Sigmund Freud Versus Karen Horney: Comparing and Contrasting Psychoanalytic and Neo-

Psychoanalytic Theories in Relation to Generalized Anxiety Disorder

Jay Jalali

Department of Behavioural Sciences, Yorkville University

PSYCH 6104 (20S -3I): Theories of Personality

Dr. Kathy Blaydes-Walczak

July 27, 2020

In the field of mental health today, there is great interest in areas of anxiety disorders. Anxiety

disorders are extremely common and can cause an extensive amount of suffering and comorbidities in

an individual (Stein & Hollander, 2002). Despite its prevalence, the nature of anxiety is mysterious and

vast in its scope of possible theories. Important contributions to these topics have been made by

psychoanalysts to understand its origins and functioning as a recognised disorder, and virtually all

theorists begin with or refer to Freud’s concepts of traumatic anxiety as a basis for further

understanding (Stein & Hollander, 2002).

In this paper I will discuss Sigmund Freud and Karen Horney’s proposed theories on the etiology

and maintenance of anxiety, followed by a critical discussion comparing the two theories to

demonstrate current day application and relevance to general anxiety disorder.

Freud’s Theory of Anxiety

Anxiety was an important part of Freud’s personality theory, suggesting that it is fundamental to

the development of all neurotic and psychotic behaviour (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). While developing

new etiological and psychotherapeutic models to approach nervous diseases, Freud focused on himself

as the principal patient. Initially, he posited that anxiety in anxiety neurosis is a somatic residue, in that

its etiology lacked psychic mechanisms (Pizarro Obaid, 2012). Through self analysis he discovered that

psychic conflict, fantasy and unconscious desires were fundamental factors in discovering anxiety

mechanisms. These self learnings led him to question possible distinctions between anxiety inherent to

psychoneurosis (psychic anxiety) and actual neurosis (somatic anxiety); and develop sub theories such as

castration anxiety (Freud, 1905), realistic/ neurotic anxiety hysteria (Freud, 1909), realistic

anxiety/neurotic anxiety (Freud, 1917) and automatic anxiety/signal anxiety (Freud, 1926, 1932). These

gave way to needing further reconceptualising and exploring potential linkages between psychic and
somatic factors, past and present, factual and psychic realities, consciousness and unconsciousness,

desire and sexuality, in the genesis of the anxiety experience (Pizarro Obaid, 2012).

Since anxiety serves as a warning to the person that something is amiss within their personality,

it creates tension and becomes a drive that motivates an individual to satisfy a need or reduce tension

(Schultz & Schultz, 2017). There are rational options to evade perceived threats or reduce tension; such

as; running away from threats, self control or inhibition of dangerous impulses or relying on conscience.

If unsuccessful with any rational options, defense mechanisms or non rational methods serve to defend

an anxious personality (Pizarro Obaid, 2012).

Freud believed that defenses are always in operation to an extent and behaviors are motivated

by instincts, hence all behaviors are defensive, in that they defend against anxiety. The personality battle

intensity may fluctuate, but never stops. Freud theorised numerous defense mechanisms and

postulated using just one is rare; as anxiety is defended by simultaneous and overlapping mechanisms

(Pizarro Obaid, 2012). The specific defense mechanisms and theoretical concepts of each are below.

Reaction formation

This involves the conversion of socially unacceptable impulses into its opposite. When applied to

anxiety, people may defend the perception of possessing an unfavourable trait by demonstrating the

opposite trait in behaviours (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). For example, insinuated intolerance or hostility

may be met with efforts exaggerated to prove tolerance and loving peace.

Projection

Involves seeing one’s traits in other people. When applied to anxiety, it involves inaccurately

believing others posses traits, that one does not possess themselves (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). For

example, calling someone hateful while denying their own hate.

Involves altering the target of impulse satisfaction. Applied to defending anxiety, the original

object of aggression is replaced by a nonthreatening one. However, anxiety will not reduce as

satisfactorily in the substituted object (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). For example, employees may displace

frustration at their employers onto collogues.

