen, S.M., & Glassman, (1996). Re sponding to significant others when they are not there: Effects on interpersonal inference, and affect. In R.M. Sorrentino & motivation, E.T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (Vol. 3, pp. 262-321). New York: Guilford Press. Andersen, S.M., Glassman, N.S., Chen, S., & Cole, in social perception: S.W. (1995). Transference in significant The role of chronic accessibility other representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 41-57. Andersen, S.M., Glassman, N.S., & Gold, D. (1998). Mental representations of the self, significant others: Structure others, and nonsignificant and processing of private and public aspects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 845-861. Andersen, S.M., & Klatzky, R.L. (1987). Traits and social stereotypes: Levels of categorization in person perception. Journal of Personality and So cial Psychology, 53, 235-246. Andersen, S.M., Reznik, I., & Chen, S. (1997). The self and others: Cognitive and motivational In J.G. Snodgrass & R.L. underpinnings. (Eds.), The self across psychology: Thompson and the self Self-recognition, self-awareness, concept (pp. 233-275). New York. New York Academy of Science. L.M. Andersen, I., & Manzella, S.M., Reznik, and (1996). Eliciting facial affect, motivation, in transference: Significant-other expectancies

lations in psychoanalytic theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. P. & Hazan, C, Shaver, (1987). Romantic love con as an attachment process. Journal ceptualized of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524. activation: Acces Higgins, E.T. (1996). Knowledge sibility, applicability, and salience. In E.T. Hig (Eds.), Social psychol gins & A.W. Kruglanski ogy: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133-168). New York: Guilford Press. (1995). Accessibility Higgins, E.T., & Brendl, CM. and applicability: Some "activation rules" in fluencing judgment. Journal of Experimental So cial Psychology, 31, 218-243. of Higgins, E.T., & King, G.A. (1981). Accessibility con social constructs: Information processing sequences of individual and contextual vari (Eds.), ability. In N. Canto & J.F. Kihlstrom Personality, cognition and social interaction (pp. 69-121). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Hinkley, K., & Andersen, S.M. (1996). The working in transference: Significant-other self-concept activation and self-change. Journal of Personal ity and Social Psychology, 71, 1279-1295. Horney, K. (1939). New ways in psychoanalysis. New York: Norton. Kelly, G. (1955). The psychology of personal con structs. New York: Norton. Linville, P.W., & Carlston, D.E. (1994). Social cog nition of the self. In P.G. Devine, DC. Hamil ton, & T.M. Ostrom (Eds.), Social cognition: Im pact on social psychology (pp. 143-193). New York: Academic Press. P. (1990). Under Luborsky, L., & Crits-Cristoph, standing transference: The CCRT method. New York: Basic Books. Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self concept: A social psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299-337. and ex Mills, J., & Clark, M.S. (1993). Communal research and old change relationships: New In R.G. Gilmour & R. Erber controversies. (Eds.), Theoretical approaches to new relationships (pp. 29^2). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Murray, S.L., & Holmes, J.G. (1993). Seeing virtues in faults: Negativity and the transformation of interpersonal narratives in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 707-722. Ogilvie, D.M., & Ashmore, R.D. (1991). Self-with as a unit of analysis other representation in self-concept research. In R.C. Curtis (Ed.), The relational self: Theoretical convergences in psycho analysis and social psychology (pp. 282-314). New York: Guilford Press. Olson, J.M., Roese, N.J., & Zanna, M.P. (1996). Ex pectancies. In E.T. Higgins & A.W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic prin ciples (pp. 211-238). New York: Guilford Press. the transference. Singer, J.L. (1988). Reinterpreting In D.C. Turk & P. Salovey (Eds.), Reasoning, inference, and judgment in clinical psychology (pp. 182-205). New York: Free Press. Smith, E.R., & Zarate, M.A. (1992). Exemplar based model of social judgment. Psychological Review, 99, 3-21. Sullivan, H.S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psy chiatry. New York: Norton. Wachtel, P.L. (1981). Transference, schema, and as similation: The relevance of Piaget to the psy choanalytic theory of transference. The Annual of Psychoanalysis, 8, 59-76. and information Westen, D. (1988). Transference processing. Clinical Psychology Review, 8, 161 179. L.L. (1986). Person R.S., Jr., & Martin, Wyer, memory: The role of traits, group stereotypes, and specific behaviors in the cognitive repre sentation of persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 661-675.

Copyright

1998 American

Psychological

Society

This content downloaded from 168.176.5.118 on Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:50:48 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions