The Comprehensive Object Relations Profile: A preliminary report.

Abstract

usefulness of the CORP and the validity of object relations concepts.This article reports a study of a newly created instrument designed specifically for the measurement of object relations concepts. The Comprehensive Object Relations Profile (CORP) is a semistructured projective test that asks the subject to respond to specific questions regarding interpersonal vignettes. Each question is designed to tap a particular dimension of object relationships. Three dimensions are measured: object constancy, object integration, and empathy. Validity was assessed by a comparison of three diagnostic groups: schizophrenics, borderlines, and neurotics. Reliability was measured by the interjudge method. The results indicated that the CORP significantly differentiated the three diagnostic groups in the expected direction and that the CORP is a highly reliable instrument. The implications of these results were drawn for both the usefulness of the CORP and the validity of object relations concepts.Psychoanalytic object relations theory posits that representations of self and object are complex cognitive-affective structures which are developed through the individual's experience of interpersonal relationships. Assumed to be templates upon which personality organization is constructed, these representations serve as guides for future interpersonal experiences. The object relations theory of personality requires instrumentation capable of translating its concepts into operationally definable terms. In order to accomplish this task, there must be reliable and valid instrumentation designed specifically to measure the experience of relating to others. Presently, no such standard projective test exists. The current study is an investigation of the reliability and validity of a newly created projective test instrument, the Requests for reprints should be sent to Walter F.

Projective assessment of object relations: A review of the empirical literature.

“…Aside from the theoretical avenues that have been mentioned, attention also should be given to basic methodological issues. For example, Summers (1978) and his colleagues (Burke et al, 1986) have raised questions regarding the choice of stimuli for the assessment of object relations. Clearly, object relations only can be inferred and measured through derivatives and not assessed directly.…”

Object relations and social functioning of schizophrenic and borderline patients: A cross-sectional developmental perspective

“…Comprehensive Object Relations Profile (CORP; Burke, Summers, Selinger, & Polonus, 1986). This is a semi-structured instrument to assess object relations capacities along structural and thematic lines.…”

“…The validity has been exhibited by the CORP's ability to differentiate significantly among schizophrenic, borderline, neurotic, and normal individuals (Burke et al, 1986).…”

“…Test-retest and inter-judge reliability were tested and reported elsewhere as acceptable (r > .90) (McGovern, 1985). The validity has been exhibited by the CORP's ability to differentiate significantly among schizophrenic, borderline, neurotic, and normal individuals (Burke et al, 1986).…”

Relationships among semantic differential change measures of splitting, self‐fragmentation and object relations in borderline psychopathology

“…Other researchers are focusing attention on theoretically relevant dimensions of psychological change in borderline pathology. Innovative measures of object representations, object relations and primitive defences, ranging in methodology from patient self-report inventories to reconceptualized and revised scoring systems for such established projective tests as the Rorschach, are currently being developed and employed in construct validation studies of borderline pathology (Blatt & H. Lerner, 1983 ;Burke, Summers, Selinger & Polonus, 1986;Gerson, 1984; P. Lerner & H. Lerner, 1980;Marmar & Horowitz, 1986 ;Oldham, Clarkin, Appelbaum, Carr, Kernberg, Lotterman & Haas, 1985) and in psychotherapy outcome studies (Blatt, Ford, Berman, Cook & Meyer, 1988;Kantrowitz, Katz, Paolitto, Sashin & Solomon, 1987;Kavanagh, 1985;Ryan & Bell, 1984) and could eventually be used to explicate the nature of change processes in the psychotherapy of the borderline patient.…”