Hubbry Logo
CathexisCathexisMain
Open search
Cathexis
Community hub
Cathexis
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Cathexis
Cathexis
Cathexis
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
This article is about the psychological term. For other uses, see Cathexis (disambiguation).
Not to be confused with Catharsis.
Part of a series of articles on
Psychoanalysis
Sigmund Freud's couch
Concepts
Important figures
Core psychoanalysts

Influential figures applying psychoanalysis

Important works
Core psychoanalytic texts

Influential works applying psychoanalysis

Schools of thought
Training
See also

In psychoanalysis, cathexis (or emotional investment) is defined as the process of allocation of mental or emotional energy to a person, object, or idea.[1][2]

Origin of term

[edit]

The Greek term cathexis (κάθεξις) was chosen by James Strachey to render the German term Besetzung in his translation of Sigmund Freud's complete works. Freud himself used the word "interest" in English in an early letter to Ernest Jones.[3][4]

Peter Gay objected that Strachey's use of cathexis was an unnecessarily esoteric replacement for Freud's use of Besetzung – "a word from common German speech rich in suggestive meanings, among them 'occupation' (by troops) and 'charge' (of electricity)",[4] though Gay is mistaken regarding his latter example.[A]

Usage

[edit]

Freud defined cathexis as an allocation of libido, pointing out for example how dream thoughts were charged with different amounts of affect.[5] A cathexis or allocation of emotional charge might be positive or negative, leading some of his followers to speak of a cathexis of mortido as well.[6] Freud called a group of cathected ideas a complex.[7]

Freud frequently described the functioning of psychosexual energies in quasi-physical terms,[8][need quotation to verify] representing frustration of libidinal desires, for example, as a blockage of (cathected) energies which would eventually build up and require release in alternative ways. This release could occur, for example, by way of regression and the "re-cathecting" of former positions or fixations,[5]: 123–124  or the autoerotic enjoyment (in phantasy) of former sexual objects: "object-cathexes".

Freud used the term "anti-cathexis" or counter-charge[9] to describe how the ego blocks such regressive efforts to discharge one's cathexis: that is, when the ego wishes to repress such desires. Like a steam engine, the libido's cathexis then builds up until it finds alternative outlets, which can lead to sublimation, reaction formation, or the construction of (sometimes disabling) symptoms.[5]: 123 

M. Scott Peck distinguishes between love and cathexis, with cathexis being the initial in-love phase of a relationship, and love being the ongoing commitment of care. Cathexis, to Peck, is distinguished from love by its dynamic element.

Object relations

[edit]

Freud saw the early cathexis of objects with libidinal energy as a central aspect of human development.[5]: 118,151–8  In describing the withdrawal of cathexes which accompanied the mourning process, Freud provided his major contribution to the foundation of object relations theory.[10]

Thinking

[edit]

Freud saw thinking as an experimental process involving minimal amounts of cathexis, "in the same way as a general shifts small figures about on a map".[5]: 122 

In delusions, it was the hypercathexis (or over-charging) of ideas previously dismissed as odd or eccentric which he saw as causing the subsequent pathology.[11]

Art

[edit]

Eric Berne raised the possibility that child art often represented the intensity of cathexis invested in an object, rather than its objective form.[6]: 63 

Criticism

[edit]

Critics charge that the term provides a potentially misleading neurophysiological analogy, which might be applicable to the cathexis of ideas but certainly not of objects.[1] This, however, arises from a misunderstanding of the psychoanalytic definition of objects, which does not refer to physical objects that are seen in the environment, but to the internal images of these physical objects which are created by the psyche.[citation needed]

Further ambiguity in Freud's usage emerges in the contrast between cathexis as a measurable load of (undifferentiated) libido, and as a qualitatively distinct type of affect – as in a "cathexis of longing".[1]

See also

[edit]

