Thomas Fellmann
Bioenergetic Analysis • The Clinical Journal of the IIBA, 2025 (35), 53–87
https://doi.org/10.30820/0743-4804-2025-35-53 CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 www.bioenergetic-analysis.comIt is shown how the students further developed Lowen’s bioenergetic concepts, which, in the light of object relations theories, can be traced back to Winnicott in particular. However, to date, Kernberg’s ideas are largely absent from the bioenergetic literature. Lowen’s model of pathogenesis, with the idea of pleasure orientation as the main motivation for human action and physical defense as a means of repressing anxiety in connection with suppressed impulses, is contrasted with Kernberg’s idea of the dynamic unconscious. Based on a modified drive model, he understands affects as the basic motivation for human action. These organize themselves according to their valence into antagonistic poles of aggression and libido. He understands the defense function as a means of splitting painful relationship dyads from conscious self-experience. The three-elements of the object relations are also understood in their physically tangible dimensions, with a focus on the energetic aspect. Daniel Stern’s concept of RIGS supports this connection, which Kernberg does not conceptualize in this way. Krause’s modular affect theory provides guidance for working with the element of affect. The grounding phenomenon known in bioenergetics is reinterpreted by means of Kernberg’s psychodynamic understanding and the possibilities of the interventions derived from it are explained on the basis of a clinical example.
Keywords: object relations theory, psychopathogenesis model, affect theory, enactment, grounding, RIGs, dynamic unconscious
A teoria da relação de objeto na Análise Bioenergética à luz da concepção de Kernberg (Portuguese)
O artigo mostra como os estudantes foram desenvolvendo conceitos bioenergéticos de Lowen, os quais, à luz de teorias de relação de objeto, podem ser associadas particularmente a Winnicott. Entretanto, até o momento, as ideias de Kernberg estão praticamente ausentes na literatura bioenergética. O modelo de patogênese de Lowen, cuja ideia central se baseias na orientação para o prazer como a principal motivação para a ação humana e na defesa física como meio de reprimir a ansiedade em conexão com impulsos suprimidos, contrasta com a ideia de inconsciente dinâmico de Kernberg. Baseado num modelo modificado de drive, ele entende serem os afetos a motivação básica da ação humana. Estes se organizam, de acordo com sua valência, em polos antagônicos de agressão e libido. Ele entende a função de defesa como um meio de separar as relações diádicas dolorosas da auto-experiência consciente. Os três elementos das relações de objeto são também compreendidos em sua dimensão fisicamente tangíveis, com foco no aspecto energético. O conceito de RIGS Daniel Stern apoia essa conexão, a qual Kernberg não conceitualiza dessa maneira. A teoria de afeto modular de Krause oferece uma direção para trabalhar com o elemento do afeto. O fenômeno do grounding, conhecido na Bionergética, é reinterpretado através do entendimento psicodinâmico de Kernberg e as possibilidades de intervenção daí derivadas são explicadas através de um exemplo clínico.
La théorie des relations d’objet dans l’analyse bioénergétique à la lumière de la conception de Kernberg (French)
Il est montré comment les chercheurs ont développé les concepts bioénergétiques de Lowen, qui, à la lumière des théories des relations d’objet, peuvent être attribués en particulier à Winnicott. Cependant, à ce jour, les idées de Kernberg sont largement absentes de la littérature bioénergétique. Le modèle de pathogenèse de Lowen, avec l’idée de l’orientation au plaisir comme motivation principale de l’action humaine et de la défense corporelle comme moyen de refouler l’anxiété en relation avec les impulsions refoulées, est en contradiction avec l’idée de Kernberg de l’inconscient dynamique. Sur la base d’un modèle modifié de pulsion, il comprend les affects comme la motivation fondamentale de l’action humaine qui s’organisent en fonction de leur valence en pôles antagonistes d’agression et de libido. Il comprend la fonction de la défense comme moyen de séparer les dyades relationnelles douloureuses de l’expérience du soi conscient. Les trois éléments des relations d’objet sont également compris dans leurs dimensions physiquement tangibles, en mettant l’accent sur l’aspect énergétique. Le concept de RIGs de Daniel Stern soutient ce lien, que Kernberg ne conceptualise pas de cette manière. La théorie modulaire de l’affect de Krause fournit des conseils pour travailler avec l’élément de l’affect. Le phénomène d’ancrage connu en bioénergétique est réinterprété au moyen de la compréhension psychodynamique de Kernberg et les possibilités des interventions qui en résultent sont expliquées sur la base d’un exemple clinique.
La teoria delle relazioni oggettuali nell’analisi bioenergetica alla luce della concezione di Kernberg (Italian)
Viene mostrato come i suoi allievi abbiano sviluppato i concetti bioenergetici di Lowen, che, alla luce delle teorie delle relazioni oggettuali, possono essere ricondotti in particolare a Winnicott. Tuttavia, fino ad oggi, le idee di Kernberg sono in gran parte assenti dalla letteratura bioenergetica. Il modello di patogenesi di Lowen, con l’idea dell’orientamento al piacere come motivazione principale per l’azione umana e la difesa corporea come mezzo per reprimere l’ansia in relazione agli impulsi repressi, è messo in relazione con l’idea di Kernberg dell’inconscio dinamico. Sulla base di un modello di pulsione modificato, egli comprende gli affetti come motivazione di base per l’azione umana che si organizzano in base alla loro valenza in poli antagonisti di aggressività e libido. Egli comprende la funzione di difesa come mezzo per separare le diadi relazionali dolorose dall’esperienza di sé cosciente. I tre elementi delle relazioni oggettuali sono anche compresi nelle loro dimensioni fisicamente tangibili, con un focus sull’aspetto energetico. Il concetto di RIGs di Daniel Stern supporta questa connessione, che Kernberg non concettualizza in questo modo. La teoria modulare dell’affetto di Krause fornisce una guida per lavorare con l’elemento dell’affetto. Il fenomeno del grounding noto in bioenergetica viene reinterpretato per mezzo della comprensione psicodinamica di Kernberg e le possibilità degli interventi che ne derivano vengono spiegate sulla base di un esempio clinico.
Lowens Schüler haben seine bioenergetischen Konzepte weiterentwickelt, die von der Objektbeziehungstheorie her besonders auf Winnicott zurückgehen. Allerdings blieben in der bioenergetischen Literatur Kernbergs Theorien bis heute großenteils unberücksichtigt. Lowens Modell der Pathogenese, das auf der Idee der Lustorientierung als Haupttriebkraft des menschlichen Handelns basiert, sowie der Abwehr zur Bewältigung unterdrückter Regungen, wird Kernbergs Idee des dynamischen Unbewussten gegenübergestellt. Von einem modifizierten Triebmodell ausgehend, versteht dieser die Affekte als Grundmotivation des menschlichen Handelns, welche sich je nach Valenz in die antagonistischen Pole von Aggression und Libido unterteilen. Die Abwehrfunktion wird als ein Mittel aufgefasst, durch Abspaltung schmerzliche dyadische Beziehungen von der bewussten Selbsterfahrung auszugrenzen. Weiterhin werden die drei Elemente der Objektbeziehungen in ihren körperlich erfahrbaren Dimensionen verstanden, wobei der energetische Aspekt im Mittelpunkt steht, Daniel Sterns Konzept der RIGs unterstützt diese Verbindung, die Kernberg allerdings nicht in dieser Weise auffasst. Krauses modulare Affekttheorie zeigt die Richtung für die Arbeit mit den Affekten. Das bioenergetische Konzept des grounding wird von Kernbergs psychodynamischem Verständnis her neu interpretiert; anhand eines Fallbeispiels werden die davon ausgehenden Interventionsmöglichkeiten veranschaulicht.
