Leichsenring F, Hiller W
Institut für Psychologie der Universität Göttingen.
Z Psychosom Med Psychoanal. 1990;36(1):62-78.
In the present paper normals, neurotics and borderline patients were compared with respect to primary and secondary process thinking. The Holtzman Inkblot Technique was used to assess the different modes of functioning. As it was expected, normals had more indicators of the most severe levels of primary process thinking than neurotics, but less than borderline patients. On the other hand it could be demonstrated that in normals the reality testing ability and synthetic functioning were not impaired compared to neurotics. In the contrary, the normals exceeded the neurotics concerning indicators of abstractive abilities. The results are discussed with regard to the hypothesis of a continuum of normal and deviant thinking and with regard to the concept of adaptive regression in the service of the ego.
在本论文中，对正常人、神经症患者和边缘性患者的初级和次级过程思维进行了比较。使用霍尔兹曼墨迹技术来评估不同的功能模式。正如预期的那样，正常人具有比神经症患者更多的最严重程度初级过程思维指标，但比边缘性患者少。另一方面，可以证明，与神经症患者相比，正常人的现实检验能力和综合功能并未受损。相反，在抽象能力指标方面，正常人超过了神经症患者。根据正常与异常思维连续体的假设以及自我服务的适应性退行概念对结果进行了讨论。
