130 Psychodynamic Models of Personality
(1950, 1954), who developed a detailed theoretical framework
linking specific psychodynamic processes with predictable
physiological sequelae and illness states. When Sifneos
(1972) articulated his empirically grounded, psychoanalyti-
cally informed model of alexithymia (i.e., an inability to ver-
balize emotions), the stage was set for the development of a
truly psychoanalytic health psychology. The key hypotheses
of Sifneos’s approach—that unverbalized emotions can have
myriad destructive effects on the body’s organ systems—
helped lay the groundwork for several ongoing health psy-
chology research programs that are to varying degrees rooted
in psychodynamic concepts. Research on health and hardiness
(Kobasa, 1979), stress and coping (Pennebaker & O’Heeron,
1984), emotional disclosure and recovery from illness
(Spiegel, Bloom, Kraemer, & Gottheil, 1989), and the “Type
C” (cancer-prone) personality (Temoshok, 1987) are all based
in part in psychodynamic models of health and illness.
The Opportunities and Challenges of Neuroscience
Some of the first contemporary efforts to integrate psychoan-
alytic principles with findings from neuroscience involved
sleep and dreams (Hobson, 1988; Winson, 1985). Although
the language of Freudian dream theory is far removed from
that of most neuropsychological models, work in this area has
revealed a number of heretofore unrecognized convergences
between the psychodynamics and neurology of dreaming. In
fact, contemporary integrative models of dream formation
now incorporate principles from both domains, setting the
stage for extension of this integrative effort to other aspects
of mental life.
Neuroimaging techniques such as the computerized axial
tomography (CAT) scan, the positron-emission tomography
(PET) scan, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have
begun to play a leading role in this ongoing psychoanalysis-
neuroscience integration. Just as neuroimaging techniques
have allowed memory researchers to uncover the neural un-
derpinnings of previously unseen encoding and retrieval
processes, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)
have enabled dream researchers to record on-line visual rep-
resentations of cortical activity associated with different
sleep stages and experiences.
Two psychodynamically relevant issues now being studied
via fMRI (functional MRI) and other neuroimaging techniques
are unconscious processes (e.g., implicit perception and learn-
ing) and psychological defenses (Schiff, 1999; Walla, Endl,
Lindinger, & Lang, 1999). In general, evidence suggests that
implicit processes are centered in mid- and hindbrain regions
to a greater degree than are explicit processes—a finding
that dovetails with Freud’s own hypotheses as well as with
recent evolutionary interpretations of psychodynamic princi-
ples (Slavin & Kriegman, 1992). Neuroimaging studies of de-
fensive mental operations are still in their infancy, but
preliminary findings suggests that the process of biasing and
distorting previously-encoded information involves predictable
patterns of cortical (and possibly subcortical) activation.CONCLUSION: THE PSYCHOLOGY
OF PSYCHODYNAMICS AND THE
PSYCHODYNAMICS OF PSYCHOLOGYDespite their limitations, psychodynamic models of person-
ality have survived for more than a century, reinventing
themselves periodically in response to new empirical find-
ings, theoretical shifts in other areas of psychology, and
changing social and economic forces. Stereotypes notwith-
standing, psychodynamic models have evolved considerably
during the twentieth century and will continue to evolve dur-
ing the first decades of the twenty-first century as well.
For better or worse, psychoanalytic theory may be the
closest thing to an overarching field theory in all of psychol-
ogy. It deals with a broad range of issues—normal and patho-
logical functioning, motivation and emotion, childhood and
adulthood, individual and culture—and although certain
features of the model have not held up well to empirical test-
ing, the model does have tremendous heuristic value and
great potential for integrating ideas and findings in disparate
areas of social and neurological science.
More than a century ago, Freud (1895b) speculated that
scientists would be resistant to psychoanalytic ideas because
of the uncomfortable implications of these ideas for their
own functioning. Whether or not he was correct in this re-
gard, it is true that psychodynamic models of personality
provide a useful framework for examining ourselves and our
beliefs. Clinical psychologists have long used psychoana-
lytic principles to evaluate and refine their psychotherapeu-
tic efforts. Scientists have not been as open to this sort of
self-scrutiny. There is, however, a burgeoning literature on
the biases and hidden motivations of the scientist (Bornstein,
1999a; Mahoney, 1985), and psychodynamic models of
personality may well prove to contribute a great deal to this
literature.REFERENCESAdler, A. (1921). Understanding human nature.New York: Fawcett.
Adler, A. (1923). The practice and theory of individual psychology.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.