Теория объектных отношений в биоэнергетическом анализе в свете концепции Кернберга (Russian)
Показывается, как студенты развивали биоэнергетические концепции Лоуэна, которые, в свете теорий объектных отношений, восходят, в частности, к Винникотту. Однако, до сих пор идеи Кернберга в значительной степени отсутствуют в биоэнергетической литературе. Модель патогенеза Лоуэна, с идеей ориентации на удовольствие как основной мотивации человеческих действий и физической защиты как средства подавления тревоги в связи с подавленными импульсами, противопоставляется идее динамического бессознательного Кернберга. Основываясь на модифицированной модели влечений, он понимает аффекты как основную мотивацию человеческих действий. Они организовываются в соответствии со своей валентностью в антагонистические полюса агрессии и либидо. Он понимает защитную функцию как средство отделения болезненных взаимоотношений от осознанного переживания себя. Три элемента объектных отношений также понимаются в их физически осязаемых измерениях, с акцентом на энергетический аспект. Концепция RIGS Дэниела Стерна поддерживает эту связь, которую Кернберг не концептуализирует таким образом. Модульная теория аффекта Краузе дает рекомендации по работе с элементом аффекта. Феномен заземления, известный в биоэнергетике, переосмыслен с помощью психодинамического подхода Кернберга, а возможности вмешательства, вытекающие из него, объясняются на основе клинического примера.
La teoría de las relaciones objetales en el análisis bioenergético desde la perspectiva de la concepción de Kernberg (Spanish)
Se examina cómo los alumnos han ampliado y desarrollado los conceptos bioenergéticos de Lowen. Estos conceptos, desde el punto de vista de las teorías de las relaciones objetales, pueden vincularse especialmente con las ideas de Winnicott. Sin embargo, las ideas de Kernberg continúan estando en gran medida ausentes en la literatura bioenergética. El modelo de patogénesis de Lowen, con la idea de la orientación hacia el placer como la principal motivación de la acción humana y la defensa física como un medio para reprimir la ansiedad en relación con los impulsos reprimidos, se contrasta con la idea de Kernberg del inconsciente dinámico. Basado en un modelo pulsional modificado, Kernberg entiende los afectos como la motivación básica para la acción humana. Estos se organizan según su valencia en polos antagónicos de agresión y libido. Kernberg concibe la función defensiva como un medio para escindir las díadas relacionales dolorosas de la experiencia consciente del yo. Los tres elementos de las relaciones objetales también se comprenden en sus dimensiones físicamente tangibles, con un enfoque en el aspecto energético. El concepto de RIG (Representaciones de Interacciones Generalizadas) de Daniel Stern apoya esta conexión, que Kernberg no conceptualiza de esta manera. La teoría modular de los afectos de Krause proporciona orientación para trabajar con el elemento afectivo. El fenómeno de “grounding”, fundamental en la bioenergética, se reinterpreta a la luz de la comprensión psicodinámica propuesta por Kernberg. Las posibilidades de intervención que surgen de esta nueva perspectiva se ilustran con un ejemplo clínico.
从科恩伯格的概念看躯体动力分析中的客体关系理论 (Chinese)
研究表明，学生们是如何进一步发展勒温的生物能概念的，根据客体关系理论，这些概念尤其 可以追溯到温尼科特，然而，迄今为止，科恩伯格的观点在躯体动力分析文献中基本没有出 现。勒温的病理学模型认为，愉悦取向是人类行动的主要动机，而身体防御则是与被压抑的冲 动相关的抑制焦虑的一种方式，这与科恩伯格的动力无意识概念形成了对比。基于修正后的驱 力模型，科恩伯格将情感理解为人类行动的基本动机。这些情感根据其价值将自己组织成攻击 性和性欲的对立两极。他将防御功能理解为将痛苦的二元关系从有意识的自我体验中分裂出来 的一种方式。客体关系的三个要素也被理解为有形的物理层面，重点是能量方面。丹尼尔-斯 特恩（Daniel Stern）的 “RIGS”概念支持这种联系，而科恩伯格并没有将其加以概念化，克劳 斯的模块化情感理论为情感元素的工作提供了指导。本文通过科恩伯格的心理动力学的理解方 式，重新诠释躯体动力学中的扎根现象，并以临床实例为基础，解释了由此衍生的干预的可能性。
Lowen’s character structures represent an evolution of the character typology conceived by Reich in his book Character Analysis (Reich, 1933). Lowen’s thinking is guided by ego psychology. His writings lack references to object relations theorists such as Melanie Klein, Winnicott, Fairbairn, Guntrip, Bion, Balint, and Margaret Mahler, or to Heinz Kohut’s self-psychology. It was left to his students, including Bob Lewis, Bob Hilton, Stephen Johnson, Scott Baum, Vincentia Schroeter, Guy Tonella, Jörg Clauer, and others, to integrate more recent psychoanalytically-oriented theoretical models into the understanding of bioenergetics and to derive practical clinical conclusions from them. All these later authors base their work on the so-called “soft” or “maternal” object relations theories (Fonagy et al., 2003). These theories tend to take a supportive, structure-building, and nurturing approach, aligning with the so-called relational turn in psychoanalysis, which emphasizes a two-person psychology. In contrast, the contributions of Otto F. Kernberg, a contemporary theorist whose work remains influential in the treatment of personality disorders, particularly borderline personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder, have received little attention within the bioenergetic community. Kernberg belongs to the “hard” object relations theory school, which aligns with a “paternal” conceptual framework characterized by uncovering, interpreting, and confronting dynamics (Fonagy, 2003). This paper aims to make an initial attempt to bridge this gap. The focus is less on Kernberg’s specific conceptualization of borderline personality disorder and the overarching borderline personality organization (Kernberg, 1980) with its emphasis on identity diffusion, and more on his fundamental model of the psyche, which integrates the diverse and multifaceted aspects of object relations theory. The goal is to demonstrate how this fundamental model of the psyche can explain clinical situations within the framework of bioenergetic analysis and serve as a guide for therapeutic action.
To begin, it is important to clarify what is meant by object relations theory. In broad terms, this encompasses all theories that address both real, external persons and the internal experiences associated with them, as well as the impact of these experiences on psychological functioning (Fonagy & Target, 2020 [2003], p. 153).
Kernberg offers three definitions of object relations theory:
This third definition serves as the foundation for the discussion that follows.
At the core of Kernberg’s model is the formation of dyadic intrapsychic representations of self and object images, each of which possesses a bipolar intrapsychic quality. These representations originate in the early mother-child relationship and influence the later development of dyadic, triadic, and multiple internal and external interpersonal relationships. Interpersonal relationships are thus understood as reenactments of earlier ones.
According to Kernberg, all experiences occur as simultaneous formations of self and object. The self is understood as a composite structure resulting from the integration of multiple self-images. The object refers to internal objects or object representations, derived from the integration of multiple object images into broader representations of others. A key aspect of Kernberg’s theory is that internalization always involves a dyadic, bipolar characteristic, where each unit of self- and object-image is embedded in a distinct affective context. These self-object-affect units constitute the primary determinants of the totality of the psychic structures (id, ego, and superego) (Kernberg, 1997, p. 55).
Object relations theory thus concerns itself with the causes and psychological development leading to a more or less integrated ego, superego, and id. It is a theory of early development but also provides a framework for therapeutic techniques addressing a wide range of pathologies, including psychosis, borderline personality disorder, pathological narcissism, and neuroses (Kernberg, 1995).
An essential point to highlight is that Kernberg’s object relations theory is rooted in representations that he conceptualizes as cognitive constructs, though he does not elaborate on their nature. It can be assumed that he refers to cognitive and imaginative properties or processes. However, he does not extend his conceptualization to include the physical domain, such as processes involving bodily sensations, posture, or movement. In his writings, Kernberg only hints at the importance of observing patients and attending to their communication channels to guide the choice of focal topics during therapy sessions. He references nonverbal cues such as tone, voice modulation, posture, gestures, and facial expressions but does not integrate these into his theoretical framework for object relations (Clarkin et al., 2006 [2008], p. 97).
