Skip to main content
Log in

A response to “Horney theory: An object relations theory”

  • Published:
The American Journal of Psychoanalysis Aims and scope

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • Horney, Karen (1945).Our Inner Conflicts. New York: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horney, Karen (1952).Neurosis and Human Growth. New York: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kernberg, Otto (1975).Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism. New York: Jason Aronson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kernberg, Otto (1976).Object Relations Theory and Clincal Psychoanalysis. New York: Jason Aronson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, Arnold (1985). The borderline diagnosis and integration of self.American Journal of Psychoanalysis 45(3).

  • Pines, Fred (1988). The four psychologies of psychoanalysis and their place in clinical work.Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 36(3).

  • Sandler, J., and Rosenblott, B. (1962). The concept of the representational world.Psychoanalytic Study of the Child 17: 128–145.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This paper was initially presented in modified form on March 3, 1991, at a Faculty Retreat of the American Institute for Psychoanalysis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mitchell, A. A response to “Horney theory: An object relations theory”. Am J Psychoanal 52, 45–49 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01253442

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01253442

Navigation