Explanatory notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Cathexis

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Cathexis is a fundamental concept in , referring to the investment or attachment of psychic energy—often specifically —to a person, object, idea, or mental representation. Introduced by , it describes how emotional and motivational intensity is directed toward elements in the internal or external world, forming the basis for desires, attachments, and unconscious processes. The term derives from the German Besetzung, meaning "occupation" or "investment," and was rendered into English as "cathexis" by translator to capture this dynamic allocation of . Freud first conceptualized cathexis in his 1895 Project for a Scientific Psychology, where he envisioned it as the charging of neurons with excitatory to explain psychological phenomena like and . Over the subsequent decades, from 1893 to 1938, the idea evolved significantly, shifting from a neurophysiological model to a purely one after Freud abandoned his early neurological framework. In works such as (1900) and (1923), cathexis became integral to his topographic and structural models of the mind, distinguishing between free-floating in the unconscious and bound in the ego, as well as positive cathexis (attraction) versus anticathexis (repressive counter-investment by the ego to neutralize unacceptable impulses). This development highlighted cathexis as a core mechanism linking drives to object relations, influencing phenomena like (decathexis, or withdrawal of from lost objects) and symptom formation. In clinical psychoanalysis, cathexis underscores the therapeutic process by illuminating how patients invest energy in transference objects or resistances, enabling analysts to trace unconscious conflicts. Although rooted in Freud's , the concept has been critiqued and refined by later theorists, such as in , where it extends to interpersonal attachments beyond libidinal drives alone. Its enduring relevance lies in explaining the energetic basis of motivation and , bridging early aspirations with modern psychodynamic practice.

Etymology and Historical Development

Etymology

The term "cathexis" derives from the noun káthexis (κάθεξις), meaning "holding" or "retention," which stems from the verb katechéō (κατέχω), signifying "to hold fast," "to occupy," or "to restrain." In Freud's original German writings, the concept was expressed using the everyday word Besetzung, which connotes "occupation," "investment," or "charge" in the sense of endowing something with energy. The English term "cathexis" first appeared in psychoanalytic literature in 1922, in 's translation of Freud's Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego, to capture the idea of psychic energy allocation within Freud's economic model of the mind. It was later standardized as the preferred rendering of Besetzung by in the Standard Edition of Freud's works (1953–1966), though alternatives like "" or "charge" have occasionally been proposed or used in other contexts to convey the notion of libidinal attachment.

Freud's Formulation

Sigmund Freud first formulated the concept of cathexis in his 1895 Project for a Scientific Psychology, an unpublished manuscript where he described it as the charging of neurons with excitatory energy (Q) to explain psychological processes like memory and motivation. The term also appeared that year in Studies on Hysteria, co-authored with Josef Breuer. Freud elaborated the concept in The Interpretation of Dreams (1900), where he described it as the attachment of psychic energy to elements within dreams, facilitating the process of wish-fulfillment by investing libidinal energy in dream-thoughts and their representations. In this work, cathexis served as a mechanism to explain how unconscious desires gain expression through the censorship and displacement characteristic of dream formation, with energy flowing to both manifest and latent content. Freud further evolved the concept in Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905), linking cathexis explicitly to the distribution of across sexual objects and aims during . Here, cathexis represented the investment of libidinal energy in specific body zones or external objects, underscoring how sexual instincts organize around these attachments from infancy onward, with implications for both normal and perverse manifestations of sexuality. The term received deeper elaboration in Freud's metapsychological papers, particularly in The Unconscious (), where he distinguished between mobile and bound forms of cathexis to account for the dynamics of repression and . Mobile cathexis refers to freely flowing psychic energy that can shift rapidly between ideas, typical of primary process thinking in the unconscious, while bound cathexis involves energy tied to stable structures in the , aiding secondary process regulation. This distinction highlighted how anticathexes from the conscious system counter unconscious impulses by binding energy to prevent breakthrough. Freud revisited and expanded these ideas in (1920), emphasizing the role of cathexis in the compulsion to repeat and the binding of traumatic excitations. Within his "economic point of view" of , cathexis functioned as a quantitative model for flow, conceptualizing the mind as a where investments of determine the intensity and direction of mental processes, akin to hydraulic pressures seeking equilibrium. This economic framework positioned cathexis as central to understanding the distribution and transformation of instinctual energies across the .