In the following discussion, an attempt will be made to address this gap by integrating the physical and nonverbal dimensions into the object relations framework. This expansion aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of therapeutic interactions and their underlying processes.
First, however, I will provide some introductory and further remarks on the various object relations theories. They diverge on several key points, including:
Fairbairn rejects libido and aggression as primary motivational systems. He proposes that object relations themselves serve as the central motivational force, equating libido with the drive for relational connection. He dismisses the notion that libido’s primary function is pleasure-seeking (Fairbairn, 2000 [1946], p. 171). Fairbairn emphasizes the critical role of a nurturing early environment in fostering healthy psychological development (Bacal, 1990).
Sullivan (Newman, 1990), like Fairbairn, disputes the existence of innate drives. Both theorists consider aggression secondary, arising from frustrated libidinal needs, particularly in the context of traumatic experiences in the early mother-child relationship.
In contrast, theorists aligned with Freud’s dual-drive theory, such as Melanie Klein, argue that aggression is innate and pivotal in shaping early interpersonal dynamics. To some extent, Winnicott and certain ego psychologists in the object relations tradition share this perspective (Kernberg, 2002, p. 15).
Kleinian theorists posit that unconscious fantasies exist from birth as expressions of libido or destructive impulses, including the death drive. These fantasies profoundly influence how infants perceive their real relational experiences, which are shaped by, but not determined by, external environmental factors.
The perspective of interpersonal psychoanalysis, on the other hand, as represented by Sullivan or Guntrip, regarding the significance of unconscious fantasies, posits that early internalized object relations are maintained with minimal structural modifications and deny the existence of unconscious fantasies from birth. Consequently, transference developments reflect quite accurately the actual traumatically internalized object relations of the past (Kernberg, 2002, pp. 15–16).
Kernberg, in the tradition of Klein and Jacobson, interprets transference relationships as manifestations of reactivated intrapsychic conflicts. His approach heavily emphasizes countertransference, particularly when addressing severe personality disorders.
In contrast, theorists such as Guntrip and Greenberg & Mitchell prioritize the reality of the therapeutic interaction in the present moment, focusing on the therapist’s personality rather than on the patient’s innate unconscious fantasies (Greenberg & Mitchell, 1983).
The romantic paradigm, endorsed by Balint, Winnicott, and Guntrip, portrays humans as inherently good and capable, shaped largely by external influences. It attributes psychopathology to developmental deficits stemming from unfavorable conditions and assumes a significant, optimistic potential for growth and healing. This perspective also underpins humanistic psychology.
The classical paradigm, rooted in the work of Anna Freud, Melanie Klein, Kernberg, and certain British object relations theorists, views humans as naturally flawed but capable of addressing some shortcomings. It interprets psychopathology as the result of unresolved conflicts and emphasizes the inescapable nature of aggression and destructiveness. Life, according to this view, is a constant struggle against the resurgence of infantile conflicts (Fonagy & Target, 2020 [2003], pp. 156–157).
These fundamental differences in theory and technique highlight the diverse approaches within the field of object relations, each shaped by distinct philosophical assumptions and clinical priorities.
Despite their differences, object relations theories share several fundamental similarities:
These shared elements underscore the central importance of early relational experiences in shaping psychological development and their lasting impact on personality and pathology. They also highlight the therapeutic value of examining these early patterns in the context of the therapeutic relationship.
Alexander Lowen’s conceptualization of mental disorders stems from the mid-20th century, shaped by Wilhelm Reich’s psychoanalytic framework, with whom he underwent analysis between 1942 and 1945 (Lowen, 1975), and Freud’s drive theory. Thus, he is located with his views in classical psychoanalysis. His approach integrates ego psychology and focuses primarily on the biological and energetic dimensions of psychological functioning diverging from developments in relational and object relations theories.
In short: Stressful situations in adulthood trigger reactualization of infantile conflicts through regression. Attempts to resolve these conflicts using defensive strategies fail, leading to intensified symptoms and emotional distress.
Lowen’s model centers on the inner psychodynamics of the individual, with limited consideration for relational dynamics or external interpersonal influences. He makes no reference to a counterpart who reacts sensitively in contact and thus makes safety possible. For Lowen, the conscious feeling of safety is limited exclusively to one’s own experience, especially that of grounding, i. e. to the way in which contact with the ground is established and felt. In the article (Lowen, 1995), he refers to failed therapies by Wilhelm Reich. His patients did achieve the experience of the orgasm reflex and free movement in the pelvis during inhalation and exhalation through breathing work, accompanied by a feeling of pleasure. However, when they left the therapy room and lacked direct contact with Reich, this good feeling disappeared. For Lowen, this only meant that Reich neglected the work with and the strength in the legs. He disregarded the importance of the therapeutic relationship, the support it provides and the experience of support it creates. Lowen remained theoretically in the 50s of the last century. He did not participate in the further development and theoretical debates of psychoanalysis. There are no references to the object relationship in his writings.
Several of Lowen’s students have further developed his approach to one-person psychology, incorporating concepts from object relations theory. This evolution marks a departure from Lowen’s paradigm, which posited that all character structures involve an energy deficit caused by suppressive defense mechanisms. In cases of severe psychopathology, such as borderline personality disorder or borderline character structures, there is instead an excess of energy.
This section highlights key students of Lowen and their contributions to object-relations-oriented approaches.
Bob Hilton developed a method of relational somatic psychotherapy, inspired by Winnicott and Guntrip (Sieck, 2007; Hilton, 2012) and shaped by his personal experiences as a patient of Lowen. Hilton emphasizes the therapeutic relationship as the central element for fostering change. He attributes psychological problems to a dual source of trauma:
Hilton identifies the disturbed mother-child relationship as a core issue, suggesting that the development of blocks and withdrawal into the self can be traced back to this early relational dynamic. This manifests on two levels: Physically, in the form of numbness, immobility, and apathy (a “broken heart”), and relationally through superficial attachments, over-adaptation, and substitute gratifications – what Winnicott (1958b) termed the “false self”.
Hilton rejects the classical psychoanalytic interpretation of resistance as mere stubbornness. Instead, he views resistance as a self-protective function that must be respected to avoid retraumatization. His therapeutic stance is guided by three principles:
This approach enables patients to relinquish resistance as a protective mechanism, paving the way for deeper self-exploration and healing.
Johnson (1985) situates Lowen’s five character structures within a developmental framework, referencing the work of Margaret Mahler. He attributes the schizoid character to developmental disruptions in the autistic phase (up to the 8th week of life) and the oral character to impairments during the symbiotic phase (up to 6 months). Johnson incorporates Winnicott’s concept of the “false self”, which arises as a response to the frustration of the “true self” and appears across various character structures.
In his work “The Narcissistic Personality Style” – which Lowen refers to as the psychopathic character – Johnson explores developmental issues within the rapprochement phase (15–24 months) and classifies object relations according to Kohut into three levels of severity:
In his book Body and Word in Psychotherapy (1996), Downing integrates object relations theory with body-oriented psychotherapeutic approaches, drawing partly on Kernberg’s concepts. Downing views internal representations not merely as images of people but as motor-encoded beliefs about others. He discusses object relations units in the sense of Kernberg, which revive the patient’s past relational experiences – such as those with the mother – within the therapeutic process. Downing connects these units with affective-motor schemas, composed of three elements:
Through this approach, Downing provides a body-psychotherapeutic perspective that proves particularly useful in clinical practice, especially through his detailed focus on working with affects during therapy.
