Internal and external as a psychological problem. Ammon's I-structural test

Ammon's I-structural test (German: Ich-Struktur-Test nach Ammon, abbr. ISTA) is a clinical test technique developed by G. Ammon in 1997 based on the concept of dynamic psychiatry (1976) and adapted by the NIPNI. Bekhtereva Yu.A. Tupitsyn and his employees. Also, based on the test, the Mental Health Assessment Methodology was subsequently developed.

Theoretical basis

According to Ammon's personality structure theory, mental processes are based on relationships, and personality structure is a reflection of this set of relationships. The structure of personality and psyche is determined by a set of “I-functions” expressed to varying degrees, which together make up identity. Therefore, according to Ammon, “mental disorders are essentially diseases of identity.” The central, core structures of the “I” are not conscious; they are complex elements that are in constant interaction with each other and the environment. It follows from this that a change in one Self-function always entails a change in another Self-function.

According to the same theory, mental disorders represent a spectrum of pathological conditions that correspond to the existing type of organization of the personality structure. Within this structure, mental disorders are ranked as follows: endogenous mental disorders, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, are considered the most severe, followed by personality disorders, then neuroses, up to healthy, adequately structured personalities. For the same symptoms: addiction, obsessions, etc. - There may be different types of personality damage.

The cause of identity disorders and predisposition to the development of disorders, according to Ammon, are disrupted interpersonal relationships in significant social groups, primarily in the parental family, as a result of which there is no adequate integrative development of self-functions and general harmonization of the personality. Thus, Ammon's theory is an attempt to explain the etiology and pathogenesis of mental disorders from the point of view of psychodynamic concepts subjected to rational processing.

The main task in developing the test was to operationalize how predominantly unconscious personality structures find their phenomenological expression in attitudes, attitudes and behaviors. The test items describe options for situations that could arise in group interpersonal interaction. The unconscious part of the “I” manifests itself in self-assessment of experiences and behavior in such situations.

Internal structure

The test consists of 220 statements, with each of which the test taker must express his agreement or disagreement. Statements are grouped into 18 scales; questions between scales do not overlap.

The scales, in turn, are grouped into six main self-functions, which they are aimed at diagnosing. These are Aggression, Anxiety/fear, External delimitation of the Self, Internal delimitation of the Self, Narcissism and Sexuality. Each of these functions, according to Ammon, can be constructive, destructive and deficient - which is measured by the corresponding scales (for example, constructive Aggression, destructive Sexuality, deficient Narcissism).

Brief description of I-functions

1. Aggression within the framework of the concept of dynamic psychiatry, it is understood as an active appeal to things and people, as a primary focus on the world around us and openness to it, necessary to satisfy its needs for communication and novelty. This includes the ability to network, have a healthy curiosity, actively explore the outside world, and persevere in achieving goals. The concept of aggressiveness also includes the potential of a person’s activity and his ability to realize it. Aggression is formed within the framework of primary symbiotic relationships within the primary group. As a result of the indifferent or hostile attitude of the primary group towards the child, he develops a corresponding experience of aggression - destructive or deficient.
2. Anxiety/Fear is a self-function that preserves personal identity in crisis situations, integrating new experience into the structure of the personality. As a regulatory function, it ensures creativity in its moderate intensity, i.e. change and flexible ordering of the integrity of the “I”. In pathological forms, it can completely block the activity of the individual, or deprive him of feedback about the consequences of actions. Anxiety develops normally if the golden mean is observed between protecting the child from danger and stimulating him to take risks. In the case of an overprotective position of primary society, the child is deprived of the opportunity to independently enrich his life experience; in an indifferent environment, a real assessment of the consequences of action and/or inaction is not formed.
3. External self-delimitation is a function that allows the individual to realize his separateness, uniqueness, first of all, from the primary object. As a result of this, true interpersonal interaction becomes possible, the perception of others as individuals. If this function is underdeveloped, the entire “I” remains poorly differentiated, since in essence, the personality is deprived of the ability to have true relationships.
4. Internal self-delimitation is a function that regulates intrapsychic processes, differentiating logic and emotionality, conscious and unconscious parts of the personality, actual experiences from traces of existing experience. Thus, the internal I-delimitation provides the possibility of the existence of a complexly organized personality.
5. Narcissism determines a person’s attitude towards himself, a sense of independence of value and significance, on the basis of which interaction with the outside world is built. This applies to both the sense of value of oneself as a whole and individual parts of the body (for example, hands), mental functions (for example, emotional experiences), social roles, etc. In the case of pathological relationships in significant social groups, narcissism acquires pathological expression, as a result of which a person, for example, can flee from reality in the world of his own fantasies.

Brief description of the content of the scales

Constructive	Destructive	Scarce
Aggression
Purposeful and connection-promoting activity regarding oneself, others, objects and spiritual aspects. The ability to maintain relationships and solve problems, form your own point of view. Actively building your own life	Misdirected, interrupting communication. destructive activity regarding oneself, other people, objects and spiritual tasks. Dysregulated aggression, destructive outbursts, devaluation of other people, cynicism, revenge	A general lack of activity, contact with oneself, other people, things and spiritual aspects. Passivity, withdrawal, indifference, spiritual emptiness. Avoiding competition and constructive argument
Anxiety/Fear
The ability to feel anxiety, process it, and act appropriately to the situation. General activation of the individual, realistic assessment of danger	An overwhelming fear of death or abandonment that paralyzes behavior and communication. Avoidance of new life experiences, developmental delay	Inability to perceive fear in oneself and others, lack of protective function and regulation of behavior when there is a danger signal
External delimitation of the Self
Flexible access to the feelings and interests of others, the ability to distinguish between “Self” and “Not-Self”. Regulating the relationship between oneself and the outside world, between distance and closeness	Rigid closeness regarding the feelings and interests of others. Lack of emotional involvement and willingness to compromise. Emotionality, self-isolation	Inability to refuse others, to differentiate oneself from others. Chameleon-like adjustment to the feelings and points of view of other people, social hyperadaptability
Internal delimitation of the Self
Flexible, situationally adequate access to your unconscious sphere, to your feelings and needs. The ability to dream. Fantasies do not completely leave the soil of reality. Ability to distinguish between present and past	Lack of access to the sphere of one’s own unconscious, a rigid barrier regarding one’s feelings and needs. Inability to dream, poverty of imagination and emotions, lack of connection with the story of one's life	The absence of a boundary between the conscious and unconscious spheres, influxes of unconscious experiences. Being at the mercy of feelings, dreams and fantasies. Disturbances in concentration and sleep.
Narcissism
A positive and reality-appropriate attitude towards oneself, a positive assessment of one’s importance, abilities, interests, one’s appearance, recognition of the desirability of satisfying one’s significant needs, acceptance of one’s weaknesses	Unrealistic self-esteem, withdrawal into one’s inner world, negativism, frequent grievances and a feeling of being misunderstood by others. Inability to accept criticism and emotional support from others	Lack of contact with oneself, a positive attitude towards oneself, recognition of one’s own worth. Giving up your own interests and needs. Often goes unnoticed and forgotten
Sexuality
The ability to enjoy sexual contacts while at the same time being able to give pleasure to a sexual partner, freedom from fixed sexual roles, the absence of rigid sexual stereotypes, the ability to flexible agreement based on a felt understanding of the partner.	Inability to have deep, intimate relationships. Intimacy is perceived as a burdensome obligation or a threat to the loss of autistic autonomy, and is therefore avoided or terminated through substitution. Sexual relationships are retrospectively perceived as traumatic, harmful, or degrading.	It is expressed by the absence of sexual desires, the poverty of erotic fantasies, the perception of sexual relations as unworthy of a person and deserving of disgust. A low assessment of one's body image and one's sexual attractiveness is common, as is a tendency to devalue the sexual attractiveness of others.

Detailed description of the content of the scales

Aggression

Constructive aggression is understood as an active, active approach to life, inquisitiveness and healthy curiosity, the ability to establish productive interpersonal contacts and maintain them, despite possible contradictions, the ability to form one’s own life goals and objectives and realize them even in unfavorable life circumstances, to have and defend their ideas, opinions, points of view, thereby entering into constructive discussions. Constructive aggression presupposes the presence of a developed empathic ability, a wide range of interests, and a rich fantasy world. Constructive aggression is associated with the ability to openly express one’s emotional experiences and is a prerequisite for creative transformation of the environment, one’s own development and learning.

Individuals who show high scores on the scale of constructive aggression are characterized by activity, initiative, openness, sociability, and creativity. They are capable of constructively overcoming difficulties and interpersonal conflicts, sufficiently highlight their own main goals and interests and fearlessly defend them in constructive interaction with others. Their activity, even in confrontational situations, takes into account the interests of their partners, so they, as a rule, are able to reach compromise solutions without compromising personally significant goals, that is, without compromising their own identity.

With low scores on the scale, there may be a decrease in activity, a lack of ability to conduct a productive dialogue and constructive discussion, a lack of need to change living conditions, the formation of one’s own personally significant goals, a tendency to avoid any confrontation due to fear of breaking a symbiotic relationship or due to the lack of necessary skills in conflict resolution. They are also characterized by a reluctance to “experiment” and an undeveloped ability to adequately respond to emotional experiences in interpersonal situations. With low scores on the constructive aggression scale, the severity of scale scores on the other two “aggressive” scales is of particular importance for interpretation. It is the ratio of the scales of “destructive” and “deficit” aggression that provides the key to understanding the nature of the “constructive” deficit.

Destructive aggression is understood as a reactive reformation of initially constructive aggression due to special unfavorable conditions in the primary group, the parental family; in other words, destructiveness is a certain deformation of the normal ability to actively interact with the outside world, people and objects. Arising due to the hostile, rejected attitude of the primary group and, above all, the mother towards the child’s needs in gaining new life experience, i.e. psychological mastery of a gradually opening reality, possible only under the protection of primary symbiosis, the destruction of aggression expresses an internalized ban on one’s own autonomy and identity. Thus, the primary potential of activity cannot be realized in the present objective world, otherwise aggression does not find an adequate human relationship in which it could be used. Subsequently, this manifests itself as destruction directed against oneself (one’s goals, plans, etc.) or the environment. In this case, the most significant feature becomes the actual situational inadequacy of aggression (in intensity, direction, method or circumstances of manifestation) to the complex interpersonal space of human relations.

