Word for person showing psychological projection

Word for person showing psychological projection

Is there any single word for a person who shows more psychological projection (the defence mechanism of attribution of your own undesireable qualities to someone else) than a normal person? And is there a specific term for such condition?Wikipedia link

Let me explain my question. A person showing extreme self importance is called a narcissist. So what do we call a person who shows extreme projections?

Projection is both normal (we all do it always) and (in excess) a symptom of many different psychological disorders.

There is no name for such a person, as that symptom never occurs in isolation.

It is not correct that extreme self-importance makes someone a narcissist. Again, extreme self-importance can be found in many different disorders, and narcissism has many additional symptoms.

Related Documents

Two subdivisions within psychology that I find fascinating are abnormal psychology and lifespan and human development. Abnormal psychology dives deep into the mind to diagnose and treat mental disorders individuals may have (Encyclopedia, 2012). This is a subdivision of psychology which most people think about when they hear the word “psychology.” Treatment of mental disorders plays a key role in the science aspect of psychology and its practice seeks to understand how the body affects the mind and how the mind affects the body. This symbiotic relationship is important to understand in this subdivision of psychology. Within this subdivision, there are subtopics of abnormal psychology that helps the field gain understanding into the human mind.&hellip


Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Projection, the mental process by which people attribute to others what is in their own minds. For example, individuals who are in a self-critical state, consciously or unconsciously, may think that other people are critical of them. The concept was introduced to psychology by the Austrian psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud (1856–1939), who borrowed the word projection from neurology, where it referred to the inherent capacity of neurons to transmit stimuli from one level of the nervous system to another (e.g., the retina “projects” to the occipital cortex, where raw sensory input is rendered into visual images). In contemporary psychological science the term continues to have the meaning of seeing the self in the other. This presumably universal tendency of the human social animal has both positive and negative effects. Depending on what qualities are projected and whether or not they are denied in the self, projection can be the basis of both warm empathy and cold hatred.

In projection, what is internal is seen as external. People cannot get inside the minds of others to understand someone else’s mental life, one must project one’s own experience. When someone projects what is consciously true of the self and when the projection “fits,” the person who is the object of projection may feel deeply understood. Thus, a sensitive father infers from his daughter’s facial expression that she is feeling sad he knows that when he himself is sad, his face is similar. If he names the child’s assumed emotion, she may feel recognized and comforted. Intuition, leaps of nonverbal synchronicity (as when two persons in a relationship suddenly find themselves making similar gestures or thinking of the same image simultaneously), and peak experiences of mystical union (as when one feels perfectly attuned with an idealized other person, such as a romantic partner) involve a projection of the self into the other, often with powerful emotional rewards. Neuroscientific discoveries regarding mirror neurons and right-brain-to-right-brain communication processes (in which intuitive, emotional, nonverbal, and analogical thinking is shared between caregivers and children via intonation, facial affect, and body language) are establishing the neurological bases of such long-noted projective phenomena.

On the other hand, projection frequently functions as a psychological defense against painful internal states (“I am not the person feeling this you are!”). When people project aspects of the self that are denied, unconscious, and hated and when they distort the object of projection in the process, projection can be felt as invalidating and destructive. At a social level, racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, and other malignant “othering” mindsets have been attributed at least partly to projection. There is research evidence, for example, that men with notably homophobic attitudes have higher-than-average same-sex arousal, of which they are unaware. Projection of disowned states of mind is also a central dynamic in paranoia as traditionally conceptualized. Paranoid states such as fears of persecution, irrational hatred of an individual or group, consuming jealousy in the absence of evidence of betrayal, and the conviction that a desired person desires oneself (i.e., erotomania, the psychology behind stalking) result from the projection of unconscious negative states of mind (e.g., hostility, envy, hatred, contempt, vanity, sadism, lust, greed, weakness, etc.). In other words, paranoia involves both the disowning of a personal tendency and the conviction that this tendency is “coming at” oneself from external sources.