Core Concepts in Psychoanalysis

Definition and Mechanisms

In psychoanalysis, cathexis refers to the investment of libidinal energy, or psychic quantity, in particular mental representations such as persons, objects, ideas, or bodily zones, thereby endowing them with emotional significance and motivational force. This process, originally conceptualized by Freud as the "Besetzung" or occupation of neurons with excitatory energy (Qη), transforms neutral psychical elements into charged components of the mental apparatus, facilitating , , and action. The mechanisms of cathexis involve the dynamic allocation, withdrawal, and redistribution of this within the psyche. Allocation occurs when is directed toward specific representations, such as cathecting a image during to simulate satisfaction and reduce tension. Withdrawal, or decathexis, follows the principle of neuronal , divesting elements of to discharge accumulated tension and restore equilibrium, as seen in the ego's temporary retraction of cathexes during . Redistribution enables the flow of between elements via facilitations or displacements, allowing adaptive shifts, such as redirecting from a repressed idea to a substitute formation. These processes underpin by propelling the psyche toward tension reduction through goal-directed activity and contribute to affect formation by modulating the intensity of or unpleasure signals arising from cathected states. Specific variations include hypercathexis, an excessive investment of in an already cathected element, often signaling fixation or intensified defense, as when the ego applies additional to a threatening idea to reinforce repression and prevent its breakthrough into . Conversely, hypocathexis denotes reduced or insufficient investment, indicating avoidance or detachment, such as the diminished directed toward external objects in narcissistic states where is withdrawn to preserve self-equilibrium. Freud's original formulation positioned cathexis as a foundational economic for understanding instinctual binding to ideas. Unlike general emotions, which primarily involve qualitative affective experiences, cathexis specifically addresses the quantitative, economic dimension of psychic energy distribution, emphasizing how libidinal charges determine the strength and persistence of mental attachments rather than their subjective feeling alone.

Libidinal and Anticathexis

Libidinal cathexis refers to the positive investment of psychic energy, specifically libido derived from the sexual or life instincts (Eros), into external objects, internal representations, or ideas, thereby fostering feelings of desire, attachment, or love. This form of cathexis directs libidinal energy toward objects that hold emotional significance, enabling the expression of instinctual drives in a manner that promotes psychological connection and satisfaction. In Freud's model of psychic energy, libidinal cathexis represents the outflow of this vital force from the id toward conscious or preconscious elements, contrasting with more neutral investments of interest. Anticathexis, in opposition, constitutes the ego's counter-investment of energy to oppose or neutralize libidinal cathexis, serving as a key mechanism in repression and defense against unacceptable impulses. Introduced in Freud's 1915 paper "Repression," anticathexis is described as an unceasing counter-pressure that binds psychic energy to prevent the breakthrough of repressed material into , thereby maintaining ego equilibrium. This process exemplifies defense mechanisms, such as reaction-formation in obsessional , where the ego deploys anticathexis to transform hostile or libidinal trends into their opposites, avoiding direct confrontation with prohibited desires. The dynamic interplay between libidinal cathexis and anticathexis is fundamental to the formation of symptoms in neuroses, where an imbalance—such as excessive anticathexis to suppress strong libidinal attachments—leads to the displacement of energy into substitute formations like phobias or compulsions. In anxiety hysteria, for instance, the repression of a libidinal cathexis toward a forbidden object (e.g., a parental figure) prompts anticathexis, resulting in the symptom of phobia as a compromise that binds the unbound anxiety. This equilibrium of opposing cathexes ensures the stability of the psychic apparatus but at the cost of symptomatic expression when the counter-forces prove insufficient or overly rigid.