In behavior, destructive aggression is manifested by a tendency to destroy contacts and relationships, in destructive actions up to unexpected breakthroughs of violence, a tendency to verbal expression of anger and rage, destructive actions or fantasies, a desire for forceful solutions to problems, adherence to destructive ideologies, a tendency to devaluation (emotional and mental) of other people and interpersonal relationships, vindictiveness, cynicism. In cases where aggression does not find an external object for its expression, it can be directed towards oneself, manifesting itself as suicidal tendencies, social neglect, tendencies to self-harm or a predisposition to accidents.

Individuals who show high scores on this scale are characterized by hostility, conflict, and aggressiveness. They, as a rule, are not able to maintain friendly relations for a long time, are prone to confrontation for the sake of confrontation, exhibit excessive rigidity in discussions, in conflict situations strive for the “symbolic” destruction of the enemy, experience pleasure from contemplating an insulted or humiliated “enemy”, and are distinguished by vindictiveness and vindictiveness and cruelty. Aggression can manifest itself both in open outbursts of anger, impulsiveness and explosiveness, and can be expressed in excessive demands, irony or sarcasm. The energy that needs to be realized manifests itself in destructive fantasies or nightmares. Violations of emotional and, especially, volitional control, which are temporary or relatively permanent, are also typical for such individuals. Even in cases where the observed behavior of individuals with high scores on this scale reveals an exclusively heteroaggressive orientation, a real decrease in social adaptation is clearly visible, since the described character traits usually create a negative atmosphere around the individual, objectively preventing the “normal” implementation of his conscious goals and plans .

Deficient aggression is understood as an early prohibition on realizing the existing potential of activity, searching for an object and interacting with it. In essence, we are talking about a deeper disorder of the central self-function. This disorder manifests itself in the form of underdevelopment of the I-function of aggression, that is, in the non-use of the initially given constructive predisposition to active, playful manipulation of the objective world. Such underdevelopment is associated with a severe disruption of the nature of the relationship between mother and child in the pre-oedipal stage, when in fact the child is not supported in any way in his attempts to playfully master the “object”, thereby initially feeling the insurmountable complexity of the environment, gradually losing the desire for autonomy, exit from symbiosis and building your own identity. In contrast to the previously described situation of the development of destructive deformation of the I-function of aggression, when pathologically modified symbiosis is manifested in parental “prohibitions,” in the formation of deficient aggression we are talking about a deficiency of the symbiosis itself, associated either with emotional rejection of the child or with excessive identification with him.

In behavior, deficient aggression is manifested in the inability to establish interpersonal contacts, warm human relationships, in a decrease in objective activity, in narrowing the range of interests, in avoiding any confrontation, conflicts, discussions and situations of “competition”, in a tendency to sacrifice one’s own interests, goals and plans, as well as the inability to take on any responsibility and make decisions. With severe deficit aggression, the ability to openly express one’s emotions, feelings and experiences, claims and preferences is significantly hampered. The lack of activity to some extent is usually subjectively compensated by unrealistic fantasies, unrealistic plans and dreams. In emotional experiences, feelings of one’s own powerlessness, incompetence and uselessness, a feeling of emptiness and loneliness, abandonment and boredom come to the fore.

Individuals who show high scores on the deficit aggression scale are characterized by a passive life position, alienation of their own plans, interests and needs. They tend to put off making decisions and are unable to make any significant efforts to achieve their goals. In interpersonal situations, as a rule, there is compliance, dependence and a desire to avoid any contradictions, situations of clashes of interests and needs. They often have substitution fantasies that have little connection with reality and do not imply real embodiment. Along with this, there are often complaints about a feeling of inner emptiness, indifference, “chronic” dissatisfaction with everything that is happening, a lack of “joy of life,” a feeling of futility of existence and the insurmountability of life’s difficulties.

Anxiety

Constructive anxiety is understood as the individual's ability to withstand experiences associated with anxiety; without loss of integration, integrity, identity, use anxiety to solve adaptation problems, that is, act in the real world, feeling its real dangers, contingencies, unpredictability and the possibility of unfavorable circumstances. In this regard, constructive anxiety presupposes the ability to differentiate real threats and “objectively” unfounded fears and fears, acts as a mobilizing mechanism that flexibly coordinates the level of internal activity with the real complexity of the currently experienced situation or as an inhibitory factor warning about the likely impossibility of coping with existing difficulties . Constructive anxiety controls the level of acceptable curiosity, healthy curiosity, and the limits of possible “experimentation” (actively changing the situation). Formed in a productive symbiosis, such anxiety forever retains its interpersonal character and, thus, provides the opportunity in threatening situations to seek help and accept it from others, as well as, as necessary, to provide all possible assistance to those who are really in need.

Individuals with high scores on the constructive anxiety scale are characterized by the ability to soberly assess the dangers of a real life situation, to overcome their fear in order to realize vital tasks, goals and plans, and expand life experience. They, as a rule, are able to make informed, balanced decisions in extreme situations, and have sufficient tolerance to anxious experiences, allowing them to maintain integrity even in difficult situations that require a responsible choice, i.e., confirmation of identity. Anxiety in these people contributes to increased productivity and overall performance. They are connected and can actively involve others in resolving their own doubts, concerns and fears and, in turn, can sense the troubling experiences of others and contribute to the resolution of these experiences.

With low scores on this scale, there may be an inability to differentiate between different dangers and one’s own experience of threatening situations. Such people are characterized by weakening or even disruption of flexible emotional regulation of behavior. Their level of activity often does not coincide with the existing difficulties of the real life situation. Depending on the indicators of the other two scales of fear, either an “overwhelming” overestimation of the degree of danger that disintegrates the individual’s behavior, or its complete subjective denial can be noted.

Destructive fear is understood as a deformation of constructive anxiety, manifested in the loss of the last function of flexible regulation of the level of activity necessary for the integration of the mental life of the individual. The roots of destructive fear as a function of the “I” lie in the preoedipal phase of ontogenesis and are associated with a violation of the nature of the relationship between mother and child. Under unfavorable conditions, caused, for example, by an atmosphere of “hostile symbiosis,” the threat can be perceived in a generalized manner, “flooding” the child’s still weak “I,” preventing the normal integration of his life experience. This can create conditions that make it difficult to develop the ability to tolerate a certain level of anxiety necessary for a differentiated assessment of the degree of real danger. The most significant thing here is the deformation of the mechanism of interpersonal interaction as the most important way to overcome the experienced threat. Anxiety in this case cannot be sufficiently “shared” and jointly experienced in symbiotic contact with the mother or the primary group, as a result of which there is an excessive frustration of the sense of security, unconsciously accompanying the personality in all its relations with reality, reflecting the lack of basic trust.

In behavior, destructive fear is manifested primarily by an inadequate revaluation of real threats, difficulties, and problems; excessive expression of bodily vegetative components of emotional reactions; poorly organized activity in a situation of danger, up to panic manifestations; fear of establishing new contacts and close, trusting human relationships; fear of authority; fear of any surprises; difficulty concentrating; expressed fears about one’s own personal future; inability to seek help and support in difficult life situations. In cases of excessive intensity, destructive fear manifests itself in obsessions or phobias, expressed “free-floating” anxiety or “panic stupor”.

Individuals with high scores on the scale of destructive fear are characterized by increased anxiety, a tendency to worry and worry even on the most insignificant occasions, difficulties in organizing their own activity, a frequent feeling of insufficient control over the situation, indecisiveness, timidity, shyness, spontaneity, and the severity of vegetative stigmas of anxiety ( sweating, dizziness, rapid heartbeat, etc.). They, as a rule, experience serious difficulties in self-realization, expanding their often limited life experience, feel helpless in situations that require mobilization and confirmation of identity, are filled with all sorts of fears about their future, and are unable to truly trust either themselves or the people around them.

Deficient fear is understood as a significant underdevelopment of the self-function of anxiety. In contrast to the previously described destructive fear, which is mainly associated with the loss of the regulatory component of anxiety, in a deficient state of the self-function of fear, not only the regulatory, but also the existentially most important signaling component of anxiety suffers. This usually manifests itself in the complete impossibility of coexistence with anxiety, that is, in the complete intolerance of experiences associated with the mental reflection of danger. In the formation of such dysfunction, the timing of the traumatic experience appears to be of particular importance. Here we are talking about a violation of group-dynamic relationships associated with a very early period of personality development. If, during the development of a destructive deformation of anxiety, a modified development of a constructive precondition, primarily intended to alert about danger, occurs, then with the development of the described dysfunction, this precondition not only does not develop, but is often completely excluded from the arsenal of emerging adaptation mechanisms. The most important point here, as in the previously described case of the formation of destructive fear, is the interpersonal basis of the process of impaired development of the function. The specificity lies in the fact that in an “indifferent”, “cold” primary symbiosis, the fears and apprehensions experienced by the mother regarding him are not transmitted to the child. The mechanism of indirect “mastery of danger”, as the perception of the changing emotional states of the mother, in an atmosphere of parental indifference turns out to be blocked, forcing sooner or later to face fear face to face. The traumatic consequences of such a collision subsequently determine the pathogenic dynamics of the development of the described function.

In behavior, deficient fear is manifested by the inability to “feel” fear at all. This is often expressed in the fact that the objective danger is underestimated or completely ignored, and is not perceived by consciousness as reality. Absent fear manifests itself intrapsychically in feelings of fatigue, boredom and spiritual emptiness. An unconscious deficit in the experience of fear, as a rule, reveals itself in a pronounced desire to search for extreme situations that allow one to experience real life with its emotional fullness at all costs, that is, to get rid of “emotional non-existence.” The fear of other people is perceived just as little as one’s own fear, which leads to a smoothing of relationships and emotional non-participation, inadequacy in assessing the actions and deeds of others. The acquired new life experience does not lead to development, new contacts are not mutually enriching.