The Austrian-born British psychoanalyst Melanie Klein (1882–1960) wrote about a primal form of projection, “projective identification,” that she assumed to derive from the earliest mental life of children, before they feel psychologically separate from caregivers. Via this process, which has become an important concept in contemporary psychoanalytic thinking, a person tries to expel a state of mind by projecting it but remains identified with what is projected, is convinced of the accuracy of the attribution, and induces in the object of projection the feelings or impulses that have been projected. For example, a man in a rage projects his anger onto his wife, whom he now sees as the angry one. He insists it is her hostility that stimulated his rage, and almost immediately his wife becomes angry. Projective identification exerts emotional pressure that evokes in the other whatever has been projected. Another example: A woman in psychotherapy experiences her therapist’s ending a session on time as a sadistic attack. She loudly berates him for abusing her, accusing him of enjoying hurting her. In response to this denunciation and its misrepresentation of his motives, the normally compassionate therapist notices that he is having sadistic thoughts. The projection has become a self-fulfilling fantasy. Because projective identification is a particularly challenging defense to deal with in psychotherapy, it has spawned an extensive psychoanalytic literature.

Contrary to widespread professional opinion, however, projective identification is not simply a defense used by people with disorders of development and personality (see also mental disorders: Personality disorders). It operates in everyday life in numerous subtle ways, many of which are not pathological. For example, when what is projected and identified with involves loving, joyful affects, a group can experience a rush of good feeling. People in love can sometimes read one another’s minds in ways that cannot be accounted for logically. Because such emotional contagion occurs ubiquitously, many contemporary psychoanalysts have reframed as “intersubjective” what was once seen as the patient’s one-way projection onto the therapist. That is, both parties in a therapeutic relationship (or any relationship) inevitably share a mutually determined emotional atmosphere.

Klein’s writing led to a general professional acknowledgment that projection has more primitive and more mature forms. In its earliest expressions, self and other are not well differentiated. In mature projection, the other is understood to have a separate subjective life, with motives that may differ from one’s own. Before age three, children tend to assume that the emotional effect of an action was its intention. When caregivers set unwelcome limits, very young children react with normal, temporary hatred and accuse the parents of hating them. A slightly older child understands that when his mother’s limit-setting angers him, her act does not necessarily mean she is angry with him. Philosophers use the term “theory of mind” to denote this capacity to see others as having independent subjectivities. Contemporary psychoanalytic theorists and researchers refer to it as “mentalization.” Although a benign use of projection is the basis for understanding others’ psychologies, in mentalization there is little distortion of the other person’s mind because there is no automatic equation of it with the mind of the observer.

Empirical studies of defense mechanisms have supported clinical observations about projection, including the idea that it is one of many universal psychological defenses that evolve and mature in normal development. Understanding projection has been critically important to psychiatry, clinical psychology, counseling, and the mental health professions generally. It has also been cited as an explanatory principle in political science, sociology, anthropology, and other social sciences.

Projective test

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Projective test, in psychology, examination that commonly employs ambiguous stimuli, notably inkblots (Rorschach Test) and enigmatic pictures (Thematic Apperception Test), to evoke responses that may reveal facets of the subject’s personality by projection of internal attitudes, traits, and behaviour patterns upon the external stimuli. Projective tests are also used, less frequently, to study learning processes. Other projective methods involve requiring subjects to build wooden block structures, complete sentences, paint with the fingers, or provide handwriting samples additional methods include association tests in which spoken words serve as the stimuli.

The usefulness and reliability of projective tests depend on a number of factors, including the extent to which identical personality interpretations can be reached by different evaluators using the same test data and the extent to which those interpretations are supported by assessments of personality from other sources (e.g., personality inventories and clinical observation). In consideration of such factors, psychologists are sharply divided over the value of projective tests, despite their prominence in both personality research and therapeutic practice.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica This article was most recently revised and updated by Adam Augustyn, Managing Editor, Reference Content.

9 Mind-Blowing Psychological Phenomena You’ve Never Heard of

Mind-boggling paradoxes, phenomena, and effects intrigue us even if there's a logical explanation for them. When you face them, you might feel that someone is interfering with the laws of nature.

