Forensic Psychology Case Analysis, Part II A : ‘thesis’
Projection as Game Strategy and Relational Manipulation
Abstract
This sequel builds upon the prior analysis (Forensic Psychology Case Analysis: Transactional Analysis Perspective), extending the focus from overt manipulative games to the Speaker’s reliance on projection as both a defensive mechanism and a tactical maneuver. Projection, whether conscious or unconscious, functions as a cornerstone of the Speaker’s communication style, shaping not only how they present themselves but also how others are forced to relate to them. Within the frameworks of Transactional Analysis (Berne, 1964) and psychoanalytic theory (Freud, Klein, Kernberg, Jung), this paper examines projection as a system, its impact on interpersonal dynamics, and the relational distortions it produces for both Speaker and Recipient.
Projection in Context of the Speaker’s Games
In the first paper, the Speaker was shown to establish dominance through covert “games” such as Now I’ve Got You, You Son of a Bitch and Courtroom, masked under the guise of concern. Projection operates as a fuel source for these games.
• Freud defined projection as:
“The attribution to others of feelings which are in fact one’s own.” (Neuro-Psychoses of Defence, 1894)
• Klein extended this:
“In projective identification, the subject expels parts of the self into another and then exerts control over that other from within.” (Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms, 1946)
Thus, the Speaker not only disowns their internal states (e.g., paranoia, inadequacy, aggression) but enforces them as labels on the Recipient, establishing the game frame.
Case Dynamics: Projection in Operation
1. Projection as Conversational Gambit
When the Speaker accuses the Recipient of being “potentially paranoid,” the deeper function is displacement: the paranoia originates in the Speaker but is assigned to the Recipient.
• TA interpretation:
• Surface transaction: Adult → Adult (“I am making an objective observation”).
• Ulterior transaction: Child → Parent (“It is not me who is weak; it is you”) + Critical Parent → Child (“You must accept your deficiency”).
• Game effect: Projection enables the Speaker to keep control of the game while deflecting awareness of their own inner material.
2. Projection as Energy Exchange
Every act of projection creates a transfer of psychic load. The Speaker evacuates uncomfortable emotions, which the Recipient then experiences as confusion, shame, or self-doubt.
• Jung observed:
“The psychological rule says that when an inner situation is not made conscious, it happens outside, as fate.” (Aion, 1951)
By externalizing, the Speaker avoids inner conflict, but the Recipient carries the burden, destabilizing them and reinforcing the Speaker’s superiority.
3. Projection in Systemic Games
Projection strengthens the dominance–submission polarity:
• The Speaker maintains their ego by disowning flaws.
• The Recipient is pressured into the role of “flawed party.”
• The relational field becomes tilted: the Speaker appears “stable and concerned,” while the Recipient appears “unstable and questionable.”
The Reciprocal Relation to Projection
Recipient’s Experience
The Recipient, drawn into the projection, faces a double bind (Bateson, 1972). To accept the projection is to accept the Speaker’s definition of reality (“Yes, I am paranoid”). To reject it risks escalation (“You prove your paranoia by denying it”).
• Emotional impact: confusion, defensiveness, erosion of confidence.
• Strategic impact: if unexamined, the Recipient becomes trapped in the Speaker’s game system.
Speaker’s Experience
Projection offers immediate ego relief, but long-term relational distortion.
• Kernberg notes:
“In pathological narcissism, projection is not merely defensive but a means of aggression, control, and devaluation.” (Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism, 1975)
• The Speaker thus gains dominance but at the cost of authentic communication. They are locked into repeating the same limited strategies, unable to sustain genuine Adult-to-Adult dialogue.
Conscious vs. Unconscious Use of Projection
The Speaker’s linguistic precision (“potential paranoia,” “potential influence”) suggests self-awareness. This opens two possibilities:
1. Unconscious defense – projection as a primitive mechanism protecting a fragile ego (borderline/paranoid organization).
2. Conscious strategy – projection as deliberate tactic to destabilize and dominate (psychopathic organization).
Both lead to relational harm, but the second indicates calculated exploitation rather than reflexive defense.
Counter-Strategies for Recipients
The Recipient’s resilience depends on refusing to internalize the projected content.
• Remain in Adult ego state: resist the invitation into Adaptive Child.
• Name the projection: “That seems more about your concern than mine.”
• Return responsibility: “If you’re worried, that’s your feeling.”
• Expose the game publicly: projection loses power when the pattern is recognized by observers.
Berne:
“The only winning move in a game is not to play.” (Games People Play, 1964)
Conclusion
Projection in the Speaker’s system is both shield and weapon. It displaces their own anxiety while cementing the dominance-submission structure of the games identified in Part I. The relational consequence is that the Speaker avoids self-knowledge, while the Recipient risks being destabilized and defined by alien material.
The combined system of games + projection reveals a manipulative dynamic that is both forensically significant (as diagnostic marker) and interpersonally destructive. The only effective counter lies in the Recipient maintaining Adult stance, rejecting projected roles, and exposing the game to daylight.
Index of Relevant Sources
1. Eric Berne – Games People Play: The Psychology of Human Relationships (1964)
2. Eric Berne – Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy (1961)
3. Sigmund Freud – The Neuro-Psychoses of Defence (1894)
4. Melanie Klein – Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms (1946)
5. Gregory Bateson – Steps to an Ecology of Mind (1972)
6. Otto Kernberg – Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism (1975)
7. Carl Jung – Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self (1951)
8. Robert Hare – Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us (1993)
9. Paul Ekman – Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics, and Marriage (1985)
For the full exploration, see also;
No comments:
Post a Comment