Individuals with high scores on the deficit fear scale are characterized by the absence of an alarm reaction in both unusual and potentially dangerous situations, a tendency to take risky actions, ignoring the assessment of their likely consequences, and a tendency to emotionally devalue important events, objects and relationships, for example, situations of separation with significant others, loss of loved ones, etc. Unlike people with high scores on the scale of destructive fear, people with increases on this scale usually do not experience difficulties in interpersonal contacts, however, the established relationships do not have sufficient emotional depth. In fact, true complicity and empathy are inaccessible to them. With significant severity on the deficit fear scale, there is likely to be a substitutive tendency to use alcohol, psychotropic substances or drugs and/or an associated stay in a criminal environment.

External self-delimitation

Constructive external self-delimitation is a successful attempt to build a flexible communicating boundary with the environment. Formed in the process of resolving symbiotic relationships, this boundary allows for the separation of the developing identity while maintaining the ability and opportunity for vital exchange and productive interpersonal interaction. Symbiotic fusion is replaced by constructive autonomy. Thus, the “I” is formed as “a place of continuous mental experience, i.e., the feeling of “I”” (Federn P.), the true existence of which is possible only with the formation of a “movable border of the “I””, separating the “I” from the “Not” -I". The most important consequences of this process are the possibility of further development of identity, enrichment of life experience, regulation and control of interpersonal distance. Thus, a good “sense of reality” is formed, the ability to enter into contacts, including symbiotic ones, without the threat of re-identification and to leave them without subsequent feelings of guilt.

High scores on the constructive external self-delimitation scale reflect openness, sociability, sociability, good integration of internal experience associated with interpersonal activity, sufficient ability to set one’s own goals and objectives, usually consistent with the requirements of others, good emotional contact with external reality, maturity of emotional experiences, the ability to rationally distribute one’s time and efforts, choose an adequate strategy of behavior in accordance with the changing current situation and one’s own life plans. In situations that require participation, people with high scores on this scale show themselves capable of providing help and support to others.

With low results on this scale, one can observe a violation of the ability to control interpersonal distance, problems establishing optimal interpersonal contacts, a decrease in the ability to rationally use available forces, resources and time, difficulties in setting and defending personally significant goals, tasks consistent with the current context of interpersonal relationships , insufficient consistency of emotional experience associated with object interactions, difficulties in expanding and integrating new impressions. Depending on the indicators of other scales of external self-limitation, the described difficulties, problems, lack of abilities or deficit of opportunities reflect the specific nature of violations of the external boundary of the “I”, whether it is excessive rigidity that impedes productive communication and exchange, or “overpermeability” that reduces autonomy and promoting “overwhelm” with external impressions and hyper-adaptation to the demands of the outside world.

Destructive external self-limitation is understood as a disorder of the “external” regulation of a person’s relationship with reality, that is, interaction with the surrounding group and events in the external world. This is expressed in “building a barrier” that prevents productive communication with the objective world. The deformation of the I-delimitation function is formed in the pre-oedipal period due to the special nature of symbiotic relationships and, in turn, causes disturbances in the development and differentiation of the “I”, in other words, the formation of I-identity. The most important prerequisite for the formation of the external boundaries of the “I” is the normal functioning of constructive aggression, which plays a decisive role in the study of the external world and thereby allows the developing personality to learn to separate it from their own experiences. A destructive environment with its “hostile” atmosphere and a generalized ban on activity requires “isolation without communication.” Activity here not only ceases to be an interpersonal connection, but also becomes a factor producing a “breakdown” in relationships. Thus, an impenetrable border is formed that implements the “primary ban” on one’s own identity. In other words, a destructive environment – ​​otherwise the mother and/or the primary group – forces the child’s “I” to develop not within its own, but within strictly defined, rigid boundaries prescribed by it.

In behavior, destructive external self-separation is expressed by a desire to avoid contacts, a reluctance to enter into “dialogue” and conduct a constructive discussion, a tendency to hyper-control the manifestations of one’s own experiences and feelings, and an inability to jointly search for compromises; reactive hostility to other people's emotional expression, rejection of the problems of others and reluctance to “let them in” to one’s own problems; insufficient orientation in complex interpersonal reality; a feeling of emotional emptiness and a general decrease in objective activity.

Individuals with high scores on this scale are characterized by strict emotional distancing, inability to flexibly regulate interpersonal relationships, affective stiffness and closedness, emotional introversion, indifference to the difficulties, problems and needs of other people, focus on overcontrol of expressiveness, lack of initiative, uncertainty in situations requiring skills interpersonal communication, inability to accept help, passive life position.

Deficient external self-delimitation in the most general sense is understood as the insufficiency of the external boundary of the “I”. As with the previously described destructive external self-limitation, the functional insufficiency of the external boundary of the “I” reflects a violation of the process of regulating the relationship of the individual with external reality. However, here we are not talking about “rigid” closure, but, on the contrary, about the super-permeability of this border. The roots of the deficiency of external self-delimitation, as well as the deficiency states of other previously discussed functions, arise in the pre-oedipal period. At the same time, compared to destructive conditions, they are associated with a more “malignant” violation of the nature of early symbiosis, causing not so much a deformation of the process of function formation, but a complete stop in its development. As a rule, this reflects a stop in the internal dynamics and development of the symbiotic relationship itself. The most important consequences of such “stasis” are not only the continuation of symbiosis beyond the normally necessary period - “protracted symbiosis”, but also a permanent violation of the essence of the symbiotic relationship. The child is absolutely not supported in his “search” for his own identity, rigidly perceived by the mother as an unchanging “part” of herself. Of the two most important functions of the boundary: isolation and connection, in the case of a deficient external self-delimitation, the main one, which provides the possibility of internal formation, suffers to a greater extent .

In behavior, underdevelopment of the external boundary is manifested by a tendency to hyperadapt to the external environment, inability to establish and control interpersonal distance, excessive dependence on the demands, attitudes and norms of others, orientation towards external criteria and assessments, inability to sufficiently reflect, monitor and defend one’s own interests, needs, goals, inability to clearly separate one’s feelings and experiences from the feelings and experiences of others, inability to limit the needs of others - “inability to say no”, doubts about the correctness of independently made decisions and actions taken, in general, a “chameleon-like” life style.

High scores on this scale are typical for people who are obedient, dependent, conforming, dependent, seeking constant support and approval, protection and recognition, usually rigidly oriented towards group norms and values, identifying themselves with group interests and needs, and therefore unable to form their own, a different point of view from others. These people are prone to symbiotic fusion, rather than equal, mature partnerships, and in connection with this, they tend to experience significant difficulties in maintaining stable productive contacts and, especially, in situations where they need to be interrupted. Typical for them is a feeling of their own weakness, openness, helplessness and insecurity.

Internal self-delimitation

Constructive internal self-delimitation is a communication barrier that separates and connects the conscious “I” and the internal environment of the individual with its unconscious feelings, instinctive impulses, images of internalized objects, relationships and emotional states. Forming as a “condensate” of predominantly ontogenetic interpersonal experience, the constructive internal self-delimitation not only reflects the lifetime dynamics of primary group-dynamic relationships (primarily the relationship between mother and child), but also separates the “stage” on which all any significant individuals subsequently manifest themselves. movements of the soul. The functional significance of the internal boundary is determined both by the need to protect the developing “I” from the overwhelming inevitability of internal needs, and by the importance of the latter’s representation in the holistic mental life of the individual. It is extremely important for an integrated identity that the unconscious, no matter how it is understood, be it a psychically reflected bodily process, an archaic instinctual impulse, or a repressed interpersonal conflict, can communicate itself without disturbing the actual interaction with reality. Operationally, this presupposes the ability to have fantasies and dreams, to recognize them as such, that is, to separate them from real events and actions; differentiate well between objects of the external world and one’s own ideas about them; the ability to allow feelings into consciousness and express them, separating real and unreal aspects of feeling and not allowing emotions to completely determine personal activity; accurately distinguish between different states of consciousness, such as sleep and wakefulness, differentiate various bodily states (fatigue, exhaustion, hunger, pain, etc.), comparing them with the current situation. One of the most important manifestations of the constructiveness of internal I-delimitation is also the ability to separate the temporal aspects of experience while maintaining the continuity of the sense of “I”, as well as the ability to distinguish between thoughts and feelings, attitudes and actions while maintaining the feeling of their integral subjective belonging.

Individuals with high scores on this scale are characterized by a good ability to distinguish between external and internal, differentiated perception of internal experiences, bodily sensations and their own activity, the ability to flexibly use the possibilities of sensory and emotional comprehension of reality, as well as intuitive decisions without losing control over reality, good controllability of bodily states, the generally positive nature of internal experience, the ability for sufficient mental concentration, high overall orderliness of mental activity.

With low scores on the scale of constructive internal self-delimitation, there may be a mismatch of emotional experience, an imbalance of internal and external, thoughts and feelings, emotions and actions; disturbances in the experience of the sense of time, inability to flexibly control emotional and bodily processes, and consistently articulate one’s own needs; undifferentiated perception and description of differing mental states; deficiency of the ability for productive mental concentration. Functional insufficiency of the internal boundary is manifested in a violation of interaction with unconscious processes, which, depending on the indicators on other scales of internal self-limitation, reflects either “hard” suppression of the unconscious or the absence of a sufficient intrapsychic barrier.

Destructive internal I-delimitation is understood as the presence of a rigidly fixed “barrier” separating the “I”, otherwise the center of conscious experiences, from other intrapsychic structures. The decisive factor here, as well as with destructive external self-delimitation, is the violation of the “permeability” of the boundary. The border in this case does not so much delimit the autonomized “I” as delimit it, depriving it of a natural connection with the unconscious. Instead of functional differentiation of a single mental space, there is an actual separation of its individual parts, hyper-adapted to various requirements - the claims of the external world and internal instinctive impulses. If constructive internal self-delimitation represents the internalized experience of gradual resolution of preoedipal symbiosis, i.e., the experience of harmonious interpersonal interaction that flexibly takes into account the changing structure of the needs of a growing child, then destructive internal self-limitation, in fact, is the internalization of the rigid protection of the mother and family from his (the child's) natural requirements. Thus, the border as an “organ” of reflecting the child’s internal needs, based on a libidinal attitude towards him and narcissistic support, as a guarantee of mandatory acceptance and future satisfaction of his needs, is transformed into its opposite.