Bright Side found several brain-twisting paradoxes and problems that you can test yourself and decide whether to believe or not.

9. Birthday problem

This paradox suggests that in a group of 23 people there's a 50% chance that at least 2 of them share the same birthday. In a group of 60 people, the probability reaches almost 99%.

Do you think it's absurd? That's the whole paradox. However, the mathematical calculations prove that it is actually possible.

8. The Baader-Meinhof phenomenon (frequency illusion)

Here's a simple explanation for this mind phenomenon: the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon occurs when you've just learned about the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon, and now you repeatedly notice the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon everywhere.

It's not about coincidence. Before you learn a new word, you never notice it in the whole flow of information.

7. Dropped marble sound

Many people seem to hear a weird sound at night. It's like neighbors from above dropped a marble ball and let it roll on the floor.

You can find numerous discussions of this matter on the internet, but there's still no common opinion. Most likely, concrete and pipes expand and contract during the hot and cold seasons, thus creating this sound.

6. Strange-face-in-the-mirror illusion

Italian psychologist Giovanni B. Caputo studied the illusion that is created by looking at your own reflection for a long time. Some people see their parents or fantastic creatures others see a different version of their own face.

There's no mystery, just a simple explanation for this situation. The illusion occurs when the visual system perceives the same object again and again but identifies it differently.

5. Jamais vu

Jamais vu can be literally translated from the French as never seen, and it's the opposite of déjà vu. For example, you know a certain word perfectly well but suddenly have the feeling that you're seeing it for the first time. The easiest way to create jamais vu is to repeat a word several times. You'll feel that it sounds weird and has no sense.

Jamais vu and déjà vu are still a mystery to scientists.

Here's another popular example of the Mandela Effect for you. How many people were in the car with President Kennedy? There are so many photographs of the fateful day that you might think it's ridiculous to have doubts about it.

However, most people seem to believe there were 4. In actual fact, there were 6 people in the 6-seat car: the President, the First Lady, the Governor of Texas, his wife, an unknown man, and the driver.

Projective Tests

The best known projective psychological test is the Rorschach, or inkblot test. The patient is asked to look at each blot and to say what it looks like or what it could be. Because the stimulus is ambiguous, the patient must impose his or her own structure. In doing so, thoughts, feelings, and themes, some of which are unconscious, are projected into the material. Projective tests tend to have lower validity and reliability than objective tests. That is, they are less stable, and have lower relationships with other criteria. However, the information which they provide tends to be richer and more varied.
The Rorschach test is particularly useful for detecting the types of disordered thought patterns seen in schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. The scoring of this test takes into account the popularity of the patient’s responses, the content of the responses, whether the figures are seen as moving or stationary, response complexity, whether color or shading is used, and other factors. As with most tests, there are no single responses which are seen as necessarily pathological. Response frequencies and ratios are compared to normal and abnormal averages to determine if pathology or a particular tendency is present.


Personality tests are techniques designed to measure one’s personality. They are used to diagnose psychological problems as well as to screen candidates for college and employment. There are two types of personality tests: self-report inventories and projective tests. The MMPI is one of the most common self-report inventories. It asks a series of true/false questions that are designed to provide a clinical profile of an individual. Projective tests use ambiguous images or other ambiguous stimuli to assess an individual’s unconscious fears, desires, and challenges. The Rorschach Inkblot Test, the TAT, the RISB, and the C-TCB are all forms of projective tests.

Word for person showing psychological projection - Psychology

1) An unconscious self-defence mechanism characterised by a person unconsciously attributing their own issues onto someone or something else as a form of delusion and denial.

2) A way to blame others for your own negative thoughts by repressing them and then attributing them to someone else. Due to the sorrowful nature of delusion and denial it is very difficult for the target to be able to clarify the reality of the situation.

3) A way to transfer guilt for your own thoughts, emotions and actions onto another as a way of not admitting your guilt to yourself.

1) Believing that someone else does not like you when it is indeed you that does not like them. By projecting this onto another you ascribe the negativity of the thoughts/feelings onto them so your ego does not have to admit the deficiency of your own thought processes.