Theoretical Applications

Object Relations Theory

In object relations theory, cathexis is reconceptualized as the libidinal investment in internal representations of relational objects, extending Freud's drive-based model to emphasize early interpersonal dynamics. , developing her ideas from the 1920s through the 1950s, integrated cathexis into her framework of unconscious phantasies, where infants cathect internal objects such as the "good breast" (nurturing) or "bad breast" (frustrating), derived from innate aggressive and libidinal drives. These phantasies drive defensive mechanisms like splitting—dividing objects into idealized and persecutory parts—and projection, where unwanted aspects of the self are expelled into external or internal objects to manage anxiety./05:_Neo-Freudian_Perspectives_on_Personality/5.03:_Object_Relations_Theory) Klein's seminal contributions, as outlined in works like Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms (1946), posit that such cathexes form the basis of the paranoid-schizoid position, influencing lifelong relational patterns. A key distinction in Klein's model is between partial and total object cathexis, reflecting developmental shifts in how libidinal energy is allocated. Partial object cathexis predominates in early infancy, focusing on fragmented aspects of the (e.g., as a satisfying or depriving ) without integrating the whole , which fosters splitting to preserve good objects from bad ones. As development progresses to the depressive position around 4-6 months, cathexis evolves toward total objects, enabling the to perceive the as a unified whole with ambivalent qualities, thus promoting integration and guilt over aggressive phantasies. This progression underscores cathexis's role in modulating and fostering reality-based relations, with failures leading to persistent partial cathexes in pathological states. Ronald Fairbairn further adapted cathexis in the 1940s, shifting emphasis from innate drives to environmental influences on object-seeking, where libidinal energy is primarily invested in relationships rather than tension discharge. In his model, detailed in Psychoanalytic Studies of the Personality (1952), the ego splits in response to frustrating environments, forming internalized "bad objects" that are cathected to maintain attachments, even at the cost of self-pathology; this prioritizes relational needs over Freudian drive satisfaction. Fairbairn viewed cathexis as dynamically linking endopsychic structures, where exciting and rejecting object relations absorb libidinal energy, explaining phenomena like masochistic bonds. Cathexis plays a central role in attachment formation within , as the of psychic energy in relational objects shapes and vulnerability to disorders like borderline states. Early disruptions in cathecting primary caregivers lead to unstable internal representations, fostering intense, ambivalent attachments characterized by . In borderline pathology, excessive cathexis toward partial or persecutory objects perpetuates splitting and , resulting in relational instability and identity diffusion, as evidenced in clinical studies linking unresolved attachments to heightened emotional in feared abandonments. Fundamentally, cathexis serves as a bridge between the id's instinctual energies and the ego's relational structures, facilitating the formation of internalized representations that organize the psyche. In this view, libidinal investments transform raw drives into dynamic object relations, allowing the ego to mediate between unconscious impulses and external through ongoing cathexes of self-other imagos.

Thinking and Repression

In Freudian , thinking is conceptualized as a involving the of , or cathexis, in mental elements such as ideas and representations. Primary thinking, characteristic of the unconscious, operates through the free mobility of cathexis, where can readily shift between ideas via mechanisms like displacement and , allowing for the fulfillment of wishes without regard to constraints. This mobility enables the rapid association and transformation of content but lacks the structured regulation needed for adaptive . In contrast, secondary thinking, associated with the and conscious systems, relies on bound cathexis, where is fixed or inhibited to prevent immediate discharge, facilitating logical, -oriented thought and the postponement of . The interaction between cathexis and repression profoundly shapes thought formation, as outlined in Freud's 1915 paper "Repression." Here, repression entails the withdrawal of cathexis from unacceptable ideas while retaining unconscious cathexis, necessitating an ongoing anticathexis—a counter-investment of —to maintain the barrier against conscious . This anticathexis prevents the full cathexis of repressed ideas, resulting in partial breakthroughs that manifest as compromise formations, such as neurotic symptoms, where distorted derivatives of the repressed gain limited access to awareness. Freud likened this dynamic to a delicate balance of forces, where excessive pressure from the repressed could overwhelm the counter-pressure, leading to symptomatic expressions that indirectly satisfy prohibited impulses. A specific manifestation of cathexis dynamics in appears in obsessional , where thought inhibition arises through decathexis—the deliberate withdrawal of energy from certain ideas to avoid conflict. In such cases, the ego deploys anticathexis to neutralize threatening thoughts, but this overinvestment depletes available energy for normal , producing characteristic doubts, indecisiveness, and obsessive ruminations as the mind struggles with inhibited associations. Freud observed this in clinical examples, noting how patients experience profound mental blockage, as the energy bound in defensive counter-cathexes diverts from productive thinking. Freud's model of cathexis draws an to neural excitation, portraying it as a "charge" of akin to flowing through neural pathways, where ideas become activated or inhibited based on the quantity and direction of this excitatory investment. This hydrodynamic and electrical underscores how cathectic processes "energize" mental elements, enabling the flow of thought while repression acts as a regulatory valve to manage potentially disruptive excitations.