Baum explores object relations theory extensively in two works, connecting it with body-oriented psychotherapeutic approaches. In his first work (Baum, 1997), he examines borderline personality disorder in the context of Lowen’s grounding concept, incorporating elements of Kernberg’s theory, albeit without explicitly naming him. Baum expands the grounding concept to include not only the physical perception of contact with the ground but also the energetic and psychological perception of reality. He describes the identity disturbance in borderline patients as a lack of self-coherence and an inability to perceive others in a differentiated way, which he links to a deficiency in grounding. This is associated with somatic issues, such as insufficient contact with the ground and limited proprioception in the legs, resulting in an inner withdrawal from reality.
Baum broadens the concept of reality testing, incorporating the ability for internal anchoring and the retrieval of comforting memories. Therapeutically, he emphasizes the importance of the therapeutic relationship, which he describes as being based on a so-called therapeutic matrix, characterized by equality and mutual sensitivity to perceptions – though he does not clearly define the concept of equality. Classical bioenergetic techniques, such as kicking and deep breathing, also play a role in his approach.
In his later article (2017), Baum develops the concept of the therapeutic matrix further, grounding it in Winnicott’s concept of the “holding environment”. He highlights the central role of the therapeutic relationship as a key factor in psychotherapy. However, unlike his earlier work, Baum now qualifies the principle of equality, describing the relationship as inherently asymmetrical: the patient is at the center, and the dynamic is not about mutual exchange. Baum defines the therapeutic matrix through three categories:
Baum rejects a purely relational therapy, instead integrating the principles of abstinence and neutrality on the part of the therapist, drawing on the principles of object relations theory and inspired by Bion.
Klopstech describes the therapeutic approach as contingent upon the clinical situation, framing it either as a one-person therapy or as therapy in the context of object relations theory (Klopstech, 2002). She differentiates between the one-and-a-half-person psychology and the two-person psychology, a concept introduced by psychoanalyst Martha Stark (Stark, 2000).
The one-and-a-half-person psychology model assumes a structural deficit in the patient and is based on two theoretical frameworks:
This model highlights the “price” (a deficit) the child pays for parental inadequacies. Key proponents of this perspective include Balint and Winnicott.
In contrast, the two-person psychology is grounded in a relational understanding of the therapeutic relationship. Here, the patient and therapist form a dynamic relationship based on mutuality and reciprocity. The therapist assumes the role of a subject and an active participant in the relationship.
Klopstech’s approach thus enables a flexible therapeutic framework that focuses either on the patient’s structural deficits or on the relational dynamics between the patient and therapist, depending on the needs of the clinical situation.
Heinrich (Heinrich-Clauer, 2008) utilizes her own bodily sensations, internal images, and emotions, interpreting them as resonance phenomena in the sense of somatic countertransference and using them as a starting point for therapeutic interventions.
Lewis (Lewis, 2008) explains the development of the “false self” (as described by Winnicott) through the premature development of the head-neck-shoulder musculature. When a mother – potentially exhibiting traits of borderline personality disorder – lacks sensitivity, the infant is forced to prematurely support themselves against gravity in an attempt to self-regulate and withdraw from the mother. This results in chronically tense neck muscles and a mask-like facial expression, indicating a split between body and mind. The patient “lives in their head” with limited access to bodily sensations. Lewis refers to this condition as cephalic shock.
Tonella demonstrates that the “self” is a complex functional unit comprising “representation, emotion, motor activity, sensory function, and energy”. He argues that the self develops against the backdrop of two motivational systems: sexuality and attachment. His work refers to Bowlby’s attachment theory (Tonella, 2008).
Cockburn (Cockburn, 2012) develops an understanding of pre-oedipal transference from an object relations perspective, drawing on the work of Ogden and Bion. He explains the paranoid-schizoid position and the associated phenomena of splitting. Cockburn emphasizes the intensity of transference resonances and their energetic and somatic nature in severely disturbed patients, which can be physically experienced by the therapist as countertransference. He argues that Lowen’s three bioenergetic principles are not limited to one-person psychology: psychological problems are integrated equally with physical expression in the therapeutic process; muscular tension is systematically addressed; and body-based interventions facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of transference and countertransference phenomena.
Koemeda (Koemeda-Lutz, 2006) highlights the importance of enactment in therapy, which can be understood both from an object relations and relational perspective. The term “enactment” refers to the spontaneous bodily movements of the patient and therapist, which initially appear as unconscious enactments. In this dynamic, in a first step the therapist becomes engaged in a non-verbal form of communication in the here and now. Through this scenically enacted process, past experiences are reorganized, and communication occurs through expressive actions and mutual handling (Heisterkamp, 2022). In the next phase, it is crucial for the therapist to consciously perceive their somatic countertransference and actively integrate it into the therapeutic process.
Resneck-Sannes (2012) emphasizes the importance of Bowlby’s attachment theory, which she regards as part of object relations theory. This theory serves as her foundation and guide for understanding and contextualizing therapeutic processes. She critiques the fact that physical contact is often overlooked in scientific discussions. For her, this dimension, combined with relational orientation, is a central feature of bioenergetics and distinguishes it from other body-oriented psychotherapeutic approaches, such as Levine’s Somatic Experiencing. In her view, physical contact in therapy must be precisely tailored to the individual needs of the patient. Variations in the intensity of touch, as well as the use of voice, including its volume and tone, aim to provide the patient with a comforting and healing experience.
Resneck-Sannes draws on infant researcher Ed Tronick (2007) and argues that therapeutic change arises only through resonance between patient and therapist. This resonance creates the space for a dyadic body-emotion awareness. The effectiveness of therapy, according to her, lies less in interpretations and more in the therapist’s genuine presence, characterized by spontaneity and affectivity. In her article on the borderline character structure, Vincentia Schroeter (2009) references Kernberg’s description of psychopathological phenomenology, particularly primitive defense mechanisms such as splitting and projective identification. These mechanisms prevent borderline patients from developing an integrated and consistent sense of self and others. Patients with this character structure exhibit high energy levels, are explosive, and struggle to control their energy, leading to impulsive emotional outbursts. Schroeter views the therapeutic task as providing the patient with grounding and support, including on a physical level. The goal is to facilitate positive experiences through this support, which can then be internalized and experienced as an integrated part of the self.
Kernberg’s conceptualization of object relations theory has received little attention in bioenergetic literature to date. However, given its valuable contribution to understanding patient issues and guiding therapy, we will explore its fundamental concepts in detail in the following section. This provides the foundation for its meaningful therapeutic application.
Kernberg developed the most comprehensive and differentiated theoretical framework among the object relations theories proposed to date. On the one hand, he successfully reconceptualized psychoanalytic treatment and devised a manualized approach specific to severe personality disorders: Transference-Focused Psychotherapy (Clarkin et al., 2008). On the other hand, as a clinically oriented psychiatrist, his understanding of borderline pathology significantly influenced diagnostic criteria. This is evident in the description of borderline personality disorder in the DSM-III (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) during the 1980s, as well as in the current DSM-5, particularly in the alternative model outlined in its appendix. The same influence is apparent in the upcoming ICD-11 framework.
Additionally, Kernberg designed a diagnostic classification system for clinically relevant personality disorders, integrating categorically defined disorders into dimensional domains that account for severity, introversion versus extraversion, and levels of identity development (Clarkin et al., 2006; 2008, pp. 10–11). This conceptualization was ahead of its time during the 1980s and 1990s, challenging the exclusively categorical thinking of psychiatry at that time. It holds immense clinical significance and can also be highly beneficial for bioenergetic practitioners, enriching our body-psychotherapeutic thinking and interventions with invaluable insights.
Kernberg’s developmental model is partly based on findings from infant research, as described, for instance, by Stern (1992 [1985], p. 160). Starting from innate abilities, it outlines how a psychological structure emerges. Temperament, as a constitutional factor, fundamentally influences individual response patterns, such as intensity, rhythm, and thresholds for affective reactions to internal stimuli and environmental cues. “Constitutionally determined thresholds for activating positive, pleasurable, rewarding affects and negative, displeasurable affects form the primary link between the biological and psychological components of personality” (Yeomans, 2017 [2015], p. 4).