Regression or Undoing

Involves the literal attempt to alter or revisit a past event. When used to defend anxiety a

person may return to a more secure or insecure time of life by acting the way they did in the past to feel

a certain way (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Examples are childishness and poor independent behaviour.

Denial

Involves the simple refusal to face certain facts. When defending anxiety, it involves denying or

repressing any existing traumatic event, threat or fact (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Example are when

grieving a loved one could manifest in denying their loss by leaving personal belongings or living areas

unchanged.

Rationalisation

Involves reinterpreting behaviour to justify its rationality and acceptability. When defending

anxiety, a threatening thought or action can be excused or justified by self persuasion through

rationality (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). For example, critiquing a loved one for not getting one’s way.

Sublimation

Involves channeling the anxious impulses to satisfy them instead of substituting them. Energy

from anxiety is diverted into acceptable and admirable forms of expression, that are acceptable in
society (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). For example, aggressive energy can be channelled into sports or

exercise.

Repression

Involves the involuntary elimination of anything from conscious awareness. When defending

against anxiety it is an unconscious forgetting of anything existing, that is painful or discomforting

(Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Eliminating repression when operating under anxiety is difficult because we

must release the disbelief of the threat, in order to understand it’s nonthreatening nature.

Horney’s Theory of Anxiety

Karen Horney was one of the first women trained as a Freudian psychoanalyst (Paris, 1998).

Horney defined anxiety as a feeling of helplessness toward potential hostility where the environment is

feared because it is felt to be unreliable, mendacious, unappreciative, unfair, unjust and merciless (Paris,

1998). The person not only fears punishment or desertion because of forbidden drives but feels the

environment as a menace to their entire development and to their most legitimate wishes and strivings

(Paris, 1998). They feel in danger of their individuality being obliterated, freedom taken away and

happiness prevented. In an environment in which anxiety develops, the person's free use of energies is

thwarted, self-esteem and self-reliance are undermined, fear is instilled by intimidation and isolation,

and expansiveness is warped through brutality, standards or overprotective ‘love’ (Paris, 1998).

Horney, therefore, viewed anxiety as developing in certain childhood situations. If the child's

upbringing was overly harsh, emotionally barren, or stiflingly controlled, then basic anxiety was likely to

develop (Smith, 2007). Horney explained that such experiences generally convince the child that he or

she is helpless to defend the self against the; infringements of the external world. Not only does he or

she have the biological inferiority of smallness and dependency on the family, but frequently every kind

of self-assertion or move toward individuation is discouraged (Smith, 2007).

in anxiety. Horney theorised that often an infant is very fearful to openly display resentment, is

cognizant of their dependency, and feels guilty or scared when expressing hostility. Such situations

lower courage and are emotionally deprived of knowing other options of expression (Smith, 2007).

Instead, Horney explained, the individual may develop a number of different strategies to attempt to

manage social anxiety, such as trying to maintain control in interpersonal situations, attempting to find a

place through submission, doing one's best to be unobtrusive, or—most commonly—withdrawing

whenever possible, keeping a physical and emotional distance between oneself and others, even if a

longing for connectedness still exists (Paris, 1998).

According to Horney, individuals possess a real self which needs favorable circumstances for

actualisation (Coolidge et al., 2004). Under anxiety, their defensive states control them instead of

authentic emotions, and thus depart from their genuine personalities. Horney posited defensive states

into interpersonal, engaging externally with people, and intrapsychic, engaging internally within our

minds (Coolidge et al., 2004).

Interpersonal Strategies

People attempt to handle anxiety by developing compliance and overtly move towards people,

by developing aggressive and vindictive traits and moving against people or detaching and resigning

away from people (Coolidge et al., 2004). Non defensive functioning, maneuvers flexibly and

emotionally intelligently between all three solutions, but in anxiety or defense development, each

combines a mixture of behavior patterns, personality traits, beliefs of justice, human nature and values.