In behavior, destructive internal self-delimitation is manifested by dissociation of the conscious and unconscious, past, present and future, actually present and potentially present, an imbalance of thoughts and feelings, emotions and actions, a rigid orientation towards a purely rational comprehension of reality, which does not allow intuitive and sensory decisions, inconsistency bodily and mental life, inability to fantasize, dream, a certain impoverishment of emotional experiences and impressions due to an often exaggerated tendency to rationalize and verbalize sensory images; desensitization of bodily sensations, i.e. insensitivity to the urgent needs of the body (sleep, thirst, hunger, fatigue, etc.); the rigidity of the defense mechanisms used, separating the emotional components of impressions and projecting them into the outside world.

Persons with high scores on this scale give the impression of being formal, dry, overly businesslike, rational, pedantic, and insensitive. They dream little and almost never fantasize, do not strive for warm partnerships, and are not capable of deep empathy. The inability to adequately perceive their own feelings and needs makes these people insensitive to the emotions and needs of others; the real world of the living people around them can be replaced by a set of their own projections. In intellectual activity, they are prone to systematization and classification. In general, an overly rationalized consciousness is complemented by an overly irrationalized unconscious, which often manifests itself in inappropriate actions and deeds, accidents, and accidental injuries.

Deficient internal self-delimitation is understood as insufficient formation of the internal boundary of the “I”. This boundary arises in the process of structural differentiation of the psyche and marks the possibility of the formation of a truly autonomous “I”. In this regard, the insufficiency of the internal boundary is, in a certain sense, a basic underdevelopment of personal structures, inhibiting the formation of other intrapsychic formations. Like the destructive internal self-delimitation, the deficiency of the internal boundary reflects the interpersonal dynamics of the pre-oedipal period, but here the “pathology” of relationships is deeper, can be less recognized by the mother and, apparently, refers to the earliest stages of the child’s ontogenesis. In fact, such relationships can be of a different nature, existing, for example, in the form of a clichéd reproduction of normatively assigned roles or, on the contrary, characterized by extreme inconsistency of behavior. In any case, the mother is unable to perform the most important function of the developing symbiosis, which is associated with the constant “training” of the child in the skills of coping with her own needs. Since in this period the external world exists for the child only as changing internal sensations, it is extremely important to teach him to differentiate his various own states and distinguish the latter from external objects. In this regard, the stopping of the internal dynamics of the development of the symbiotic relationship itself, described above (scale of deficient external self-limitation), is especially unfavorable, which, combined with the inability of the mother to correctly identify the actual needs and needs of the child, leads to the formation of a functional insufficiency of the internal boundary, i.e. deficient internal self-delimitation. In contrast to the destructive internal self-delimitation, during the formation of which the formation of a “false” identity nevertheless occurs, in the case under consideration the interpersonal dynamics of the primary group prevents the development of any identity.

In behavior, the weakness of the internal border of the “I” is expressed by a tendency to excessive fantasy, unbridled daydreaming, in which the imaginary can hardly be separated from reality. Consciousness is often “flooded” by poorly controlled images, feelings, emotions, the experience of which is unable to differentiate them from external objects, situations and relationships associated with them. Poorly structured internal experience, as a rule, can only be replenished mechanically, remaining almost always too closely connected with specific situations and the emotions and affects experienced in them. The experience of time is practically absent, since the experience of the present, as a rule, absorbs both the past - due to a certain weakness in the ability to distinguish a previously experienced affect from the momentary - and the future - due to the difficulties of differentiating the imaginary and the real. The possibilities for realistic perception and regulation of one's own bodily processes are noticeably reduced. On the one hand, actualized needs are subject to immediate satisfaction and practically cannot be postponed; on the other hand, many real “bodily needs” can remain without any attention for a long time. Behavior in general is inconsistent, often chaotic and disproportionate to the current life situation.

Individuals with high scores on the scale of deficient internal self-limitation are characterized by impulsiveness, weakness of emotional control, a tendency to exalted states, insufficient balance in actions and decisions, “overwhelming” with disparate, varied feelings, images or thoughts, extreme inconsistency in interpersonal relationships, inability to sufficient concentration of effort, poor regulation of bodily processes. Very high scores on this scale may indicate a prepsychotic or psychotic state. In behavior then, inadequacy, disorganization and disintegration come to the fore, often perceived as pretentiousness and absurdity.

Narcissism

Constructive narcissism is understood as an individual’s positive image of himself, based on a sense of self-worth and based on positive experiences in interpersonal contacts. The main attributes of such self-perception and self-image are both realistic assessments, in which the most important, in a good sense, unbiased, friendly, “participating” relations of the significant environment, and integrity, including a general positive attitude towards oneself as an individual, towards individual areas your existence, your own actions, feelings, thoughts, bodily processes, sexual experiences. Such holistic realistic acceptance of oneself in its most diverse manifestations allows one to freely surrender oneself to the power of other people’s assessments, without trying either consciously or unconsciously to form a positive image of oneself, carefully covering one’s own weaknesses. In other words, constructive narcissism means a marked convergence of such integrations as "self" and "self" for others. No matter how the nature of narcissism is understood in general, constructive narcissism characterizes sufficient maturity of an individual’s interpersonal potentials and “healthy” self-sufficiency. This is not a “fantasy of omnipotence” or the delight of sensual pleasure, but a feeling of joy from the growing opportunities for self-realization in the complex world of human relationships.

In behavior, constructive narcissism manifests itself as the ability to adequately evaluate oneself, truly fully perceive one’s capabilities and realize them, feel one’s strength and competence, forgive oneself mistakes and failures, learning the necessary lessons and thereby increasing one’s life potential. Constructive narcissism reveals itself in the ability to enjoy one’s own thoughts, feelings, fantasies, insights, intuitive decisions and actions, correctly perceiving their real value, it allows the individual to fully experience his bodily life and provides the opportunity to establish a variety of interpersonal relationships in accordance with his inner motives . Constructive narcissism makes it possible to painlessly experience temporary loneliness, without experiencing feelings of melancholy or boredom. Constructive narcissism allows a person to sincerely forgive others for their mistakes and delusions, to love and be loved, while maintaining internal integrity, independence and autonomy.

Individuals with high scores on this scale are characterized by high self-esteem, self-esteem, healthy ambition, realistic perception of themselves and others, openness in interpersonal contacts, diversity of interests and motivations, the ability to enjoy life in its most varied manifestations, emotional and spiritual maturity, the ability to resist unfavorable developments of events, unkind assessments and actions of others without harming oneself and the need to use protective forms that seriously distort reality.

With low scores on the constructive narcissism scale, we are, as a rule, talking about insecure, dependent, dependent people who react painfully to other people’s assessments and criticism, and are intolerant of their own weaknesses and the shortcomings of others. Communication difficulties are typical for such people; they are unable to maintain warm, trusting relationships at all, or, while establishing and maintaining them, they cannot maintain their own goals and preferences. The sensory life of persons with low scores on this scale is often impoverished or too “unusual”; their range of interests is narrow and specific. Weakness of emotional control and lack of full-fledged communication experience do not allow these people to sufficiently feel the fullness of life.

Destructive narcissism is understood as a distortion or violation of the individual's ability to realistically experience, perceive and evaluate himself. Formed in the process of deformed symbiotic relationships, destructive narcissism absorbs the pre-oedipal experience of negative interpersonal interactions and is actually a reactive defensive experience of the insufficiency of a tender-caring attitude towards the growing “I” of the child. Thus, destructive narcissism is, as it were, “woven” from grievances, fears, aggressive feelings, prejudices, prejudices, refusals, prohibitions, disappointments and frustrations that arise in the interaction of a child and mother, i.e., it reflects the unconscious destructive dynamics of the primary group-dynamic field and subsequent reference groups. The most important feature of destructive narcissism is the temporary and intense instability of the attitude towards oneself, manifested in underestimation or overestimation of oneself, while the scope of fluctuations is determined by fantasies of grandeur, on the one hand, and ideas of low value, on the other. The attitude towards oneself cannot be stabilized due to the impossibility of objectifying it in the “mirror” of interpersonal interaction. Previous negative symbiotic experience of demonstrating one’s true weak undifferentiated “I” forces one to avoid mutual contacts in a wide range of situations that require confirmation of one’s own identity. Communication with others acquires an accentuated one-sided character; in this regard, as a rule, the discrepancy between internal self-esteem and the unconsciously assumed assessment of oneself by others deepens. The degree of this mismatch determines the intensity of the need for narcissistic confirmation and narcissistic support from the outside. The main problem is the impossibility of obtaining such “narcissistic nutrition”. Constantly controlling the communicative process, the destructively narcissistic “I” is fenced off from the subjective activity of the Other, the other ceases to be the Other, the necessary dialogue turns into an incessant monologue.

At the behavioral level, destructive narcissism is manifested by an inadequate assessment of oneself, one’s actions, abilities and capabilities, a distorted perception of others, excessive wariness in communication, intolerance to criticism, low tolerance to frustration, fear of close, warm, trusting relationships and the inability to establish them, the need for social confirmation of one’s significance and value, as well as a tendency to build an autistic world that isolates one from real interpersonal interactions. Often there is also a feeling of inseparability and incomprehension by others of subjectively important experiences and feelings, interests and thoughts, a feeling of hostility from others, up to paranoid reactions, a feeling of boredom and joylessness of existence.