Cultural and Interdisciplinary Extensions

In Art and Sublimation

In Sigmund Freud's , sublimation represents a key mechanism whereby libidinal energy, or cathexis, is redirected from direct sexual aims toward socially acceptable and culturally productive outlets, such as artistic creation. This process transforms potentially forbidden or disruptive impulses into higher forms of expression, allowing for the discharge of psychic tension without violating societal norms. Freud first elaborated this concept in his Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905), where he described how excessive sexual excitations can be diverted through sublimation to enhance psychical efficiency and contribute to cultural achievements, explicitly identifying artistic activity as one such origin. A prominent example of this dynamic appears in Freud's analysis of 's genius in the essay Leonardo da Vinci and a of His Childhood (1910). Here, Freud posited that Leonardo's intense infantile attachment to his mother, symbolized in the childhood fantasy of the , led to a fixation of libidinal that was later sublimated into insatiable and artistic productivity. Rather than resulting in , this redirected energy fueled Leonardo's creative output, enabling him to channel homosexual —stemming from early maternal bonds—into paintings and inventions that glorified motherhood and nature, thus resolving underlying conflicts through aesthetic form. In the realm of , Freud extended cathexis to the viewer's engagement with , where the audience invests libidinal energy in the artistic object, fostering and providing a vicarious discharge of tension. As outlined in Creative Writers and Day-Dreaming (), the artist's phantasy evokes identification in the spectator, allowing shared emotional release akin to play, without the of personal day-dreams; this cathectic investment bridges the creator's sublimated impulses with the audience's appreciative response, unifying and reality. Post-Freudian analysts, such as Hanna Segal, built on these ideas in the mid-20th century by viewing symbolism in as cathected representations that facilitate the resolution of internal conflicts. In her seminal paper "Notes on Symbol Formation" (), Segal argued that mature —formed in the depressive position—displace aggression and guilt from original objects onto artistic forms, recreating lost or damaged internal objects and thereby lessening anxiety through sublimatory processes. This perspective emphasizes how cathexis in symbolic not only expresses but also integrates split aspects of the psyche, extending Freud's framework to clinical and aesthetic applications.

Modern Psychological Interpretations

In contemporary psychology, the concept of cathexis has been extended to , where it parallels the emotional bonding processes described by from the 1960s onward. Secure attachments facilitate healthy cathexis, enabling positive emotional investment in relationships, whereas insecure attachments, often stemming from inconsistent caregiving, can hinder such investments and lead to relational difficulties. Bowlby adapted Freudian notions of object cathexis into a biological framework, emphasizing innate behavioral systems for proximity-seeking rather than purely psychic energy, thus linking cathexis to the formation of enduring emotional bonds. Modern interpretations in emotion regulation draw on affective neuroscience to explore the neural correlates of cathexis as emotional investment. Research in the and has proposed connections between cathexis and brain networks involved in and , such as the for unbound cathexis and task-positive networks for directed emotional energy. These findings bridge psychoanalytic ideas with evidence, suggesting that cathexis modulates emotional processing in regions like the and during goal-oriented affective experiences. Computational models from the , such as the Cathexis system developed by Jaime Vásquez, adapted Freudian libidinal to simulate synthetic in autonomous agents, using threshold-based networks to generate and influence behavior based on emotional states. This approach demonstrated how cathectic mechanisms could drive in AI by allocating "energy" to motivational goals, influencing subsequent applications in . Recent discussions in , particularly around 2024-2025, have revived cathexis in trauma therapy, especially for processing and loss. In interventions for traumatic , de-cathexis—withdrawing libidinal energy from lost objects—is reframed as a therapeutic goal to alleviate persistent attachments exacerbating post-traumatic symptoms, integrating psychoanalytic principles with evidence-based protocols. Post-2000 interdisciplinary applications in emphasize cathexis for goal-directed energy allocation, viewing it as a mechanism for channeling emotional resources toward and resilience. Models inspired by free energy principles recast cathexis and de-cathexis as adaptive processes minimizing in pursuit of valued outcomes, enhancing in therapeutic contexts focused on .