It is essential to note that the standard research paradigm in infant studies assumes results are derived from a specific infant state – namely, an awake and balanced infant (Dornes, 1993, p. 35). Under these conditions, innate abilities enable the differentiation between self and object.
“An optimal interaction between the baby and the caregiver creates a warm, nurturing atmosphere for the infant, allowing them to sense that the caregiver loves them, understands their needs precisely, and satisfies them in a gratifying rhythmic exchange. In this context, the infant develops a secure attachment to the caregiver and begins constructing a coherent internal narrative about themselves and others, grounded in the confident and joyful expectation of being protected and cared for. This secure attachment helps the child manage negative experiences – moments of discomfort, displeasure, and pain – that are inevitable in any developmental process” (Yeomans, 2017 [2015], p. 7).
Through this process, from birth, a self-representation – or multiple self-representations – develops and gradually integrates. Additionally, secure attachment facilitates the development of realistic object representations, forming the structure of the “ego”, which consists of an integrated self surrounded by integrated concepts of significant others or object representations. Stern refers to this process as the development of “Representations of Interactions that have been Generalized” (RIGs) (Stern, 1992 [1985], p. 160). Kernberg also incorporates Margaret Mahler’s phase model of psychological development. While Kernberg acknowledges the innate differentiation ability of infants, he rejects Mahler’s concept of an initial autistic phase.1
The first developmental phase, the symbiotic phase, unfolds under conditions of peak affects during the first year of life and concludes in its second half. During this phase, structures develop in which an entirely good and entirely bad self-representation are related to an idealized entirely good and an entirely bad object representation. Intense experiences of hunger, pain, and isolation alternate with ecstatic satisfaction.
In these affect-intense moments, the infant’s inner world merges self- and object-representations without boundaries. This dynamic form what Kernberg terms the “dynamic unconscious” or the “id”. In contrast, low-intensity affect states allow the infant to perceive and relativize the external world, distinguishing it from their inner world. This merging of self and object representations in affect-intense moments characterizes the symbiotic phase, also observed in psychotic structures or dynamics between torturer and victim.
The second phase, separation and individuation, lasts until the end of the third year. In situations of intense affect, self-representations and object-representations remain separated. Splitting phenomena lead to oppositions between entirely good and entirely bad internalized relationships. While this phase is normal in young children, it characterizes pathological structures in borderline patients. These individuals struggle to integrate positive and negative aspects of themselves and others, leading to idealization or persecution of objects.
The third phase, object constancy, begins at the end of the third year and involves the gradual integration of polarized libidinal and aggressive representations into a “whole self” and “whole objects”. The ego, superego, and id form as complete structures. The defense mechanism shifts from splitting to repression, allowing for the integration of self and object.
In later childhood, the final phase involves the integration of the ego and superego through abstraction, individuation, and depersonalization of the superego, strengthening ego identity. In Kernberg’s view, the “id” is not a repository of chaotic drives but rather the primitive, split-off, persecutory, and idealized internalized object relations whose intensity – whether sexually or aggressively arousing – cannot be tolerated. These are completely separated from the ego through repression.
Kernberg posits that infants are born with a biological affect disposition, forming the primary motivations for human behavior. These motivations are categorized as positive (e. g., love, happiness, euphoria) or negative (e. g., fear, hate, anger). These affects integrate into two overarching constructs: libido and aggression. Affects thus serve as the building blocks of drives, which manifest clinically in the concrete affects of corresponding internalized object relations. By framing drives as affective integrations, Kernberg reverses the traditional psychoanalytic relationship between drive and affect.
The drives – libido and aggression – refer to specific objects, always experienced in a relational context. Internalized object relations serve as building blocks of psychic structure, forming a triadic unit consisting of:
These units, termed object-relation dyads, are not exact internal representations of past events but are shaped by internal processes influenced by primary affects and fantasies (Yeomans, 2017 [2015], p. 3).
Defense is no longer understood as an unconscious conflict between impulse and defense but as the repression of an internalized object relationship. A manifest dyad defends against another, repressed dyad. For example, a patient’s overly friendly transference toward the therapist is not merely a reaction formation against aggression but reflects a submissive object relationship defending against an aggressive one.
Primitive, split-off object relations are activated not only in transference but also lead to role reversals. The patient projects their self onto the therapist, identifying themselves with the object representation in the relationship. Particularly with borderline patients, rapid shifts in role distribution may occur within a single session. These shifts demonstrate the activation and role reversal within the same object relationship.
Kernberg interprets pathological states in adult patients as failures to progress beyond normal developmental phases.
We understand subject representation, object representation, and their associated affect as the tripartite building blocks of psychic structure. These are formed in every relational episode (Luborsky, 1995). For us as bioenergetic therapists, the following questions arise: How can we understand this conception from a body psychotherapeutic perspective? What can we derive from it, and how can we utilize it therapeutically?
In psychoanalytic discourse, representation is often used synonymously with idea or image. However, an analysis of this term extends beyond a purely mental understanding or the notion of representations as photographs of ourselves and others that we carry within us. As described above, representations as elements of psychic structure emerge through so-called RIGs (Representation of Interaction with Generalized Others), processes of introjection through which complete interactions or episodic representations of the environment are internalized. These processes involve factors such as gaze, gesture, facial expressions, voice, posture, the temporal structuring of movement, the experience of force, and spatial orientation (Stern, 2011 [2010]).
These representations can have unconscious, preconscious, and conscious dimensions. Physical and psychological aspects play a decisive role and include, particularly in their unconscious dimensions, consistent relationships (Mertens, 1992). The processes involved lead to identificatory dynamics, in which the self seeks to emulate a model, initially often the mother. Beyond the dynamic unconscious as defined above, the unconscious also encompasses procedural knowledge or what is referred to as the procedural unconscious. This knowledge, inaccessible to conscious awareness, develops from birth. Being unsymbolizable, it is acted out and includes nonverbal signals such as posture, gestures, and affective motor patterns. This is evident, among other things, inaction dialogue.2 Thus, the body significantly participates as an information medium in the formation of representations while simultaneously expressing them.
What do we understand by affect, the third component?
According to Krause, affect can be understood as a process or system comprising six subsystems or modules. Affect activates these subsystems but can also itself be influenced by them, demonstrating a reciprocal regulatory mechanism. Affect triggers an affective action and takes control over the internal world, the perception of others, intentional motor activity and signaling, as well as central and peripheral physiological processes (Krause, 2012).
For a body-psychotherapeutic approach, knowledge of these six modules is valuable, as each can be consciously attended to in the therapeutic process. Each module can take precedence depending on the specific clinical situation.
Although these three modules (referred to as “Occurring Emotion”) can function without conscious cognition, they are externally observable.
These last three modules are referred to as “Experienced Emotion.” Based on specific motor-expressive facial expressions, discrete affects such as joy, sadness, anger, disgust, fear, surprise, and contempt are culturally invariant.
Body-oriented psychotherapeutic approaches based on object relations theory always initially focus on the currently present dyad. This dyad is either revealed in the transference dynamics between patient and therapist or becomes apparent from the patient’s description of their experience in a relational episode outside the therapy room.
We understand this dyad as embodied manifestations of the three involved elements: self-representation, object representation, and the associated affect. Simultaneously, we view these three components as a constellation with a defensive function against an internalized conflict tied to a repressed dyad. From the perspective of its defensive function, the corresponding mode of experience is characterized by a specifically diminished sense of vitality. In the original bioenergetic framework, this diminished vitality typically aligns with one of Lowen’s five character structures – or a blend of them – and is associated with a lack or withholding of energy. However, in the borderline character structure described above, we assume a high energy level. Reduced vitality, as observed in all character structures identified by Lowen, manifests in patients through shallow breathing, increased muscular tension in the thighs or calves, or an insecure sense of grounding.