2) A person in a relationship meets someone else out of spite for their partner and then forms an attachment to the person they have met they then accuse their partner of infidelity (or at least considering the idea) so that they do not have to admit to themselves or anyone else that they have already cheated in their own mind.

3) Repeatedly attacking someone with the ideas that they are: Cold, Arrogant, Selfish, Anti-social and Negative as a way of not admitting to yourself that these appear to be some of your most dominant traits.

4) Telling someone who is clearly in love with you that they are “unworthy of your love”. When in reality you have doubts within yourself that you are worthy of any love and due to this will attack and destroy any true love that exists towards and/or within you.

Telltale Signs of Cheaters

It seems like every other week another bigwig is torn apart on the national stage after being caught red-handed having what I like to call "sideage." The list is infinitely long and no one seems exempt no matter how gorgeous, intelligent or rich. Tiger Woods, General Petraeus, Elliot Spitzer, Bill Clinton, Kristen Stewart, Whoopi Goldberg, Ingrid Bergman, Elizabeth Taylor, Meg Ryan and Leann Rimes -- to name a few.

It is amazing to me how many people ignore the telltale signs only to learn that the person they shared a bed, their body and innermost dreams and secrets with has instantaneously become a "frenemy." I cannot tell you how many of my friends and clients wish they paid attention to the cheating red flags and ended the relationship sooner. After all, it is far more satisfying to discover the indiscretion yourself and devise an exit plan than to be caught off guard, deceived and dumped.

But since we obviously do not live in a perfect world (far from it!) and you are probably overwhelmed with everyday stresses, allow me to assist you in decoding the most common signs of a cheater. Hopefully after reading this, you will be able to determine whether or not you need to take steps to improve your life.

1. The Blame Game

Psychological projection is a really strange human behavior in which a person ascribes flaws to others that they deny possessing. As a result of this twisted reverse psychology, projection also happens to be a great indicator of cheating in a relationship.

For example, if your significant other is all of the sudden accusing you of sneaking around or being untrustworthy, it is probably because they are being deceitful themselves and are paranoid that you will do the same. Make sense?

2. Laying It On Thick

One way cheaters love to hide their lies is to shower those they are lying to with sweet, buttery love and affection. But underneath that unusually gooey-love exterior is oftentimes a hard, cheating core.

So if you have been noticing an extra influx of exceedingly sweet affection and thoughtful gifts, you might want to be a little cautious.

3. Social or Work Patterns Have Suddenly Changed

If he or she seems to be working unusually long hours, hanging out more with friends, or harder to get a hold of with unusually long, drawn-out explanations for such patterns, it may be a sign. And if you pay close enough attention, you might even start to notice the absences are taking on a pattern.

Most people who are in the midst of secret relationships will often start altering their schedules to match those of their elicit lovers and will unknowingly start forming routines for such trysts. So be sure to keep your eyes peeled for any kind of repetitions in odd behaviors coupled with incredulous explanations.

4. What? No Kiss?

If you notice that your usually smiley, touchy-feely, spouse is now coming home at the end of the day without giving you your usual "welcome home" kiss, he might have already been giving a little somethin' somethin' to somebody else right before.

Emotional disconnect can often be one of the most painful signs of cheating to handle. Where there was once passion and camaraderie, there is now a deafening silence that is unbearable and hurtful. If you find yourself in this situation, consider doing some detective work on your own. Voicemail, computer spyware, Skype, social media, credit card statements, bank statements and emails are a great starting point.

Oh, the joys of modern-day technology. By gracing humankind with a whole new avenue through which people can cheat on each other (just check out and, the opportunities for him or her to be fooling around with someone else via technology are endless.

My advice? If that little voice inside your head is telling you that he's acting suspicious around mobile devices and goes to unusual lengths to hide it from you, then you have reason to investigate further. What is the worst thing that could happen? You are wrong.

6. What's Wrong, Honey? Cat Got Your Tongue?

People have trouble keeping their lies straight when they are busy weaving tangled webs of deceit. If you notice that your significant other is starting to backtrack on where he has been or who he told you he was spending time with, then you need to brace yourself for the fact that he is most likely lying to you.