Criticisms and Contemporary Views

Internal Psychoanalytic Critiques

Within the psychoanalytic tradition, Jacques Lacan offered a significant critique of cathexis in the 1950s, contending that the concept retained an excessively biological orientation rooted in Freud's economic model, which obscured the symbolic and structural aspects of psychic life. Lacan argued that cathexis, with its emphasis on libidinal investment as a quantifiable energy attachment, lacked the precision needed for a mature structural theory, proposing instead the objet petit a—a remainder of the Real that functions as the cause of desire without reducing it to biological hydraulics. This shift highlighted cathexis's limitations in addressing the subject's alienation in the symbolic order, where desire circulates around lack rather than mere energetic occupation. Building on such concerns, later analysts like Roy Schafer in the 1970s further criticized the overreliance on psychic energy inherent in cathexis, portraying Freud's hydraulic model as a useful rather than a literal mechanism. Schafer contended that this framework encouraged vague quantifications of mental processes, such as "degrees of cathexis," which hindered clinical precision and interpretive depth by prioritizing mechanical discharge over narrative action and in the patient's experience. By advocating an "action language" for , Schafer sought to move beyond these energetic metaphors, emphasizing interpersonal and contextual dynamics instead. A related point of contention arose from James Strachey's editorial choices in translating Freud's works during the , where the "cathexis" was introduced to render the German Besetzung (occupation or investment), leading to inconsistencies that fueled internal debates about fidelity to Freud's intent. Critics noted that Strachey's scientistic rendering amplified the biological and energetic connotations, potentially distorting Freud's more fluid, descriptive usage and complicating the concept's integration into evolving psychoanalytic discourse. This translational intervention, while standardizing terminology, inadvertently reinforced ambiguities in cathexis's application across theoretical schools. The internal evolution of psychoanalysis also reflected critiques of cathexis through the lens of , as exemplified by Hartmann's work in , which diluted its original drive-centric focus in favor of the ego's adaptive capacities. Hartmann's introduction of a conflict-free ego sphere shifted emphasis from libidinal or aggressive cathexes as primary motivators to neutralized energies supporting autonomous ego functions, such as and reality-testing, thereby broadening cathexis beyond instinctual conflict to encompass everyday . This reconfiguration, while enriching the theory, was seen by some as diminishing the concept's explanatory power for core psychodynamic tensions.

Empirical and Scientific Limitations

One major empirical limitation of the concept of cathexis lies in its lack of testability, as it posits the allocation of "psychic energy" without providing measurable or observable criteria. , in his seminal 1954 critique of , argued that terms like cathexis and psychic energy are inherently vague, representing unquantifiable "available quantities" that evade scientific scrutiny and hinder behavioral analysis. This view aligns with broader dismissals in , where Karl Popper's 1963 analysis characterized Freudian constructs, including cathexis, as unfalsifiable due to their post-hoc adaptability to any evidence, rendering them non-scientific. Neuroscientific research further underscores these gaps, as (fMRI) studies from the 2000s onward have mapped activity associated with emotional attachment—such as activations in the ventral striatum and during social bonding—but fail to validate the specific Freudian mechanism of libidinal energy investment proposed in cathexis. Instead, these findings are more parsimoniously explained through processes, particularly dopamine-mediated reward systems that facilitate attachment and without invoking metaphysical energies. Such alternative models highlight how cathexis remains disconnected from contemporary , limiting its explanatory power. The American Psychological Association's Dictionary of Psychology (2018 edition) defines cathexis as the psychoanalytic investment of psychic energy in an object or idea, framing it as a classical term rooted in Freud's rather than a tool for current diagnostic or therapeutic practice. Recent reviews, such as a 2024 analysis of psychoanalytic contributions to evidence-based , note that while psychodynamic approaches show some efficacy, traditional concepts like cathexis lack robust empirical backing compared to therapies like (CBT), which emphasize testable and behavioral change. This diminished relevance is evident in clinical guidelines, where CBT dominates for conditions involving due to its superior evidence base. A broader limitation is cathexis's oversight of cultural variations in emotional investment, as Freudian theory assumes universal psychic dynamics underexplored in diverse contexts. reveals significant differences in emotion regulation—for instance, interdependent cultures (e.g., East Asian) prioritize suppression and relational in more than independent Western cultures—suggesting that cathexis's model of energy allocation may not generalize beyond its Eurocentric origins.