(Hurvich, 2000).
The Compliant Solution

People with complaint traits attempt to earning affection, approval and control others via being

dependent (Hurvich, 2000). Horney theorised compliant defensive solutions into three personality

types-- narcissistic, perfectionistic, and arrogant-vindictive (Hurvich, 2000).

Narcissistic people

Operate in life with self-admiration and the exercise of charm (Paris, 1998). They hold

undisputable conviction in themselves and wish to win over everyone by any means necessary. They are

convinced that if they are determined in believing their dreams and exaggerated standards, the world

will deliver their wishes. When such expectations fail to materialise, they may experience a

psychological collapse, and are not prepared to adjust to real consequences (Hurvich, 2000).

Perfectionistic people

Believe themselves to have high standards in life, high morality and intelligence, a result of

which they are condescending to people. Through self deception, expect people to match these

standards and condemn those who are unable to. thus externalizing their self-condemnation. In the

event of and misfortune or mistakes this threatens their perfectionist defense and cause self loathe and

feeling helpless in defeat (Coolidge et al., 2004).

Arrogant-vindictive people

Driven primarily by for vindication and triumphant thoughts. Their interpersonal engagements

are unnecessarily competitive and merciless and with any emotional expression regarded as weakness

or defeat (Hurvich, 2000).

Predominantly detached people worship freedom, peace, and self-sufficiency and avoid any

control or emotional attachment (Paris, 1998). They crave for personal superiority and navigate life by

shutting out any control or sharing their true inner selves. They subdue their inner needs and make do

with little emotion in order to avoid dependency on others (Hurvich, 2000).

Intrapsychic Strategies of Defense

While interpersonal difficulties create interpersonal defensive solutions to move toward, against

or away from people, intrapsychic defenses produce their own self idealised solutions. (Coolidge et al.,

2004). This series of solutions is what Horney calls the pride system, which includes neurotic pride and

claims, tyrannical shoulds and increased self-hate (Paris, 1998).

Critical Analysis

Theories of anxiety

In Freud’s theory, anxiety is explained in relation to an infant experience, determined by

biological development of psychosexual structures and influenced marginally by environment factors

(Obaid, 2014). The interaction of instinctive and counter instinctive factors resulting in human behaviour

and anxiety that compromised a person, were a result of conflict among the three structures of the id,

egi and superego (Obaid, 2014). Departing from Freud, Horney posited that a need for safety and not

the pleasure principle governed how anxiety was experienced. She instead proposed that a blend of

internal and external factors were factors in developing and maintaining anxiety (Gale,2015).

Like Freud, Horney proposed the past influenced present anxiety states, however she focused

on behaviour as influenced by early experiences, rather than at a fixed stage (Obaid, 2014). A current

character structure was more of focus than infantile experience, and psychoanalysis was focused more
on personality states the person adopted and employed to cope with anxiety (Gale,2015). According to

Horney, anxiety resulted when pathogenic influences in childhood cause people to feel unloved and

unsafe, thereby developing helplessness (Gale, 2015). This promoted her focus on understanding

anxious behaviour and defenses in terms of their current influence in a person.

As a notion of basic anxiety, Freud postulated an inherently destructive instinct within everyone,

while Horney postulated no inherent good or bad but proposed destructive personality development

that caused constructive forces to be blocked as a result of negative environmental influences (Garfinkle

et al., 2012). Freud emphasized biological factors as universal sources of instinct and behaviour,

assuming that development of anxiety and conflicts among people were therefore also universal (Obaid,

2014). This assumption undervalued the important influences and roles played by factors such as larger

culture, human development plasticity and critical human development past puberty (Gale, 2015).

In contrast to Freud, Horney also focused on the ecosystem in which a child is raised in; the

caregivers or family, peers, and society surrounding development (Rustin, 2015). She believed that

defenses against anxiety were developed by interpersonal, social and cultural forces, causing anxiety,

rather than causing personality disorders (Rustin, 2015).

