Talk:Introjection

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Psychology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The mention of Paul Van Dyk's song really doesn't belong here - I wouldn't mention Beck on a page about a Dump Truck just because he wrote a song with that title. At the same time, there's no reason that a song can't get a page. It should have a page of it's own if someone's interested in making it. I wouldn't even mind hooking things up to disambiguate. There's not enough information on the artist's page or anywhere else to move this little tidbit to the right spot. At this point I guess I should've just deleted the comment and been done with it. Anyone else have input?

• Could someone write a example of how introjection mechanism works practically?
• Can someone elucidate how a person shouting "Ridiculous!" all the time is a meaningful example of introjection? BRAMO (talk) 18:21, 23 May 2019 (UTC)Reply
• The South Park reference is only helpful for people who are familiar with the scenario. I haven't seen the episodes in question and found the example useless in grasping the concept without a further explication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.200.90.42 (talk) 15:08, 1 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Is the citation style used here appropriate to Wikipedia? For example, the date is listed for "The Meaning of Introjection", but there is no link to the paper, or even a footnote with the original publication information. A link or citation about the Torok essay mentioned in the same section would also be nice.

For the second sentence in the "Relational Mechanisms" section, the citation seems unclear to me. Is it from the same work by Winnicott mentioned later? The third paragraph in this section has unclear quotation marks: where does the quote begin, and where does it end?

Finally, in the "Torok/Ferenczi" section, it is stated, "Of course, Freud had a habit of looking at relational mechanisms in negative terms." This appears to be a broad generalization - perhaps it is patently obvious to students of psychology, but as a layperson, I know that I would appreciate examples, quotations, or - if possible - links that will give me a better sense of Freud's opinions on this particular subject.

Thanks a lot. ErikaJavert (talk) 16:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

This section says: "In Freudian terms, introjection is the aspect of the ego's system of relational mechanisms which handles checks and balances from a perspective external to what one normally considers 'oneself'"
Relational mechanisms is a red link, and it is a term that is only used in this article. Anybody know a better term to replace "relational mechanisms" with?? Lova Falk talk 09:30, 6 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

I can't really find any use of that term within freudian psych, so probably best to replace it. I believe that the section is describing a defence mechanism, so that term should be a reasonable replacement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xurizuri (talk • contribs) 01:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

At present the second half of this section seems to me to be describing projective identification rather than simple introjection. A mention of the fact that introjection is one of the steps of projective identification somewhere in the article would be warranted, but it should be clearly described as such; furthermore, I do not see what projective identification has to do with learning. Anditres (talk) 17:35, 12 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

.... such as the phenomenon of transgenderism. 2600:8801:BE1C:1D00:9505:AEF1:D2F2:AE55 (talk) 19:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)Reply