References

  1. https://dictionary.apa.org/object-cathexis
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3317371/
  3. https://www.psychomedia.it/rapaport-klein/modell02.htm
  4. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325295480_Cathexis_Clinical_implications_of_a_Central_Freudian_Concept
  5. https://dictionary.apa.org/anticathexis
  6. https://dictionary.apa.org/decathexis
  7. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000306519304100303
  8. https://www.etymonline.com/word/cathexis
  9. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cathexis
  10. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095555226
  11. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1551806X.2024.2429822
  12. https://www.encyclopedia.com/psychology/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/strachey-james-beaumont-1887-1967
  13. https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Freud/Dreams/dreams.pdf
  14. https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Freud/Dreams/dreams7b.htm
  15. https://ia802907.us.archive.org/17/items/SigmundFreud/Sigmund%20Freud%20%5B1905%5D%20Three%20Essays%20on%20the%20Theory%20of%20Sexuality%20%28James%20Strachey%20translation%2C%201955%29.pdf
  16. https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~cavitch/pdf-library/Freud_SE_Three_Essays_complete.pdf
  17. https://web.english.upenn.edu/~cavitch/pdf-library/Freud_Unconscious.pdf
  18. https://dravni.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Freud-S.-1915.-The-Unconscious.-.pdf
  19. https://bgsp.edu/app/uploads/2014/12/Freud-S-Beyond-the-pleasure-principle.pdf
  20. https://nosubject.com/Talk:Cathexis
  21. https://bpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.psu.edu/dist/9/19778/files/2021/12/freud-project_for_scientific_psychology.pdf
  22. https://nosubject.com/Hypercathexis
  23. https://www.mhweb.org/mpc_course/brenner5.pdf
  24. https://www.encyclopedia.com/medicine/diseases-and-conditions/pathology/cathexis
  25. https://dravni.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Freud-S-1915.-Repression.pdf
  26. https://pages.uoregon.edu/vburris/soc615/310freud.pdf
  27. https://bgsp.edu/app/uploads/2014/12/FreudS-Inhibitions-symptoms-and-anxiety.pdf
  28. https://pep-web.org/browse/document/ijp.059.0285a
  29. https://nosubject.com/Object
  30. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/am/pii/S0014385520301092
  31. https://tcf-website-media-library.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/20131935/An-Introduction-To-Object-Relations-1997-Chap-3.pdf
  32. https://web.english.upenn.edu/~cavitch/pdf-library/Fairbairn_Repression.pdf
  33. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1857277/
  34. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273593457_Object_Relations_Treatment_of_a_Woman_With_Borderline_Personality_Disorder_From_a_Mahlerian_Perspective_A_Case_Illustration
  35. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4076885/
  36. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00666
  37. https://web.english.upenn.edu/~cavitch/pdf-library/Freud_SE_Three_Essays_complete.pdf
  38. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci:_a_Psychosexual_Study_of_an_Infantile_Reminiscence
  39. https://psyartjournal.com/article/show/coates-finding_fantasia_leonardo_da_vinci_sigmu
  40. https://bgsp.edu/app/uploads/2014/12/Freud-Creative-Writers-and-Day-Dreaming.pdf
  41. https://dravni.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Segal-H.-1957.-Notes-on-Symbol-Formation.pdf
  42. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/becoming-unstuck/202502/the-cathexis-connection-deepen-intimacy-and-strengthen-love
  43. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273311869_Berne%27s_Theory_of_Cathexis_and_Its_Links_to_Modern_Neuroscience
  44. https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/10651/36270354-MIT.pdf?sequence=2
  45. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07481187.2025.2523644
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9630462/
  47. https://www.davidbardschwarz.com/pdf/evans.pdf
  48. https://www.scribd.com/document/764407372/Roy-Schafer-a-new-language-for-psychoanalysis
  49. https://fromm-online.org/wp-content/uploads/excerpts/Hartmann_H_1964_B-028-Ex.pdf
  50. https://www.jstor.org/stable/21512
  51. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/is-freudian-psychoanalytic-theory-really-falsifiable/A03E14205CAA392B17F59CEE73C1213D
  52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3398354/
  53. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2632330/
  54. https://dictionary.apa.org/cathexis
  55. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10879-024-09617-x
  56. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00004/full
  57. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4341898/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.