Potential space and reflective functioning: Towards conceptual clarification and preliminary clinical implications

Abstract

The authors propose that although the psychoanalytic constructs ‘reflective functioning’ and ‘potential space’ overlap and are sometimes used interchangeably, a knowledge of their distinctions and the ways in which they interface have important clinical implications. These concepts are similar in that both are capacities considered (1) to originate in the caregiver‐child relationship, (2) to involve playing with ideas and symbolic thought, (3) to facilitate the therapeutic process and (4) to represent a desirable treatment outcome. The terms diverge in three important ways. First, potential space is a broader concept that can be applied not only to thinking about internal states but to aspects of human experience (e.g. art, religion) involving a sense of aliveness. Reflective functioning is more circumscribed to representations of mental states and their implications for interpersonal functioning. Second, potential space has more of a conscious introspective element, whereas reflective functioning is based in procedural memory. Third, reflective functioning operates intrapsychically, whereas potential space tends to be thought of as occurring in an interpersonal field. The authors hypothesise and illustrate a possible bi‐directional, dialectic relationship between the two constructs. It is suggested that this new understanding might, in some cases, facilitate productive reformulations of clinical formulations, such as working with a perceived resistance.