High scores on this scale reflect pronounced inconsistency of self-esteem, inconsistency of its individual components, instability of attitude towards oneself, difficulties in interpersonal contacts, extreme touchiness, excessive caution, closedness in communication, a tendency to constantly control one’s own expression, restraint, spontaneity, “super insight” up to suspicion. Facade impeccability is often accompanied by excessive demands and intransigence towards the shortcomings and weaknesses of others; a high need to be in the center of attention, to receive recognition from others, is combined with intolerance to criticism and a tendency to avoid situations in which real external assessment of one’s own properties can occur, and the inferiority of interpersonal communication is compensated by a pronounced tendency to manipulate.

Deficit narcissism is understood as a lack of ability to form a holistic attitude towards oneself, to develop a differentiated view of one’s own personality, one’s abilities and capabilities, as well as to evaluate oneself realistically. Deficit narcissism is a rudimentary state of a sense of self-sufficiency and autonomy. Compared to destructive narcissism, here we are talking about a deeper violation of the central I-function, leading to an almost complete inability to perceive the uniqueness and uniqueness of one’s own existence, to attach importance to one’s desires, goals, motives and actions, to defend one’s own interests and have independent views, opinions and points of view. Like the previously described deficit states of other self-functions, deficit narcissism is primarily associated with the atmosphere and nature of pre-oedipal interaction. At the same time, unlike, for example, destructive narcissism, it reflects a significantly different mode of interactional processes. If the environment that causes the destructive deformation of narcissism is characterized by “too human” relationships with their inconsistency, contradiction, fears, resentments, feelings of neglect and injustice, then the atmosphere of deficit narcissism is coldness, indifference and indifference. Thus, instead of the “distorting mirror” of destruction, there is only the “emptiness” of deficiency. It should be noted that physical care and concern for a growing child can be impeccable, but they are formal, focused on purely external conventional norms and do not reflect personal, subjective participation. In fact, it is precisely this deficit of love, tenderness and actually human care that prevents the child from forming his own boundaries, distinguishing himself and the formation of a primary self-identity and, in the future, almost fatally predetermines deep “narcissistic hunger.”

In behavior, deficit narcissism is manifested by low self-esteem, pronounced dependence on others, the inability to establish and maintain “full” interpersonal contacts and relationships without compromising one’s interests, needs, life plans, difficulties in identifying one’s own motives and desires, views and principles, and associated excessive identification with the norms, values, needs and goals of the immediate environment, as well as poverty of emotional experiences, the general background of which is joylessness, emptiness, boredom and forgetfulness. Intolerance of loneliness and a pronounced unconscious desire for warm, symbiotic contacts in which one can completely “dissolve”, thereby sheltering oneself from the unbearable fears of real life, personal responsibility and one’s own identity.

High scores on this scale characterize people who are unsure of themselves, their capabilities, strength and competence, hiding from life, passive, pessimistic, dependent, overly conforming, incapable of genuine human contacts, striving for a symbiotic merger, feeling their uselessness and inferiority, constantly in need in narcissistic “feeding” and incapable of constructive interaction with life and always content with only the role of passive recipients.

Sexuality

Constructive sexuality is understood as a purely human ability to receive mutual pleasure from physical, bodily sexual interaction, which is experienced as a mature unity of personalities, free from fears and guilt. It is especially important that such unity is not burdened by any role fixations, social responsibilities or aspirations and is not determined solely by biological needs. Its only self-sufficient goal is unconditional bodily, mental and spiritual fusion. Constructive sexuality involves genuine acceptance of a partner and confirmation of one’s own self-identity, in other words, the ability to engage in sexual contact, feeling the living reality of a given unique partner and maintaining a sense of inner authenticity. Another important aspect of constructive sexuality is the ability to emerge from sexual symbiosis without the destructive feelings of guilt and loss, but, on the contrary, experiencing the joy of mutual enrichment. Formed in the process of resolving childhood symbiosis, constructive sexuality presupposes successful overcoming not only pre-oedipal, but also subsequent oedipal and pubertal age-related crises. As an I-function, constructive sexuality has a basic, fundamental significance, but in its development it itself requires a certain, necessary minimum of constructiveness. For its successful formation, along with the integration of polymorphic infantile sexuality, there must be sufficiently developed constructive functions of the “I”, primarily constructive aggression, constructive fear, stable communicating boundaries of the “I”.

In behavior, constructive sexuality is manifested by the ability to enjoy sexual contacts while simultaneously being able to give pleasure to a sexual partner, freedom from fixed sexual roles, the absence of rigid sexual stereotypes, a tendency towards erotic play and erotic fantasies, the ability to enjoy the variety and richness of experiences arising in a sexual situation, the absence of sexual prejudices and openness to new sexual experiences, the ability to communicate one’s sexual desires to a partner and understand his feelings and desires, the ability to feel responsibility and show warmth, care and devotion in sexual partnerships. Constructive sexuality is not so much a wide range of acceptability of forms of sexual activity as the ability for flexible coordination based on a felt understanding of the partner. High scores on this scale are typical for sensitive, mature people who are able to establish close partnerships, who understand their needs well and feel the needs of another, who are able to communicate and realize their own sexual desires without exploitation and impersonal manipulation of others, who are capable of a mutually enriching exchange of sensory experiences and sensual experiences. , not fixed on any clichéd methods of sexual behavior; as a rule, having a fairly developed sexual repertoire with diversity and differentiation of erotic components, which, however, are well integrated and reflect the holistic, natural activity of the individual.

With low scores on the constructive sexuality scale, there is insufficient ability for partner sexual interaction, sexual activity is either too instrumentalized, stereotyped, or impoverished. In any case, there is an inability to perform sexual “game”; the partner is perceived and acts only as an object to satisfy one’s own sexual desires. Erotic fantasies acquire a clearly egocentric character or are absent altogether. Sexual activity almost always takes place outside the “here and now” situation. The specific nature of the dysfunction of sexuality is reflected by the predominant increase in indicators on one of the two subsequent scales.

Destructive sexuality is a deformation of the development of the function of sexuality, manifested in a violation of the process of integration of sexual activity in the holistic behavior of the individual. In fact, sexuality turns out to be split off from the Self-identity and, thus, pursues its own autonomous goals, often inconsistent with other manifestations of the Self. Such goals may, for example, be an actualized desire for purely sexual satisfaction associated with the stimulation of one or another erogenous zone, the need for recognition and admiration, the desire to prove sexual superiority, adherence to a socially prescribed role, aggressive motivation, etc. Central here is distortion internalized unconscious group dynamics, transforming sexuality from a means of deepening communication, achieving closeness, trust and intimacy into a way of avoiding truly human contact. The place of partner symbiosis, the unity of feelings, thoughts and experiences is taken by selfish isolation. Both the partner and individual components of one’s own sexual activity are instrumentalized and manipulatively used to achieve sexual pleasure. Feelings experienced by others are ignored or exploited objectively. Relationships are closed in nature and are not at all aimed at any “discovery” of the partner, the desire to feel his uniqueness, “... the boundaries of the other either do not intersect at all, no discovery of the other occurs, or they intersect, but in a way that insults the dignity partner physically, mentally or spiritually.” The source and core of destructive sexuality is the deformed, mostly unconscious, dynamics of symbiotic relationships. The cornerstone of such deformation is misunderstanding or ignoring the child’s bodily needs and developing sensitivity. Specific forms of distortion of symbiotic interaction can vary ranging from the hostile attitude of the primary group towards polymorphic manifestations of infantile sexuality to excessive greenhouse relations, in which all interactions associated with the child are eroticized regardless of his real desires. Thus, the primary lack of the mother’s ability to deal with closeness and distance in accordance with the needs of another, her lack of freedom from sexual prejudices and/or the general even unconscious rejection of the child create the preconditions for disturbances in the development of the “healthy” mode of primary experience of the developing “I”, i.e. e. the process of formation of psychosexual identification.

In behavior, destructive sexuality is manifested by reluctance or inability to have deep, intimate relationships. Human intimacy is often perceived as a burdensome obligation or a threat to the loss of autistic autonomy, and is therefore avoided or terminated through substitution. Instead of a complete personality, only individual fragments of it participate in contact. Sexual activity split off in this way insultingly ignores the integrity of the other, giving the sexual relationship a character of impersonality, anonymity, and alienation. Sexual interest turns out to be fetishized in a broad sense and strictly connected only with certain qualities of the partner. Erotic fantasies and sexual games are exclusively autistic in nature. The sexual repertoire is usually rigid and may not correspond to the partner's range of acceptability. Destructive sexuality is also characterized by the presence of pronounced negative emotions after sexual excesses. Sexual relationships are retrospectively perceived as traumatic, harmful, or degrading. In this regard, feelings of guilt, a feeling of degradation or the experience of being “used” are often noted. The extreme manifestations of destructive sexuality include diverse sexual perversions: various types of sexual violence, including child abuse, sadomasochism, exhibitionism, voyeurism, fetishism, pedophilia, gerontophilia, necrophilia, sodomy, etc. High scores on the scale of destructive sexuality are characteristic of incapable individuals to spiritually fulfilling, emotionally rich sexual experiences; avoiding emotional intimacy, trust and warmth. The place of true interest in a sexual partner is usually taken by some particular stimulating element, for example, novelty, unusualness, characteristics of secondary sexual characteristics, etc. Destructive sexuality can manifest itself in various forms of aggressive behavior: from scandalousness to open manifestations of physical violence and/or self-destructive tendencies. Sexual excess is rarely experienced by them as genuine “here and now.”