Therapy of anxiety

Horney’s re-evaluation of psychoanalytic theory originated from dissatisfaction with therapeutic

results of Freud’s therapy method (Garfinkle et al., 2012). According to Freud, psychoanalysis fosters

reactions that lead to transference of feelings derived from childhood (Garfinkle et al., 2012). Horney

viewed transference as how patient’s behaved towards therapists in accordance with their character

structure, which creates visibility of a patient’s defensive traits and inner conflicts (Gale, 2015).

Horney focused on recognizing defenses in therapy, hence discovering their roles in a patient

and consequences (Garfinkle et al., 2012). The purpose of anxiety therapy being to assist people control
their instincts and lessen anxiety. Horney’s fundamental goal of therapy was to restore a patient to

themselves, regain their genuine personalities and find stability in themselves (Smith, 2007).

Horney rejected the Freudian therapist patient relationship authoritarian model and favoured a

democratic one, emphasizing that psychoanalysis is a cooperative undertaking (Garfinkle et al., 2012).

Her mantra being that, occupying a morally or psychologically superior position does not build trust and

lessens the ability to understand the patient (Smith, 2007).

As patients become less defensive, their destructive forces grow weaker, and any inner

distortions emerge (Garfinkle et al., 2012). This co discovered visibility helps patients understand

defenses are self sabotaging, as experiencing and understanding the destructiveness of their anxiety

solutions, will lead to more motivation to change (Garfinkle et al., 2012).

Conclusion

Many theorists formulated psychoanalytic theories on anxiety and therapy, based on Freud’s

theory of neurosis. Although useful for idea formulation on the nature of anxious personalities, the

ability to change and identify defensive traits was not effective. Through my discussion and comparisons

between the two theories, I have proposed that Karen Horney used the foundation to develop a more

applicable and relevant understanding of the disorder, in relation to allowing defenses to be made more

visible through the therapy process and allow for a more evolutionary patient therapy relationship style

to treat anxiety.
 References

Coolidge, F. L., Segal, D. L., Benight, C. C., & Danielian, J. (2004). The predictive power of Horney's

psychoanalytic approach: An empirical study. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 64(4), 363-74.

Freud S (1905). Three essays on the theory of sexuality. SE 7, 125-245.

Freud S (1909). Analysis of a phobia in a five-year-old boy. SE 10,3-149.

Freud S (1917). Lecture 25: Anxiety. New introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. SE 16, 392-411.

Freud S (1926). Inhibitions, symptoms and anxiety. SE 20,77-174.

Freud S (1932). Lecture 32: Anxiety and instinctual life. New introductory lectures on psychoanalysis. SE

22,81-111.

Gale, C. L. (2015). A study guide for psychologists and their theories for students: Karen Clementine

Horney. Cengage Learning. Kindle Edition. 

Garfinkle, E. J., & Behar, E. (2012). Advances in psychotherapy for generalized anxiety disorder.  Current

Psychiatry Reports,  14(3), 203-210.

Hurvich, M. (2000). Fear of being overwhelmed and psychoanalytic theories of anxiety. Psychoanalytic

Review,  87(5), 615-49.

Obaid, F. P. (2014). The incidence of freudian self-analysis in the construction of the psychoanalytic

theory of anxiety. International Journal of Psychoanalysis,  95(1), 15-41.

Paris, B. J. (1998). Horney & Humanistic Psychoanalysis. 29.

birth. International Journal of Psychoanalysis 93, 693-715.

Rustin, M. (2015). Anxieties and defences: Normal and abnormal *. Organisational and Social

Dynamics,  15(2), 233-247,347.

Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2017). Theories of Personality (11th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Smith, W. B. (2007). Karen horney and psychotherapy in the 21st century. Clinical Social Work

Journal,  35(1), 57-66.

Stein, D. J., Williams, D. R., Stein, D. J., & Hollander, E. (2002). Cultural and Social Aspects of Anxiety

Disorders. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Publishing Inc.