Experience of Sense of Self (E-SOS)

Abstract

The Experience of Sense of Self (E-SOS), also referenced in psychometric literature as the Experienced Self and Other Scale (ESOS), is a multidimensional self-report measurement tool developed to quantify an individual’s phenomenological boundary differentiation and perceived psychological distance between the self and diverse internal and external referents (the “other”). Rooted in psychodynamic object relations theory, existential phenomenology, and social cognitive neuroscience, the instrument captures how individuals cognitively and affectively delineate self-identity from familial figures, social hierarchies, internal affective sensations, somatic experiences, temptations, and transcendent phenomena. The standard version of the instrument comprises 45 items rated on a 4-point continuum anchored from 1 (Completely independent) to 4 (No separation), measuring the degree of psychological fusion versus boundary demarcation. Psychometric investigations through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses demonstrate that the scale is organized around five primary empirical dimensions: Experience of Positive Sensation (α = .81), Experience of Challenges (α = .77), Experience of Temptations (α = .73), Experience of Higher Power (α = .78), and Experience of Family (α = .65). Across clinical and normative samples, the scale exhibits robust construct validity, showing significant associations with measures of differentiation of self, attachment insecurity, emotion regulation deficits, borderline personality organization, and subjective well-being. This article provides a comprehensive academic analysis of the instrument’s theoretical foundations, structural validity, reliability parameters, clinical and research applications, administration procedures, and psychometric profile.

Keywords

Sense of self, Experienced Self and Other Scale, self-other differentiation, ego boundaries, object relations, self-concept, psychometrics, identity integration, psychological fusion, psychological boundaries

Authors

The Experience of Sense of Self (E-SOS) / Experienced Self and Other Scale (ESOS) was conceived and developed by:

• Efrat Shvil, Ph.D. — Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA; and Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons / New York State Psychiatric Institute. Dr. Shvil spearheaded the empirical validation of the ESOS during her doctoral dissertation and post-doctoral research examining interpersonal trauma, stress responding, and self-other differentiation.
• Elizabeth Midlarsky, Ph.D. — Professor of Psychology and Education, Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. Dr. Midlarsky contributed extensively to the conceptual framework, research design, and psychometric refinement, drawing on her extensive scholarship in altruism, life-span developmental crises, and clinical psychology.
• Herbert H. Krauss, Ph.D. — Adjunct Professor of Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia University, and Professor Emeritus of Psychology, Hunter College of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, USA. Dr. Krauss contributed seminal perspectives on existential psychology, cross-cultural psychometrics, and the philosophical conceptualization of self-referential boundaries.
• A. W. Ward, M.A. — Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. Contributed to early scale development and preliminary psychometric data collection presented at national scientific assemblies.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Experience of Sense of Self (E-SOS) is to provide a standardized, psychometrically grounded method for assessing the structural and experiential boundaries that an individual maintains between their core self and various experiential targets. While traditional self-report inventories typically gauge self-esteem (e.g., the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale), self-efficacy, or explicit self-concept clarity, they rarely evaluate the phenomenological topography of self-boundaries—specifically, how distinct or fused an individual experiences themselves relative to internal affective states, somatic drives, significant others, societal pressures, and spiritual forces. The E-SOS bridges this diagnostic and empirical gap by examining boundary permeability and differentiation across multiple ecological domains.

In clinical settings, the E-SOS addresses critical diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Boundary disturbances represent core features in severe psychopathology, particularly across the spectrum of personality disorders (such as Borderline Personality Disorder, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and Dependent Personality Disorder), severe trauma-related conditions, and dissociative spectrum disorders. Individuals exhibiting poorly differentiated ego boundaries may experience overwhelming fusion with parental figures, profound susceptibility to external social control, or complete engulfment by negative emotional states such as terror, rage, or sadness. Conversely, excessive boundary rigidity can manifest as profound interpersonal detachment, emotional numbness, and alexithymia. By mapping an individual’s perceived separation across diverse referents, clinicians can pinpoint specific domains of boundary enmeshment or pathological alienation, thereby informing targeted interventions in psychodynamic psychotherapy, Mentalization-Based Therapy (MBT), and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT).

In empirical research, the E-SOS serves as a versatile instrument for testing structural hypotheses within social, developmental, and transpersonal psychology. Researchers utilize the scale to evaluate developmental trajectories in individuation during emerging adulthood, cross-cultural variations in independent versus interdependent self-construals, and the neural substrates of self-other boundary dissolution during mystical experiences or psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. By treating the sense of self not as a monolithic, static entity, but as a dynamic matrix of perceived relational distances, the E-SOS enables nuanced modeling of how self-differentiation influences interpersonal functioning, health behaviors, addiction vulnerabilities, and psychological resilience.