Deficit sexuality is understood as the self-function of sexuality delayed in its development. It means a generalized ban on sexual activity. In contrast to destructive deformation, deficient sexuality presupposes the maximum possible refusal of real sexual contacts, which can only occur under strong pressure from external circumstances. Essentially, we are talking about rejection of one’s own and others’ physicality. Physical contact is perceived as an unacceptable intrusion, the subjective meaninglessness of which is predetermined by the perception of what is happening as only a mechanistic interaction. The main thing here is the loss of the ability to sense the interhuman, intersubjective basis of sexual actions. Thus, the meaning of any erotic or sexual situation turns out to be sharply impoverished and, often, is presented as an “indecent” manifestation of a purely “animal” principle. In other words, sexuality is not perceived as a necessary component of purely human communication and, as a result, cannot be adequately integrated into interpersonal communications. Deficient sexuality does not allow interpersonal contacts to reach any depth and, thus, in many respects actually determines the “threshold value” of interactions. Like other deficit functions, deficit sexuality begins to form in the preoedipal period, but a specific condition for its development is a pronounced lack of positive, bodily pleasure-giving experience of interaction with the mother. If deficient aggression arises due to an indifferent attitude to the manifestations of, first of all, the child’s motor activity, the mother’s lack of fantasies that create a “playing field of symbiosis,” then deficient sexuality is a consequence of the indifference of the environment to the child’s bodily manifestations and the extreme lack of gentle tactile contact with him. The result of such “non-interaction” is a strong archaic fear of abandonment and a lack of narcissistic confirmation, which, as a generalized fear of contact and a feeling of rejection of one’s physicality, determine par exelens all subsequent mental dynamics of sexual activity.

In behavior, deficient sexuality is expressed by a predominant lack of sexual desires, poverty of erotic fantasies, and the perception of sexual relations as “dirty,” sinful, unworthy of a person and deserving of disgust. One's own sexual activity is most often associated with fear. At the same time, fear colors the entire sphere of gender relations and can manifest itself as fear of infection or moral failure, fear of touch or sexual addiction. Often there is an unformed sexual repertoire, a complete inability to play sexually, and the presence of a large number of prejudices. Behavioral manifestations of deficient sexuality are characterized by a low assessment of one’s body image and one’s sexual attractiveness, as well as a tendency to devalue the sexual attractiveness of others. In general, interpersonal relationships are rarely truly fulfilling; they prefer fictitious “princes” or “princesses” to real potential sexual partners. Deficient sexuality often accompanies impotence in men and frigidity in women.

Persons with high scores on the scale of deficient sexuality are characterized by low sexual activity, a desire to avoid sexual contacts up to complete abandonment, and a tendency to replace real sexual relationships with fantasies. Such people are not able to experience joy from their own body, communicate their desires and needs to others, and are easily lost in situations that require sexual identification. They perceive the sexual desires and claims of others as threatening their own identity. They are characterized by insufficient emotional content even in significant interpersonal relationships. A lack of sexual experience usually causes a “too serious” attitude to life, a poor understanding of people, as well as life in general.

Validation

The present version of the ISTA is the Russian-language equivalent of the author's last version of the questionnaire, revised in 1997. As part of the adaptation procedures, a double (German-Russian and Russian-German) translation of the text of the test statements was carried out, the psychological meaning of individual questions was compared and agreed upon, indicators of the validity and reliability of the scales were studied, and test scores were restandardized.

The validity of the test is primarily based on Günther Ammon’s theoretical ideas about the structural and dynamic features of the central self-functions. In accordance with the human structural concept of personality, a number of statements have been selected that make it possible to register behavioral manifestations in which the predominantly unconscious self-structure is displayed. Thus, ISTA is built on a rational principle, based on conceptual validity and implicitly contains the experience of psychoanalytically oriented observation.

In the present version of the questionnaire, the coordination of the psychological meaning of the proposed items with their German counterparts was carried out on the basis of an expert opinion developed by a group of expert psychologists, who in turn relied on the operationalization definitions of the central personal formations under study of G. Ammon’s human structural concept.

In particular, in full accordance with theoretical concepts, groups of scales assessing the constructive destructive and deficit components of self-functions show a high positive correlation within the group. At the same time, “constructive” scales sharply negatively correlate with “destructive” and “deficit” scales.

The restandardization of the questionnaire was carried out on a group that included 1000 subjects aged from 18 to 53 years, mainly with secondary or secondary specialized education.

Psychometric characteristics of the test

Construct validity

The reliability of a test lies in its ability to identify the desired trait, and according to this characteristic, the Self-structure test is much better at distinguishing traits in a population of sick people rather than healthy people. This is due to the fact that the test contains statements that are extremely rare in healthy people.

Internal correlation

As expected, the indicators of all constructive scales correlate with each other, just as the indicators of all destructive and deficiency scales correlate with each other, forming a common “health factor” and “pathology factor”.

External validity

ISTA predictably and significantly correlates with the scales of the Giessen Personality Questionnaire, the Life Style Index, the SCL-90-R Symptom Questionnaire, and the MMPI.

Interpretation

Scoring

Only affirmative answers are taken into account - “Yes” (True)

Scale	Constructive	Destructive	Scarce
Aggression	1, 8, 26, 30, 51, 74, 112, 126, 157, 173, 184, 195, 210	2, 4, 6, 63, 92, 97, 104, 118, 132, 145, 168, 175, 180, 203	25, 28, 39, 61, 66, 72, 100, 102, 150, 153, 161, 215
Anxiety/Fear	11, 35, 50, 94, 127, 136, 143, 160, 171, 191, 213, 220	32, 47, 54, 59, 91, 109, 128, 163, 178, 179, 188	69, 75, 76, 108, 116, 131, 149, 155, 170, 177, 181, 196, 207, 219
External delimitation of the Self	23, 36, 58, 89, 90, 95, 99, 137, 138, 140, 176	3, 14, 37, 38, 46, 82, 88, 148, 154, 158, 209	7, 17, 57, 71, 84, 86, 120, 123, 164, 166, 218
Internal delimitation of the Self	5, 13, 21, 29, 42, 98, 107, 130, 147, 167, 192, 201	10, 16, 55, 80, 117, 169, 185, 187, 193, 200, 202, 208	12, 41, 45, 49, 52, 56, 77, 119, 122, 125, 172, 190, 211
Narcissism	18, 34, 44, 73, 85, 96, 106, 115, 141, 183, 189, 198	19, 31, 53, 68, 87, 113, 162, 174, 199, 204, 206, 214	9, 24, 27, 64, 79, 101, 103, 111, 124, 134, 146, 156, 216
Sexuality	15, 33, 40, 43, 48, 65, 78, 83, 105, 133, 139, 151, 217	20, 22, 62, 67, 70, 93, 110, 129, 142, 159, 186, 194, 197	60, 81, 114, 121, 135, 144, 152, 165, 182, 205, 212

Conversion to T-scores

The conversion of raw points to T-scores is carried out using the following formula:

T = 50 + \frac(10(X - M))(\sigma)

where X is the raw score, and M and δ are the values ​​taken from the table:

Scale	Median	Deviation
A1	9,12	2,22
A2	6,35	3,00
A3	4,56	2,06
C1	7,78	2,21
C2	3,42	1,98
C3	4,53	2,20
O1	7,78	2,23
O2	3,40	1,65
O3	7,90	2,23
O//1	9,14	2,06
O//2	3,97	1,65
O//3	6,78	2,49
H1	8,91	2,08
H2	4,17	1,98
H3	2,56	2,03
Ce1	9,26	2,86
Ce2	5,00	2,58
Ce3	2,79	2,14

Interpretation of scales

The scales are not interpreted separately; their combination is much more important. A certain idea of ​​the meaning of the characteristics measured by each scale and the self-functions of the individual can be obtained from the description of the test

Interpretation of scale combinations

Constructive aggression correlates well with constructive narcissism, which reveals a personality constructively aimed at the world around him, with adequate self-esteem.

Destructive aggression positively correlates with constructive aggression and other constructive scales. This is consistent with the concept underlying the test, according to which a healthy personality must have a certain destructive potential in order to promptly sweep away outdated norms and rules and re-evaluate existing experience in a timely manner. However, when combined with deficient aggression, one can expect the presence of auto-aggressive tendencies. The combination of destructive aggression with deficit anxiety deprives a person of the opportunity to correct his behavior, anticipating the consequences of aggression. The combination of destructive aggression with deficit anxiety and destructive narcissism confirms the assumption that the ease of narcissistic frustration finds its way out simultaneously in increased aggressiveness and repressed anxiety.

Deficit aggression often combined with destructive anxiety, deficient external self-limitation, destructive internal self-delimitation And deficit narcissism. This combination is typical for the depressive spectrum of mental disorders.

Not an uncommon combination destructive anxiety And deficit anxiety is consistent with the psychoanalytic opinion that psychological defenses such as avoidance and repression are interrelated. In addition, destructive anxiety is highly correlated with a destructive internal self-delimitation, which is also consistent with the idea that severe anxiety reduces sensitivity to oneself, and with a deficient external self-delimitation, which may indicate a mechanism of regression and the search for an object for protection myself.

In the same time constructive anxiety correlates with constructive internal self-delimitation, which also confirms the hypothesis about the mental function of anxiety as part of personality.

Clinical significance

The test is not a clinical psychodiagnostic tool in the full sense of the word. It has no nosological specification and is based on psychoanalytic views.

On the other hand, the test was developed, validated and adapted on groups of mentally ill patients, and is intended for clinical use. It is focused on diagnosing the development of personality structure in mentally ill patients, which is of great importance in developing a model of mental disorder and a psychotherapeutic treatment regimen.

According to Ammon, each person has constructive, destructive (destructive) and deficient (underdeveloped) personal inclinations, which have a strictly individual expression. A correct assessment of the personality structure of each patient - often without taking into account nosological and symptomatic specifications - is an important step towards a deep understanding of intrapsychic processes. This, in turn, is the main component of the psychotherapeutic process, including psychoanalysis of a mentally ill person. In addition, a certain personality structure determines certain response styles in the group process, which should also be used by the psychotherapist.

The final goal of psychotherapy is to replenish the deficit of the “I”, restore a healthy core of personality and the full development of a person’s identity. It is also possible to assess the degree of change in this process using a test.

Thus, the Ammon Self-Structural Test is recommended for psychological testing at the beginning of therapy (individual, group), tracking personal changes during the treatment process and assessing the final result.

Stimulus material

Questionnaire form

Answer form

see also

Literature

1. Kabanov M.M., Neznanov N.G. Essays on dynamic psychiatry. SPb.: NIPNI im. Bekhtereva, 2003.

Many people ask this question and each one tries to answer it in his own way. I also decided to answer this specific question in my own way.