In an initial therapeutic phase, the three elements – self-representation, object representation, and affect – are identified and elaborated on in as much detail as possible, including their physical manifestations. These elements emerge through awareness of bodily posture, vocal expression, spontaneous gestures, facial expressions, eye contact, and muscle tension in different regions, which may point to suppressed impulses.
When these phenomena are physically explored with the therapist’s support and described as precisely as possible, they typically trigger associations or set additional physical activities in motion. This process can lead to the emergence of relevant memories or the development of a narrative. The patient is encouraged to articulate, within the described relational episode or the current transference dynamic in the therapy room, the role they perceive for themselves and the role they attribute to the other. If this therapeutic approach reduces defensive mechanisms and muscular tension, an infantile relational constellation with the associated dyad may become visible.
This means that the current transference constellation or described conflict can be traced back to an infantile conflict. The newly emergent object relational constellation is systematically explored again, physically and cognitively, using its three elements.
In the final step, the analysis of the infantile conflict uncovers the dyadic constellation that had been defended against. This conflict involves pain or disappointment, often accompanied by an overall sense of displeasure. It is managed through the development of an affect-motor schema, resulting in an embodied defensive mode. According to Kernberg’s understanding of object relations, the defense is against a dyadic constellation, which must be identified in this third therapeutic phase.
A positive working alliance, characterized by a stable therapeutic relationship between patient and therapist, supports this process. The defensive mechanisms serve an essential function in protecting the patient from painful or threatening aspects of their internal world. Recognizing and respecting this function is crucial in therapy, as undermining or breaking the defense should never be the goal of an intervention.
Examining the phenomena that arise during grounding through the lens of object relations theory allows for a nuanced recognition of self- and object-representations along with their associated affects. To apply object relations theory to the central grounding paradigm in bioenergetic analysis, conceptual clarification is necessary.
Grounding is a cornerstone of bioenergetics. Lowen associated it with the idea that a core aspect of psychic functioning involves the movement of energy from the center to the periphery, accompanied by a reduction in tension (Lowen, 1981 [1958], p. 77). The focus is on standing, walking, and breathing, which reveal where energy and vitality are being withheld in the body. “All energy eventually finds its way into the earth; this is the principle we call ‘grounding’” (Lowen, 1981 [1958], p. 103). Lowen viewed grounding work as a means to strengthen self-expression, enhance body awareness, and increase joy in life.
Lowen’s students expanded the concept of grounding beyond mere physical contact with the ground. Notable contributions include works by Conger (1994), Clauer (2011), Baum (1997), and Heinrich (2001). Their broader understanding of grounding finds expression in various domains:
This expanded understanding of grounding goes far beyond Lowen’s original concept and can be integrated into Kernberg’s model of the three components of psychic structure.
In grounding, the self-pole, or self-representation, is physically expressed in upright posture, breathing patterns, subjective body awareness, and embodied self-feeling. Simultaneously, there is an intentionality – a directedness toward another in a relationship, representing the object-pole or object representation. Additionally, grounding involves a subjectively experienced contact with the ground.
For example, object representation may symbolically point to a specific form of relational experience, such as how the patient perceives the floor as hard and cold, reflecting an unconscious dyadic object relational constellation. In this case, the self-representation may describe a rejected and unaccepted self encountering an unattainable and distant object.
The third element, the associated affect, is revealed through bodily self-awareness and might manifest as sadness. Initially, this constellation is preconscious and may point to a manifest current conflict or the ongoing transference relationship. In later therapy stages, it could be traced back to an infantile conflict, for instance, memories of early childhood rejection.
In the final phase, the repressed dyadic constellation may emerge, revealing a self-representation where the patient feels warm, soft, and desired, in relation to an object representation perceived as benevolent, attentive, and supportive, fostering a sense of love and security.
In clinical practice, grounding phenomena – particularly the transition from standing with locked knees to a posture with slightly bent knees while focusing on the feet and their contact with the floor – can reveal significant changes in bodily awareness. These changes may represent different, even opposing, dyadic object relational constellations, which must be explored in detail. Patients often report sensations of flow and permeability in their legs, deepened breathing, relaxed shoulders, or spontaneous vibrations in their legs. From an object relations perspective, such changes reflect a transformation in the dyadic object relational constellation. Therapy should then investigate how the patient perceives themselves and the floor as a symbolic object representation, along with the accompanying affect.
Kernberg’s concept of psychic structure enriches and deepens the understanding of grounding, distinguishing bioenergetics from other psychotherapy approaches. By integrating object relations theory, Lowen’s original one-person psychology expands into a two-person psychology, offering new therapeutic strategies and perspectives. Each of the three elements can be given a physical expression. Focusing on the object representation allows the patient to consciously experience and embody this role, utilizing modalities such as voice, gaze, breath, movement, and posture.
The following case study illustrates an approach that integrates a bioenergetically-oriented intervention with reflections guided by object relations theory.
The patient seeks therapy for daily anxiety accompanied by distressing sensations of pressure and tightness in the chest, alongside low self-confidence. His two-year romantic relationship with a woman has exacerbated these pre-existing symptoms. Structurally, he presents with a neurotic personality organization characterized by repression-based defenses. He exhibits an oral character structure with schizoid elements.
This therapy session begins with the patient recounting an incident from the previous evening. He felt criticized and belittled by his girlfriend after being too tired to interact following his physically demanding work as a carpenter. He had wanted to lie down for 30 minutes but did not dare voice this desire due to what he perceived as her critical look and tone. This scenario reflects a current relational conflict in his daily life.
The patient is instructed to mentally revisit this situation while standing barefoot. The therapist stands as well. The patient’s posture becomes revealing: his knees are locked, his head tilts slightly forward, his forehead is tense and furrowed, his shoulders slump forward with a retracted chest, his breathing is shallow, engaging only the chest muscles. His arms hang limply, fingers pointing downward. His stance appears rigid, and his body stiff.
When asked about his subjective experience and bodily sensations, thus addressing his self-representation, he describes feeling insecure and lacking self-confidence. He reports feeling as though he never does anything right, perceiving himself as unable to meet others’ expectations. He likens himself to a small child and notes sensations of chest pressure, shortness of breath, and an impulse to cross his arms protectively over his chest. He feels increasingly threatened, anxious, and torn between defending himself and retreating. In this posture, he envisions himself as a young boy being punished for doing everything wrong, experiencing guilt.
Here, we reference Heinrich, who emphasizes that grounding work requires a relational response from the therapist to facilitate the integration of a sense of self within the therapeutic setting. This relational engagement involves attentive observation, sensing, listening, and providing verbal affirmation while suggesting words to integrate the patient’s experiences. To anchor the stabilizing and revitalizing sensation of energy flow in the legs and feet, and the enhanced awareness of physical posture, the therapist’s relational presence is crucial (Heinrich, 2001, p. 68).
Through the bodily sensations described while standing, the patient identifies the dominant object relationship underpinning the conflict with his girlfriend. He articulates his embodied self-representation as a guilty, punishable boy in her presence. When directed to focus on his feet, he reports feeling “tied” at the ankles, with his feet cold, distant, and the ground beneath him hard, rejecting, and unreliable. He assesses his stance as shaky, his feet tense and cramped, providing little contact with the floor as he stands on their outer edges. For a moment, the sensation of the ground becomes a symbolic object representation – a stepping stone to approach his inner experience with his girlfriend.
In the next phase, he is asked to describe his imagined girlfriend, the object representation in this relationship. He portrays her gaze as stern, unjust, intimidating, and powerful. She seems distant, cold, and unreachable, constantly critical, issuing accusations and advice about how he should change. He feels perpetually unable to meet her expectations, seeing her as a strict, demanding, and just teacher. With this, the identification of the activated object relationship, including its three elements, is complete, allowing the grounding work to progress further in the session.