Psychological Construct

The central psychological construct operationalized by the E-SOS is phenomenological self-other differentiation, conceptualized as the subjective degree of boundary separation that a person perceives between their core subjective self (“I/Me”) and specific objects, affects, appetites, persons, and metaphysical constructs. Rather than assessing simple cognitive appraisals, the instrument assays the experiential closeness, enmeshment, or independence characterizing these self-referential dyads. Factor-analytic research demonstrates that this construct operates across five distinct yet interrelated dimensions:

1. Experience of Positive Sensation

This dimension captures the integration of positive affective, somatosensory, and aspirational elements within the subjective experience of the self. Encompassing items such as Your body (Item 11), Your sexuality (Item 13), Who you want to be (Item 18), Optimism (Item 19), Self control (Item 20), Your intelligence (Item 38), Happiness (Item 39), Hope (Item 40), Your significant other (Item 42), and Excitement (Item 43), this subscale evaluates the degree to which adaptive psychological resources and pleasurable somatic markers are experienced as intimately connected with one’s identity. Optimal functioning on this subscale reflects healthy embodiment, self-worth, and affective vitality, whereas severe alienation (rating of “Completely independent”) indicates profound anhedonia, somatic dissociation, or self-estrangement.

2. Experience of Challenges

The Experience of Challenges subscale measures the experiential boundary maintained between the self and threatening, aversive internal affective and visceral states. It includes items such as Terror (Item 8), Hunger (Item 9), Your worst fear (Item 10), Stresses (Item 12), What you despise about your self (Item 15), and Sadness (Item 29). This construct captures the degree of emotional engulfment versus psychological defusion. High scores (approaching “No separation”) signify that the individual feels completely defined and overwhelmed by distressing affects and negative self-appraisals, a phenomenological hallmark of depressive rumination, panic, and structural boundary collapse.

3. Experience of Temptations

This subscale evaluates the boundary between the self and external reinforcing stimuli, compulsive behaviors, and appetitive distractions. The items loaded on this dimension include Money (Item 3), Internet (Item 5), Alcohol (Item 14), Food (Item 17), Non-prescribed drugs (Item 22), T.V. watching (Item 23), and Your cell phone (Item 24). It assays the vulnerability of the self-boundary to technological intrusion, behavioral addictions, and substance dependence. Elevated fusion with these referents indicates externalized regulation, impulsivity, and weak executive boundary insulation against consumerist and dopaminergic temptations.

4. Experience of Higher Power

The Experience of Higher Power dimension examines the phenomenological distance between the individual self and transcendent, existential, or cosmic forces. It comprises items such as God (Item 25), Spirituality (Item 30), Fate (Item 41), and Religion (Item 44). This subscale captures transpersonal boundaries, ranging from absolute existential separation and secular detachment (independence) to unitive mystical consciousness or fatalistic surrender (no separation). In clinical contexts, it differentiates adaptive spiritual grounding from passive external locus of control.

5. Experience of Family

This relational dimension measures the boundary demarcation within the primary familial matrix, specifically addressing Mother (Item 1), Other family members (Item 4), Your sibling(s) (Item 28), and Father (Item 31). Grounded in family systems theory and object relations, this construct reflects the degree of emotional individuation achieved from the family of origin. Extreme scores indicative of “No separation” reflect enmeshment, parental introjection, and unresolved individuation, whereas extreme independence may reflect counter-dependent flight or defensive emotional cutoff.

Theoretical Framework

The development of the E-SOS is anchored in an integration of three major theoretical paradigms: psychodynamic object relations theory, existential-phenomenological philosophy, and contemporary cognitive-affective neuroscience.

From object relations theory, the instrument draws heavily on the structural developmental formulations of Margaret Mahler, Donald Winnicott, and Otto F. Kernberg. Mahler’s separation-individuation paradigm posits that healthy psychological development requires the gradual progression from symbiotic fusion with primary maternal figures to the establishment of stable intrapsychic boundaries and object constancy. When the separation-individuation process is disrupted, individuals struggle with boundary ambiguity, vacillating between terrifying engulfment and profound abandonment panic. Kernberg’s structural model of personality organization similarly emphasizes the capacity for self-other differentiation as the primary diagnostic criterion separating neurotic from borderline personality organization. The E-SOS operationalizes these psychodynamic constructs into direct self-report metrics, assessing how deeply introjected primary objects remain within the adult experiential field.