I asked my inner self:

- Who am I?

- At the moment, I am not who I want to become, but who I have already become at the moment here and now.

I am not the one at the moment who wants to play some role in the future, I am the one who is already playing a specific role in the moment here and now. If now, at the moment, I am writing and typing. This means that I am a writer typing this text on a computer and no one else.

The person who cognizes his external space, and not himself, is far from the correct answer to this question, because he cognizes external space in a divided and dissociated state from himself, as something concrete and separate in the form of a thing, phenomenon, concept or their definitions.

For him, everything exists, namely, only there, outside of him, separately from him, and he abstracts from his inner self, believing that his external space is his real and valid world of life and everything that surrounds him. For him, knowledge of external objects, phenomena, concepts and their definitions is the meaning of life, the reality of existence.

It’s easier to understand the essence of the external self and answer the question:

WHO AM I EXTERNALLY?

The external self is easily cognized and is mainly limited to playing a specific role in cohabitation with and in relation to others like oneself in the moment here and now, for example:

In the family I am a husband, father, son, brother; at work I am a third-class specialist in installing boilers and units, a first-class confectioner, shoemaker, pilot, etc. In transport I am either a driver or a passenger, or a controller; among friends I am a friend, and with a mistress I am a lover, etc.

In external space, there is a point of a specific role-playing game into which a person finds himself, based on conventions, reasons and circumstances, and can easily explain what role he plays at this point.

In what condition a person is, as a point of a role-playing game, the role he will play, bad or good, is another question. Roles change very quickly and a person’s actions, thoughts and words change too.

Outwardly, a person is always many-sided, although he has only one face.

It is interesting that a person, constantly changing externally depending on conventions and circumstances, internally always remains as he is. The inner self makes him what he is. The inner self does not want to change under any external conditions and circumstances, although the external self is constantly changing. It always seems to a person that he is constantly different, but this is an illusion of a mirror image of role-playing games. The inner self always accepts itself as it is for itself, because this is how it feels comfortable, cozy, and convenient to cohabit with itself. And when you have to change based on external role-playing games, the inner self begins to feel discomfort, because roles can be disgusting, humiliating, bad, not prestigious, not respected by people, etc.

The manifestation of variability in external space should more often be considered as the need to adapt to the conditions in which the external self finds itself in the moment here and now, otherwise a person simply cannot survive. But the inner self, as it were, adapts only to itself and no one else.

The external self, in a state of separation and disunity, with the internal self constantly quarrels, cannot find a common language, constantly sort things out, contradict each other, argue, etc.

The external and internal I do not exist on their own, because they have one common I of a person, just as I am the self of myself, I am the personality of myself. One common I is possessed by the inner ESSENCE, which is the mistress of all I in a person.

The inner Self is the inner Self - ESSENCE.

For almost all people, it is a very serious problem to answer the question: Who am I - internal?

Here there are a lot of assumptions, conjectures, theories, conjectures, hypotheses, etc., none of which have a truly correct answer.

I’ll be honest, no one knows exactly who the INNER ME is.

Each of us has a cult of personality within us. This cult is cultivated by every person through the ego, egocentrism, and inner Self.

A person’s subjective assessment of his inner self is projected into his outer self through a mirror reflection and manifests itself in a person’s action, deed, behavior, creating around himself a circle of communication or alienation, interaction or inaction with his own kind in the moment here and now, depending on the point of his own location in the situation , in which he is forced to be whoever the situation of the moment here and now forces him to be.

A person always acts in two states: in a state of ignorance or knowledge.

Actions in a state of ignorance always have unpleasant consequences and that's putting it mildly.

Through his external self, a person cognizes external matter, its external manifestations; through his inner self, a person tries to cognize his inner essence.

Because the inner Self never changes, then there is no need to cognize it, and it is so clear that the inner Self is what it is.

But it is difficult to answer what or who I am in essence, without dividing the Self into internal and external.

Cognition of the external self by a person is a natural necessity, which lies in his survival in the harsh conditions of reality. But this is the instinct of self-preservation speaking in us.

If a person plays his role very naturally and competently, then other people begin to believe him and, in some cases, play along. Trust arises from faith. Fraudsters, adventurers, swindlers know this and try to play their roles very talentedly; they easily gain the trust of gullible people and deceive them.

Over the course of his external life, a person becomes an old man, a pensioner, goes on a well-deserved rest and turns into something that essentially no one needs, if he is very sick, then even more so, he is just a burden and general tension for all his loved ones.

It is a great blessing for a person that he has not yet come to know his inner self, he has only learned to imagine about it, build theories and hypotheses.

And this suggests that a person with his inner self can be known endlessly in any life. Knowing your inner self makes it possible to know yourself ETERNALLY, and this is very wonderful. Live for yourself in any situation and any convention and get to know yourself every second. Here's your constant work, creativity, self-realization.

Many people complain about boredom, saying there is nothing to do, but I found work for everyone.

Know yourself constantly, then you will be able to answer the question:

WHO AM I?

Answer:

I AM A KNOWER!

More. Descartes, and after him other thinkers, interpreted external influences as the cause of a sensory image. From this position, conclusions were drawn that a person does not cognize the objective world, but only the effect that arises as a result of the influence of external things on his senses. So, the external was recognized as the cause and as the “initiator” of the generative process. Mentally.

When clarifying the question of “external”, the external world, we should consider some concepts that in one way or another reveal its essence. Thus, the term “sirdy” is often used to designate what surrounds a person. The environment is the totality of all conditions that surround an object (thing, plant, animal, person) and directly or indirectly influence it. Those conditions that do not affect the object are not included in its midst.

To designate what exists, existed and exists in space-time outside the unsociable, which can be interpreted as the actual, possible and impossible of its environment, the concept of objective reality is used. Alnisty, reality.

The concept that allows us to separate the objectively existing from the objectively existing and most fully generalizes all that exists in its material and spiritual definitions is the concept of “being.” For example, a person can also be considered in the position of “in-being” and, as such, opposing non-existence with his contemplative activity and cognitive-transforming activity.

Being with which a person actively interacts is designated by the concept of “world.” That in the world that is created by man and becomes a reality (subjective or objective), in which it is objectified and to which it can be placed as a subject, is defined by the concept of “life world.”

In the reality of the life world, the internal and external ones can seem to dissolve and disappear. These are those happy and at the same time tragic moments when the subjective-object confrontation in cognition is replaced by a feeling of existence as such, existence, presence in being, unity with the world, a heightened experience of the reality of non-existence, one’s finitude.

It is the latter contradiction that actualizes the internal activity of a person in its duel with non-existence as “external” and at the same time, requiring reflection, to find the meaning of one’s existence in the world

If the “internal” is identified with the mental, spiritual, then the “external” for it can be the bodily. If the “internal” is considered in a structural aspect, or from the point of view of the levels of determination of mental activity, then here too one can reach the division into deep (immanent) and level (reactive) causation, considering them, again, as internal and external.

It is also typical for psychology to interpret mental activity as internal, and what can be observed and objectively recorded in the form of behavior, action, and productivity as external.

However, the main reason for including these concepts in the system of psychology is the need to explain the nature of the psyche, the driving forces of its development

Does such mental causation exist? they demand to decide on the problem of “internal and external” And it is not surprising that the most heated discussions in Russian psychology took place precisely around this problem.

The relationship between internal and external research is fundamental. SLRubinstein. Any impact of one phenomenon on another, he noted, is refracted through the internal properties of the phenomenon that this cart. See carried out. The result of any influence on a phenomenon or object depends not only on the phenomenon or body that influences it, but also on nature, on the own internal properties of the object or phenomenon on which this influence is exerted. Everything in the world is interconnected and interdependent. In this sense, everything is determined, but this does not mean that everything can be unambiguously deduced from causes, which act as an external impulse separated from the internal properties and interconnections of objects.

The patterns of formation and development of the internal process of transition from external to internal, objective to subjective as a process of “interiorization” in the “phased formation of mental actions” became the subject of research. LSVigotsky. OMLeontieva. PYA. Gal-Perin et al.

Internal (subject), for. Leontyev, acts through the external and thereby changes itself. This position has real meaning. After all, initially the subject of life generally appears only as possessing an “independent force of reaction,” but this force can act only through the external. It is in this external that the transition from possibility to reality takes place: its concretization, development and enrichment, i.e. its transformation, from the transformation and the subject himself, its bearer. Now, in the form of a transformed subject, he appears as one who changes and refracts external influences in his current affairs.

Formulas. Rubinstein "external through internal" and. Leontiev’s “internal through external” from different positions, in some ways complementing and in some ways denying each other, aimed at revealing the complex framework of the functioning and development of the human psyche.

Realizing the possibility of a narrowed or tendentious interpretation of his formula,. Rubinstein, in particular, notes that mental phenomena arise not as a result of the passive reception of external influences acting mechanically, but as a result of the mental activity of the brain caused by these influences, which serves to carry out the interaction of a person as a subject with himself.

Ukrainian psychologist. OMTkachenko is attempting to find a way to integrate and synthesize approaches. Rubinstein and. Leontiev to solve the psychological problem of external and internal. Instead of two. Antiterra of ethical formulas, he offers a working formulation of the principle of determinism: the psyche of the subject is determined by the products of actual and post-actual interaction with the object and itself acts as an important determinant of human behavior and activity.

The problem of external and internal can receive a positive solution when, from these rather abstract concepts, a movement is made in the direction of clarifying the specific features of each of the “worlds” - the “macrocosm mosu” and the “microcosm” that are hidden behind it.

The external can be considered in relation to the internal as being reflected in it. The psyche and consciousness, from the point of view of the ontological approach, acquire the meaning of “inside being” (Rubinstein), a kind of native living “internal mirror”, with the help of which being realizes itself as such. Ontologization of the mental, according to. VARomenets, makes it a real phenomenon of being, an active force that shapes the world.