The patient is then instructed to slightly bend his knees while maintaining a shoulder-width stance and to notice the resulting changes in his bodily sensations. Gradually, he observes his feet warming, feeling larger, and perceives the carpet beneath him as softer. This induces a sense of heaviness and improved support. His stance feels steadier, and the fixation in his ankle joints diminishes, creating a sense of fluidity in his lower legs. The contact of his feet with the ground provides a sense of occupying his space and feeling entitled to it. He feels accepted, able to express himself authentically without restraint. The ground transforms into a symbolic object representation, offering security and stability – a kind of safe base that allows a curious, fearless engagement with the world.
Simultaneously, his breathing changes. He notices his abdomen expanding slightly during inhalation, the pressure under his sternum easing, and his spine straightening. His shoulders visibly relax, his chin lifts, and his gaze widens. He feels an impulse to raise his arms horizontally. This process unfolds over several minutes, supported by the therapist’s encouragement to focus on bodily sensations and articulate them verbally. When asked about his self-representation, he reports feeling taller, older – more adult. He experiences a heightened awareness of his strength in his pelvis, recalling his identity as a man. Two sentences come to him: “I am someone too” and “I can stand up for myself.” As he says this, he clenches his fists. After maintaining this posture, a feeling of pride emerges. He expresses surprise that the earlier fear has completely dissipated.
As the session progresses, he begins to move around the therapy room. His movements appear freer and more relaxed. Suddenly, he growls and roars, stomping his right heel forward while shouting, “Get away!” He starts recounting negative experiences with his father, such as nightmares about visiting him during summer vacations. His parents separated when he was six, and he only saw his father during the summers. Memories surface, and he shares stories of an unresolved childhood conflict.
This clinical example demonstrates the conscious self-experience of a painful aspect of the inner world, represented by the dyad: “As I am, I am wrong; my counterpart cannot bear me and punishes me for it, which frightens me”. This dyad, reflected in the current relational conflict, points to early childhood experiences that shaped his expectations of relational dynamics (as per Stern’s RIGs). These include an embodied strategy to cope with his unmet basic need for recognition and appreciation. At the same time, the dyad, marked by pain and fear, reveals a specific embodied defense mechanism. His life has been characterized by frustration, stemming from the desire and associated fundamental need to feel important and have a father who supports, believes in, and is proud of him.
The therapeutic task is to bring the fearful self-representation to consciousness and make it tangible, using the so-called work on the self-pole. By consciously perceiving facial expressions, shoulder and chest tension, avoiding gaze, and weakness in the legs – understood as an embodied defense – the initially vague affect of fear is amplified (“occurring emotion”). This “building block element” comes to the forefront. Through increased muscular innervation, related modules (4–6) are activated, initiating cortical associative connections. The self-representation of the rejected, frightened child becomes more explicit and vividly experienced (“experienced emotion”). The fear intensifies, unveiling the detailed internal image of a punitive object representation (work on the object-pole).
After intensifying the fear, the patient gradually experiences visible physical pride, directed toward a “good” father object (previously repressed dyad). This evokes a sense of being “seen”. The emerging self-feeling – “I am someone too” – gradually finds its counterpart, not in the girlfriend but in the father. This temporary resolution of the infantile conflict becomes possible within the therapeutic framework. Here, the therapist assumes the role of the “good” father, enabling this resolution through a specific transference constellation.
Lowen’s theoretical understanding remains rooted in ego psychology and thus within the framework of one-person psychology. However, his students have successfully adapted his concept of energy to the newer developments in psychoanalysis, thereby integrating and aligning it with contemporary psychoanalytic perspectives. This is particularly evident in the expanded conception of the grounding concept, a cornerstone of bioenergetics.
The theoretical advancements adopted by his students almost universally trace back to the psychoanalyst Winnicott, who laid the groundwork for the concept of the “False Self.” Although Winnicott is not considered a direct pioneer of humanistic psychology – under which bioenergetics is categorized – his understanding of growth, authenticity, and creative expression can nonetheless be regarded as closely related to this school of thought.
While Kernberg, with his bipolar view of human motivations – aggression and libido – adheres to the classical psychoanalytic model of human nature and a distinct form of object relations theory, his concept of a psyche composed of three building blocks remains valuable. It can serve as a useful guide within a body-oriented therapeutic approach and inform intervention strategies.
In sum, the synthesis of Lowen’s energy-centric ideas with newer psychoanalytic developments illustrates the dynamic evolution of bioenergetics, paving the way for innovative approaches in understanding and addressing human psychological and somatic experiences.
Bacal, H. (1990). Harry Guntrip. In H. Bacal & K. Newman (Eds.), Theories of object relations: bridges to self psychology (pp. 191–210). New York/Oxford: Columbia University Press. Dt.: Objektbeziehungstheorien – Brücken zur Selbstpsychologie (pp. 197–227). Stuttgart-Bad Cannstat: frommann-holzboog, 1994.
Balint, M. (1968). The Basic Fault: Theraputic Aspects of Regression. New York: Brunner/Mazel.
Baum, S. (1997). Living on Shifting Sands: Grounding and Borderline Personality Organization. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 61–86.
Baum, S. (2017). Containment, Holding, and Receptivity Somatopsychic Challenges. The Clinical Journal of the International Institute for Bioenergetic Analysis, 27, 21–47.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss. Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books. Dt.: Bindung. München: Kindler, 1975.
Clarkin, J. F. (2006). Psychotherapy for Borderline Personality. Washington D. C.: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Clarkin, J., Yeomans, F. & Kernberg, O. (2006). Psychotherapy for Boderline Personality. Washington, D. C.: American Psychiatric Publishing. Dt.: Psychotherapie der Borderline-Persönlichkeit – Manual zur psychodynamischen Therapie. 2., aktual. u. neubearb. Aufl. Stuttgart: Schattauer, 2008.
Clauer, J. (2011). Neurobiology and psychological Development of Grounding and Embodiment. The Clinical Journal of the International Institute for Bioenergetic Analysis, 21, 17–55.
Cockburn, G. (2012). An Object Relations Perspective on Bioenergetics and Pre-Oedipal Transferences. The Clinical Journal of the International Institute for Bioenergetic Analysis, 22, 29–55.
Conger, J. (1994). The Body in Recovery: Somatic Psychotherapy and the Self. Berkeley: Frog Books.
Damasio, A. (1999). The Feeling of What Happens – Body and Emotion of the Making of Conciousness. New York: Harcourt Brace & Company. Dt.: Ich fühle also bin ich – Die Entschlüsselung des Bewusstseins. München: List, 2000.
Dornes, M. (1993). Der kompetente Säugling – Die verbale Entwicklung des Menschen. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer.
Downing, G. (1996). Körper und Wort in der Psychotherapie – Leitlinien für die Praxis. Kempten: Kösel.
Erikson, E. (1959). Identity and the Live Cycle. New York: Inversity Press. Dt.: Identität und Lebenszyklus. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1973.
Fairbairn, W. (1954). An Object-Relations Theory of the Personality. New York: Basic Books.
Fairbairn, W. (2000). Objektbeziehungen und dynamische Strukturen. In B. F. Hensel & R. W. Rehberger (Eds.), Das Selbst und die inneren Objektbeziehungen. Eine psychoanalytische Objektbeziehungstheorie (pp. 171–184, 1946). Gießen: Psychosozial-Verlag.
Fonagy, P. & Target, M. (2003). Psychoanalytic Theories – Perspectives from Developmental Psychopathology. Hobokon, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Dt.: Psychoanalyse und Psychopathologie der Entwicklung (5th ed.). Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 2020.
Freud, S. (1915c). Trieb und Triebschicksal. GW X.
Grennberg, J. S. & Mitchell, S. (1983). Object Relations in der Psychoanalytic Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
Guntrip, H. (1961). Personality Structure and Human Interaction. The Developing Synthesis of Psychodynamic Theory. New York: International Universities Press, Inc.