And if you do happen to come across actual proof that he has been lying to you about his whereabouts. RUN. The lies will only become bigger if you stick around.

7. Ditching Flannels For Lingerie? Red Flag

If your woman used to lie around the house in sweats and sleep in granny flannels and has suddenly taken a keen interest in her designer wardrobe and physique, then something is definitely brewing.

The truth is simple, when one half of a couple is thinking about leaving the other, they suddenly become interested in things like losing weight, dressing nicely, grooming, etc. because they are preparing themselves for the dating market or, worse yet. a new boy toy lover.

Should your partner make any kind of major lifestyle change, whether it is in eating habits or in attire, beware.

8. Gut Check

It is so strange to me how many people these days refuse to listen to their natural intuition. What could be more reliable than our own deep-rooted, innate sensibilities? This is why I always say that if you just can't shake the feeling that something is awry, then it probably is. Our intuitions don't lie. People do. Period.

Indirect Person Perception

Many of the personal attributes that observers may want to know about another person (e.g., whether the person is loyal, honest, or contemptible) are not directly observable. Instead, these attributes or traits must be discerned—either from observing the person’s actions (actually watching the person behave in a loyal or honest manner) or from interpreting information provided by a third party (e.g., what a roommate conveys about Jill or what the experimenter reveals). In each case, the general perception of a person is the product of inference, and the attribution theories that were proposed a half a century ago remain valid in understanding how such perceptions occur.

Observers watch what people do, and they make judgments about others based on those observations. When a psychology professor is seen responding to an upset student in a dismissive way, for example, one may infer that this occurred because of some aspect of the professor’s disposition or because of unfortunate circumstances of the interaction. Classic studies in social psychology attempted to bring similar scenarios into the laboratory. Participants in these studies judged the attitude of a hypothetical person who was described in a vignette as advocating an unpopular political position. Sometimes this action was described to have been voluntary other times, this action was described to have been compelled (e.g., an experimenter asked the person to advocate a specific position). Across all such studies, participants reported that the target’s behavior revealed his or her true attitude, even when that behavior had been coerced by the situation. Thus, observers tend to assume that behaviors convey attitudes and dispositions, and this occurs even when compelling situational grounds for that behavior are present. When perceiving the dismissive professor, therefore, observers are apt to conclude that the professor is callous, and not that the response was compelled by the situation (e.g., the next class that was already streaming into the classroom). These perceptions are called correspondent inferences, and the tendency to attribute actions to dispositional factors has been called the correspondence bias and the fundamental attribution error.

Following the initial insights, many researchers tried to understand precisely what leads to such inferences, and three factors emerged. Harold Kelley, for example, documented that dispositional inferences are especially likely when a particular behavior is (a) distinctive (most professors don’t actually respond in a dismissive manner) (b) consistent (this particular professor responds this way in and out of class) and (c) consensual (others have also observed this behavior). Jones and Davis stressed that such inferences are particularly likely when a particular behavior is unexpected (e.g., a known conservative endorsing a liberal position).

More recently, researchers have examined the psychological processes that permit these inferences. Two processes appear to be involved. The initial process is relatively reflexive and leads to dispositional inferences under most circumstances. The second process is considerably more reflective and tends to correct for the constraints imposed by a situation.

Other recent research has explored the extent to which dispositional inferences are ubiquitous. The tendency is so strong that it occurs even when people have no intention to form an impression of others and in the absence of observing actual behaviors. Indeed, much of the research in social psychology has exploited this by presenting research participants with sentences that describe a behavior. Reading about an individual who purportedly solved a mystery novel halfway through a book, for example, might lead an observer to infer that the individual is clever. These rapid judgments that imply enduring traits are typically called spontaneous trait inferences.

The attribution approach to the study of person perception revealed much about how impressions of others may emerge from observations. Yet person perception also refers to judgments that occur more directly.

Watch the video: Τι προσέχω στα πρώτα ραντεβού και στο πρώτο διάστημα μιας σχέσης.. (January 2022).