fei75766_ch05_149-178.indd 174  02/06/20 11:22 AM
Part II    Psychodynamic Theories174
How doesobject relations theory rateingenerating research? In1986, Morris 
Bellandcolleagues published theBellObject Relations Inventory (BORI), aself-
report questionnaire thatidentifies fourmain aspects ofobject relations: Alienation, 
Attachment, Egocentricity, andSocial Incompetence. Todate, onlyafewstudies 
haveusedtheBORI toempirically investigate object relations. However, attachment 
theory iscurrently generating much research. Thus, werateobject relations theory 
lowonitsability togenerate research, butwejudge attachment theory moderate to
highonthiscriterion forauseful theory.
Because object relations theory grew outoforthodox psychoanalytic theory, it
suffers from some ofthesame problems with falsification thatconfront Freud’s theory. 
Most ofitstenets arebased onwhat ishappening inside theinfant’s psyche, andthus
these assumptions cannot befalsified. Thetheory doesnotlenditself tofalsifications 
because itgenerates veryfewtestable hypotheses. Attachment theory, ontheother 
hand, rates somewhat higher onfalsification.
Perhaps themost useful feature ofobject relations theory isitsability to orga -
nizeinformation about thebehavior ofinfants. More thanmost other personality 
theorists, object relations theorists havespeculated onhowhumans gradually come 
toacquire asense ofidentity. Klein, andespecially Mahler, Bowlby, andAinsworth, 
builttheirtheories oncareful observations ofthemother–child relationship. They 
watched theinteractions between infant andmother anddrew inferences based on
what theysaw.However, beyond theearly childhood years, object relations theory 
lacks usefulness asanorganizer ofknowledge.
Asaguide to the practitioner, thetheory fares somewhat better thanitdoesin
organizing dataorsuggesting testable hypotheses. Parents ofyoung infants canlearn 
oftheimportance ofawarm, accepting, andnurturing caregiver. Psychotherapists 
mayfindobject relations theory useful notonlyinunderstanding theearly develop -
ment oftheirclients butalsoinunderstanding andworking withthetransference rela-
tionship thatclients form withthetherapist, whom theyviewasasubstitute parent.
Onthecriterion ofconsistency, eachofthetheories discussed inthischapter 
hasahighlevelofinternal consistency, butthedifferent theorists disagree among 
themselves onanumber ofpoints. Even though theyallplace primary importance on
human relationships, thedifferences among them farexceed thesimilarities.
Inaddition, werateobject relations theory lowonthecriterion ofparsimony. 
Klein, especially, usedneedlessly complex phrases andconcepts toexpress hertheory.
 Concept of Humanity
Object relations theorists generally see human personality as a product of the 
early mother–child relationship. The interaction between mother and infant lays 
the foundation for future personality development because that early interper -
sonal experience serves as a prototype for subsequent interpersonal relations. 
Klein saw the human psyche as “unstable, fluid, constantly fending off psychotic 
anxieties” (Mitchell & Black, 1995, p. 87). Moreover, “each of us struggles with 
the deep terrors of annihilation . . . and utter  abandonment” (p. 88).Final PDF to printer