The external, from another point of view, is what is generated by the internal, is its manifestation or product, recorded in signs or material objects

The external and internal can be differentiated not as static “worlds”, but as forms of activity that have different sources. So,. DMUznadze proposes to distinguish between “introgenic” behavior, which is determined by interests. ESAM, motives, and “extragennu”, determined by external necessity.

In this regard, SLRubinstein emphasized that the mental is not only internal, subjective, meaning that the psyche acts as a determinant of behavior, the cause of bodily changes: not recognition, but objections, ignoring the role of mental phenomena in the determination of human behavior leads to indeterminism.

A significant addition to the above definition is given. KOabulkhanova-Slavskaya. By internal, she does not mean “physiological” or “mental,” but a specific nature, its own properties, its own logic of development, specialists and the mechanics of the movement of a given body or phenomenon that is affected by an external influence. This internal provides a specific way for a given phenomenon of “refraction” of external influences, which becomes increasingly complex in phenomena of the highest level of development.

By external we mean not a particular, random influence, but all those external conditions that correlate in their qualitative certainty with the internal, since the action of external influence is not indifferent to its development. ITK.

Thus, the need to introduce the “external-internal” paradigm into circulation in psychological science is determined by significant factors. It is within the framework of this paradigm that the problems of determination and self-termination of the psyche, its autonomy from biological and social factors, the problem of mental causation, the psyche not only as a reflection, but also as an active, proactive transformative force are solved.

The “border” between internal and external is quite conditional, and at the same time the existing non-identity, discrepancy, and inconsistency of the subjective and objective are unconditional

As a rule, harmony and integrity are inherent in those expressive signs that correspond to natural experiences. A deliberately feigned facial expression is disharmonious. The mismatch of facial movements (the upper and lower parts of the face - a disharmonious “mask”) indicates the insincerity of a person’s feelings and his relationships with other people. Such a “disharmonious mask” can very accurately characterize a personality and reflect its leading relationship to the world. Harmony of expression, synchronicity of facial expressions is a kind of visual sign of a true attitude towards another person, it is a sign of the internal harmony of a person. Facial expressions and facial expressions are inseparable from personality; they express not just states, but states experienced by a specific person. This is where individual differences arise in the expression of the same emotion, attitude and, accordingly, the difficulty of their unambiguous understanding.

Over the centuries, in the process of socialization, humanity has developed methods for forming the external self of an individual and ideas about it. Such techniques include the sociocultural development of “expressive masks,” the selection of a set of movements that make human behavior socially acceptable, successful, and attractive. “Cultivation of expression” is one of the mechanisms of control not so much over a person’s body, but over his personality. From the point of view of one of the famous researchers of nonverbal communications, A. Sheflen, any element of expression (from posture to eye contact) exists in order to establish, maintain, and limit the relationship between interacting people. Therefore, interested public institutions do not simply develop requirements for expressive human behavior, but use it to broadcast a socially desirable range of traits, states, and relationships that should have a clear external expression. For example, for a long time, a “real” person was considered to be a person with a simple face with large features, large hands, broad shoulders, a massive figure, a white-toothed smile, a direct look, a clear gesture, etc. and distinguished by efficiency, perseverance, perseverance, and courage. . All those who, due to natural circumstances or conditions of upbringing, did not correspond to this behavioral model risked being branded “rotten intellectuals.”

Despite the obvious predominance in the structure of expression of little-conscious non-verbal patterns of behavior, the subject uses expressive movements not only in accordance with their main function of expressing, but also in order to mask his actual experiences and relationships, which becomes the subject of special efforts leading to the development of management and control over external self of the individual. Techniques for purposefully changing the expressive external self and disguising it were developed by representatives of the psychology of stagecraft. They associated these skills with the expressive talent of the individual, which, within the framework of the problem of forming the expressive self of the individual, can be interpreted as a set of abilities to “build” one’s external self, to “reveal the inner self” through the external self.” This process of “building” includes both cognitive-emotional and behavioral mechanisms, among which a special place is occupied by the idea of ​​one’s external self and its correspondence to the real, actual self of the individual.

In the process of O. people, their internal, essential aspects are revealed, expressed externally, and become, to one degree or another, accessible to others. This happens due to the relationship between the external and internal in a person. In the most general consideration of such a relationship, it is necessary to proceed from a number of philosophical postulates relating not only to such concepts as “external” and “internal”, but also “essence”, “phenomenon”, “form”, “content”. The external expresses the properties of the object as a whole and the ways of its interaction with the environment, the internal expresses the structure of the object itself, its composition, structure and connections between elements. Moreover, the external is given directly in the process of cognition, while the knowledge of the internal requires theory. research, during which the so-called “unobservable entities” are introduced - idealized objects, laws, etc. Since the internal is revealed through the external, the movement of cognition is considered as a movement from the external to the internal, from what is observable to what is observable. which is unobservable. The content determines the form, and its changes cause its changes, on the other hand. - form affects the content, accelerates or inhibits its development. Thus, the content is constantly changing, but the form remains stable and unchanged for some time, until the conflict between content and form destroys the old form and creates a new one. In this case, the content is usually associated with quantitative changes, and the form - with qualitative, abrupt ones. Essence is internal, inseparable from a thing, necessarily present in it, spatially located within it. A phenomenon is a form of expression of essence. It coincides with the essence, differs, distorts it, which is due to the interaction of the object with other objects. In order to reflect such a distortion in human perception, the category “appearance” is introduced as the unity of the subjective and objective, in contrast to a phenomenon that is completely objective. The problem of external and internal acquires its own specificity and particular complexity if the object of cognition is a person (especially when concepts such as “body” and “soul” are used to explain the relationship between external and internal). Early researchers of this problem were interested in: 1) the relationship between the external and the internal in a person, his physical and spiritual, body and soul; 2) the ability to judge internal, personal qualities based on external, bodily manifestations; 3) connections of certain internal, mental disorders with external. manifestations, i.e. the influence of the mental on the physical and vice versa. Even Aristotle, in his work “Physiognomy,” tried to find the relationship between the external and the internal, both in general, philosophically, and specifically in the study of man. He believed that the body and soul are so fused in a person that they become the cause of most conditions for each other. But their interconnection and interdependence is relative: for any internal. state, one can achieve an external expression that does not at all correspond to it. There can also be something external to which the internal no longer corresponds (in whole or in part), and vice versa, there can be an internal to which no external thing corresponds. Much later, concrete “filling”, recognition and further development of the postulate about the unity of the external and internal in a person, his soul and body, the desire to understand their complex, multifaceted interaction served as a fruitful basis for the development of many modern ones. directions of psychology. Among them: the psychology of nonverbal behavior, studies of human expression, the psychology of lies, the holistic approach of psychosomatic medicine, etc. Since one of the sides of O. is people’s perception of each other, in the fatherland. In social psychology, the problem of the relationship between the external and the internal in a person was most intensively developed in social perception. In practical and theoretical terms, research in this area is focused on finding possible patterns of perception by one person of another, identifying interdependence and stable connections between external factors. manifestations and internal the content of a person as a person, individual, individuality, his understanding. Most of the research in this area was carried out in the beginning. The 1970s are works devoted to the problem of people reflecting each other in the process of their interaction (A. A. Bodalev and his scientific school). To internal (mental) content of a person includes his beliefs, needs, interests, feelings, character, states, abilities, etc., i.e., everything that is not directly given to a person in his perception of another. The external refers to the physical. the appearance of a person, his anatomical and functional characteristics (posture, gait, gestures, facial expressions, speech, voice, behavior). This also includes all signs and signals that are informative or regulatory in nature, which are perceived by the subject of cognition. According to A. A. Bodalev, internal (mental processes, mental states) is associated with specific neurophysiol. and biochemical characteristics of the body. In the course of a person’s life, his complex mental formations, which are ensembles of processes and states that are continuously rebuilt in the course of activity, are dynamically expressed in external terms. appearance and behavior in the form of a set of specific characteristics organized in spatio-temporal structures. Ideas regarding the interaction of external and internal were developed in the works of V. N. Panferov. He draws attention to a person’s appearance and once again emphasizes that when perceiving another person, his personal properties (as opposed to physical properties) are not given directly to the subject of cognition; their cognition requires the work of thinking, imagination, and intuition. He considers the problem of external and internal as a problem of the relationship between objective (appearance) and subjective properties (personal characteristics) of a person. In this case, the appearance appears in quality. sign system psychol. personality traits, on the basis of the cut in the process of cognition, psychol is updated. personality content. The question of the relationship between internal and external has been resolved in favor of their unity, since appearance is perceived as a quality. characteristic inseparable from personality. When solving a problem internally. content and external expressions V.N. Panferov identifies 2 sides of a person’s appearance: physical. beauty and charm (expression). Expression, in his opinion, is functionally related to personal characteristics. Due to the constant repetition of the same facial patterns, a typical expression (expression) is formed on a person’s face, which reflects his most frequent internal expression. state. The most informative elements of a person’s appearance for the subject of perception are the expression of the face and eyes. At the same time, the author notes the ambiguity of the interpretation of facial elements and its dependence on the expressive properties of appearance. Further attention to the problem of expression and non-verbal behavior also enriched the understanding of the relationship between the external and internal in a person in the process of O. Expressed at the beginning of the 20th century. theater researcher S. Volkonsky ideas regarding aesthetics and psychology. analysis of the external expression of a person’s inner self on stage, “self-sculpting”, his search for optimum expressiveness, external. harmony, the search for ways to educate an “expressive person”, an actor capable of conveying the most subtle experiences and meanings with his gesture, movement and words, returning to the body the function of an exponent of the soul that it had lost - turned out to be relevant and received further understanding in the works of V. A. Labunskaya, where expression is considered in quality. external self of the individual and correlates with different personal structures. Lit.: Aseev V. G. Categories of form and content in psychology // Categories of materialist dialectics in psychology. M., 1988; Bodalev A. A. Personality and communication. M., 1995; Losev A. F. History of ancient aesthetics. M., 1975; Panferov V.N. Appearance and personality // Social psychology of personality. L., 1974; Sheptulin A.P. System of categories of dialectics. M., 1967. G. V. Serikov