The Future of Interpersonal Theory 223this question requires a discussion of motivation. Whereas
Sullivan’s legacy has led many interpersonal theorists to
posit self-confirmation as the core motive underlying human
transaction, Benjamin (1993) proposed a fundamental shift
toward the establishment of attachment as the fundamental
interpersonal motivation. In doing so, she has provided one
mechanism to account for the enduring influence of early ex-
perience on mental representation and interpersonal behav-
ior. Although a complete description of attachment theory is
beyond the scope of the present chapter, we agree that attach-
ment to proximal caregivers in the early years of life is both
an evolutionary imperative (e.g., Belsky, 1999; Bowlby,
1969; Simpson, 1999) and a primary organizing influence on
early mental representation (Beebe & Lachmann, 1988a,
1988b; Bowlby, 1980; Stern, 1985).
Infants and toddlers must form attachments to caregivers
in order to survive. Benjamin has suggested that the nature of
the early interpersonal environment will dictate what must
be done to establish attachments. These early attachment
relationships can be described using the SASB model’s de-
scriptive taxa, predictive principles, and copy processes. The
primacy of relationships to IPIRs is thus associated with the
need to maintain attachment to them even when not immedi-
ately present. Benjamin (1993) refers to this as maintaining
“psychic proximity” to IPIRs. The need to maintain psychic
proximity is organized around wishes for love and connect-
edness (secure attachment or AG on the SASB model), as
well as fears of rejection and loss of love (disrupted attach-
ment or DAG on the SASB model). The primacy of early
attachment patterns and mental representations influencing
current experience is consistent with psychodynamic and at-
tachment theories. Bowlby (1980) suggested that internal
working models act conservatively; thus, assimilation of new
experience into established schemas is typical (see also Stern,
1988). Benjamin (1996a) suggested that “psychic proximity
fulfills the organizing wish to receive love from the IPIR...
acting like the IPIR, acting like the IPIR were present, or
treating the self as would the IPIR can bring about psychic
proximity” (p. 189).
Returning again to the patient described earlier, it was
clear that she was ambivalently but strongly attached to her
mother. She consistently experienced blame any time she
attempted to convey interpersonal disappointments or bad
feelings. Anything that disrupted her mother’s sense of con-
trol over the world was met with the accusation that the pa-
tient was being selfish and immature—and that it was the
patient’s fault, so her feelings were not valid. In addition, she
was told that if she didn’t stop causing so much trouble, her
parents might divorce. It became clear that the patient had
internalized a critical maternal IPIR. Whenever the patient
was asked about her experience of self, she would inevitably
begin her response with “My mother says that I am... ” or
“My mother says it’s bad for me to feel this way.” When the
therapist would try to explore the patient’s contributions to
her interpersonal difficulties, it evoked recapitulation. De-
spite affirming and affliative efforts on the part of the thera-
pist, the patient had a difficult time accommodating the new
interpersonal input; instead she covertly experienced psychic
proximity to the critical maternal IPIR and responded in kind.
She experienced the therapeutic interpersonal situation as if
the maternal IPIR were present, and she needed to back down
rather than own her disappointments. To do otherwise would
risk her attachment to her mother, painful as it was.Concluding PropositionsBenjamin’s developmental and motivational extensions of
interpersonal theory provide some of the richest advances to
date. We see her work, along with Kiesler’s recent integration
of emotion theory into the interpersonal transaction cycle, as
solid evidence that interpersonal theory as originally con-
ceived of by Sullivan has a vital and promising future as a
fundamental and integrative approach to personality. In this
vein we would like to close this chapter with a further exten-
sion of these contemporary works.
Interpersonal theorists are interested in understanding
why certain reciprocal interpersonal patterns become promi-
nent for an individual. Benjamin has made an important start
by suggesting that a basic human motivation is attachment
and that the interpersonal behaviors and reciprocal interper-
sonal patterns (described by interpersonal theory’s unique
structural models) that help achieve attachment become fun-
damental to personality through internalization of relation-
ships (characterized by the copy processes). She posits that
the wish for attachment and the fear of its loss are universal,
and that positive early environments lead to secure attach-
ments and normal behavior (i.e., AG). If the developing
person is faced with achieving attachment in a toxic early en-
vironment, behavior will be abnormal (DAG), but will de-
velop in the service of attachment needs and be maintained
via internalization.
We would like to extend this further in an effort to gener-
ate an interpersonal theory of personality that more broadly
addresses issues of basic human motivation. It is our con-
tention that the maturational trajectory of human life allows
us to conceptualize many developmentally salient motives
that may function to mediate and moderate current interper-
sonal experience. That is, reciprocal interpersonal patterns
develop in concert with emerging motives that take develop-
mental priority,thus expanding the goals that underlie their