Heinrich, V. (2001). Übertragungs- und Gegenübertragungsbeziehung in der Körperpsychotherapie. Psychotherapie Forum, 9, 62–70.
Heinrich-Caluer, V. (2008). Therapeuten als Resonanzkörper: Welche Saiten geraten in Schwingung? In V. Heinrich-Clauer (Ed.), Handbuch Bioenergetische Analyse (pp. 161–178). Giessen: Psychosozial-Verlag.
Heisterkamp, G. (2002). Basales Verstehen – Handlungsdialoge in Psychotherapie und Psychoanalyse. Stuttgart: Pfeiffer bei Klett-Cotta.
Hilton, R. (2012). The Ever Changing Constancy of Body Psychotherapy. International Body Psychotherapy Journal, 11(2), 74–93.
Hinz, H. (2000). Objektbeziehung, Objektbeziehungstheorie. In W. Mertens & B. Waldvogel (Eds.), Hahndbuch Psychoanalytischer Grundbegriffe (pp. 502–508). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Hoffmann, S. & Hochapfel, G. (2009). Neurotische Störungen und Psychosomatische Medizin (8th ed.). Suttgart: Schattauer.
Jacobson, E. (1964). The Self and the Object World. Int. Univ. Press. Dt.: Das Selbst und die Welt der Objekte. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1973.
Johnson, M. S. (1985). Characterological Transformation – The Hard Work Miracle. New York: Norton.
Johnson, S. (1988). Der Narzisstische Persönlichkeitsstil. Köln: Edition Humanistische Psychologie.
Kernberg, O. (1980). Internal World and External Reality. Object Relations Theory Applied. New York: Jason Aronson Inc. Dt.: Innere Welt und äussere Realität – Anwendungen der Objektbeziehungstheorie. Stuttgart: Verlag Internationale Psychoanalyse, 1988.
Kernberg, O. (1995). Innere Welt der Objektbeziehungen. Lindauer Psychotherpiewochen – Vortrag 25.4.1995.
Kernberg, O. (1976). Object Relations Theory and Clinical Psychoanalysis. Dt.: Objektbeziehungen und Praxis der Psychoanalyse (6th ed.). Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1997.
Kernberg, O. (2002). Affekt, Objekt und Übertragung. Giessen: Psychosozial-Verlag.
Klein, M. (1948). Contributions to Psychoanalysis. 1921–1945. London: Hogarth Press. Dt.: Das Seelenleben des Kleinkindes und andere Beträge zur Psychoanalyse. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 2011.
Klopstech, A. (2002). Modelle therapeutischen Handelns: der psychoanalytische und der bioenergetische Weg. In M. Koemeda (Ed.), Körperpsychotherapie – Bioenergetische Konzepte im Wandel (pp. 61–74). Basel: Schwabe.
Koemeda-Lutz, M. (2006). Is there Healing Power in Rage? The Relative Contribution of Cognition, Affect and Movement to Psychotherapeutic Processes. The Clinical Journal of the International Institute for Bioenergetic Analysis, 16, 103–127.
Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis of the self. New York: International University Press.
Krause, R. (2012). Allgemeine psychodynamische Behandlungs- und Krankheitslehre – Grundlagen und Modelle (2nd, completely revised and expanded edition). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Lewis, B. (2008). Der Cephale Schock als somatisches Verbidnungsglied zur Persönlichkeit des Falschen Selbst. In V. Heinrich-Clauer (Ed.), Handbuch Bioenergetische Analyse (pp. 113–128). Giessen: Psychosozial-Verlag.
Lowen, A. & Lowen, L. (1977). The Way to Vibrant Helath. Dt.: Bioenergetik für Jeden – Das vollständige Übungsbuch (4th ed.). Goldmann Taschenbuch: Berlin, 1991.
Lowen, A. (1958). The Language of the Body. Dt.: Körperausdruck und Persönlichkeit – Grundlagen und Praxis der Bioenergetik. New York: Grunde & Stratton, 1981.
Lowen, A. (1975). Bioenergetics: The Revolutionary Therapy That Uses the Language of the Body to Heal the Problems of the Mind. Dt.: Bioenergetik: Therapie der Seele durch Arbeit mit dem Körper. Reinbek bei Hamburg, Rowohlt, 1979.
Lowen, A. (1984). What is Bioenergetic Analysis. The Clinical Journal of the International Institute of Bioenergetic Analysis, 1, 1–20.
Lowen, A. (1995). The Process of Bioenergetic Analysis. The Clinical Journal of the International Institute for Bioenergetic Analysis, 1–8.
Luborsky, L. (1995). Einführung in die analytische Psychotherapie – Ein Lehrbuch. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Mahler, M. (1979). The Selected Papers of Margarete S. Mahler (Vol. 2). Northvale, New York: Jason Aronson.
Mertens, W. (1992). Kompendium psychoanalytischer Grundbegriffe: Repräsentanz – mentale Repräsentanz (pp. 195–200). München: Quintessenz.
Reich, W. (1933). Charakteranalyse – Technik und Grundlagen für Studierende und praktizierende Analytiker. Selbstverlag.
Resenck-Sannes, H. (2012). Neuroscience, Attachment and Love. The Clinical Journal of the International Institute for Bioenergetic Analysis, 22, 9–28.
Schroeter, V. (2009). Borderline Character Structure Revisited. The Clinical Journal of the International Institute for Bioenergetic Analysis, 19, 31–52.
Sieck, M. (2007). Relational Somatic Psychotherapy – Collected Essays of Robert Hilton, Ph.D.
Stark, M. (2000). Modes of Therapeutic Action. Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson.
Stern, D. (1985). The Interpersonal world of the Infant. New York: Basic Books. Dt.: Die Lebenserfahrung des Säuglings. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1992.
Stern, D. (2010). Forms of Vitality. Exploring Dynamic Experience in Psychology, the Arts, Psychotherapy and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dt.: Ausdrucksformen der Vitalität. Frankfurt am Main: Brandes & Apsel, 2011.
Streeck, U. (2000). Erinnern, Agieren und Inszenieren – Enactments und szenische Darstellungen im therapeutischen Prozess. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Strenger, C. (1989). The classic and romantic visions in psychoanalysis. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 595–610.
Tonella, G. (2008). Die Funktionen, Bindungen und Interaktionen des Selbst. In V. Heinrich-Clauer (Ed.), Handbuch Bioenergetische Analyse (pp. 59–111). Giessen: Psychosozial-Verlag.
Tronick, E. (2007). The neurobehavioral and social-emotional development of infants and children. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.
Winnicott, D. (1953). Transitional objects and transitional phenomena. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 89–97.
Winnicott, D. (1958). Collected Papers: Through Paediatrics do Psychoanalysis. New York: Basic Books. Dt.: Von der Kinderheilkunde zur Psychoanalyse. München: Kindler, 1976.
Winnicott, D. (1958b). The holding environment. In The maturational processes and the facilitating environment. New York: International Universities Press.
Winnicott, D. (1965). The maturational processes and the facilitating environment. London: Hogarth Press. Dt.: Reifungsprozesse und fördernde Umwelt (3rd ed.). Psychosozial-Verlag: Giessen, 2020.
Yeomans F., Clarkin J. & Kernberg O. (2015). Transference-Focused Psychotherapy for Borderline Personality Disorder. Arlington: American Psychiatric Association Publishing. Dt.: Übertragungsfokussierte Psychotherapie für Bordeline-Patienten. Stuttgart: Schattauer, 2017.
Thomas Fellmann is a medical doctor and specialist in psychiatry and psychotherapy in private practice since 1996; CBT since 1998; supervisor, teaching therapist and faculty member of the Swiss Bioenergetic Society; local trainer elect of the Swiss Bioenergetic Society; certified therapist for the procedure according to Otto Kernberg Transference-Focused Psychotherapy.