Complementing psychoanalytic thought, existential-phenomenological psychology—represented by thinkers such as Martin Buber, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and Herbert H. Krauss—provides the ontological foundation for the scale. Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology of perception emphasizes that the self is an embodied, relational entity constantly situated in an experiential field populated by objects, others, and temporal horizons. The E-SOS operationalizes Buber’s distinction between the differentiated “I-Thou” and the instrumental “I-It” encounter, while probing how the self situates itself across time (e.g., Yourself five years ago, Yourself ten years from now) and social authority structures (e.g., Those with power over you). The scale conceptualizes the sense of self not as a static intrapsychic warehouse of traits, but as a fluid horizon of intentional relationships.

Finally, the scale aligns with contemporary social cognitive neuroscience of self-referential processing. Functional neuroimaging demonstrates that cortical midline structures (CMS), including the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) and posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), are selectively recruited during self-referential evaluations and distinguish self from familiar others. When self-other boundaries soften—whether through mindfulness meditation, flow states, or pharmacological disruption of the default mode network (DMN)—functional connectivity between these hubs shifts significantly. The E-SOS captures these cognitive-affective shifts along a subjective continuum of spatial and psychological distance.

Validity

The construct, convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validity of the E-SOS has been empirically established across multiple validation samples conducted by Shvil, Midlarsky, Krauss, and colleagues (2007, 2009, 2011, 2013).

Construct and Factorial Validity

Initial construct validity was demonstrated through exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic studies involving university cohorts and community adult populations. The emergence of five coherent, theoretically interpretable factors accounted for substantial portions of the total item variance. The internal structural consistency verified that items designated to represent distinct life domains clustered reliably around the corresponding theoretical constructs (e.g., familial figures cleanly separated from aversive emotional states and appetitive technologies).

Convergent Validity

Convergent validity has been established by correlating E-SOS subscale scores with validated psychometric inventories measuring differentiation of self, attachment orientation, and psychopathology:

• Differentiation of Self: The Experience of Family subscale correlates significantly with the Emotional Cutoff and Fusion with Others subscales of the Differentiation of Self Inventory (DSI; Skowron & Friedlander), confirming that high perceived fusion on the E-SOS accurately reflects family system enmeshment.
• Attachment Insecurity: Scores indicating low separation on the Experience of Challenges dimension correlate positively with attachment anxiety as measured by the Experiences in Close Relationships (ECR) scale (r = .38 to .46, p < .001), indicating that individuals with anxious attachment lack clear boundaries against negative affect.
• Emotion Dysregulation: The Experience of Challenges and Experience of Temptations subscales exhibit strong positive correlations with the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz & Roemer), demonstrating that boundary enmeshment with negative affects and impulses predicts poor impulse control and limited access to emotion regulation strategies.
• Subjective Well-Being: Higher integration on the Experience of Positive Sensation subscale correlates positively with the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener et al., r = .42, p < .001) and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (r = .49, p < .001).

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity was established by comparing E-SOS dimensions with measures of general cognitive intelligence and unrelated personality traits, such as openness to experience and conscientiousness from the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R). Weak, nonsignificant correlations (ranging from r = -.06 to .11) demonstrated that the instrument measures unique boundary-specific constructs distinct from general intellectual functioning or broad five-factor personality dimensions.

Reliability

The Experience of Sense of Self demonstrates sound psychometric reliability across internal consistency and temporal stability metrics, as documented in psychometric evaluations (Shvil, 2011; Shvil et al., 2013).

Internal Consistency

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the five validated factor subscales satisfy standard psychometric benchmarks for exploratory and diagnostic instruments:

• Experience of Positive Sensation (10 items): α = .81, indicating strong internal consistency.
• Experience of Higher Power (4 items): α = .78, demonstrating robust homogeneity among metaphysical and religious items.
• Experience of Challenges (6 items): α = .77, reflecting good reliability across negative affective items.
• Experience of Temptations (7 items): α = .73, displaying satisfactory internal consistency across diverse behavioral drives.
• Experience of Family (4 items): α = .65, an acceptable coefficient given the brief 4-item structure and heterogeneous nature of distinct family member relationships (e.g., father vs. sibling dynamics).

Test-Retest Stability

In temporal stability investigations evaluating a 4-week retest window among non-clinical adult cohorts, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) ranged between .71 and .84 across the subscales, indicating that perceived self-other boundary structures remain relatively stable over time in the absence of acute trauma, intensive clinical intervention, or transformative life events.

Factor Analysis

The factorial structure of the E-SOS was delineated across systematic validation studies conducted at Columbia University. Initial factor exploration on the full 45-item pool utilized principal axis factoring and principal components analysis with Promax oblique rotation to accommodate expected theoretical correlations among different boundary domains.

The empirical extraction criteria were guided by Kaiser’s eigenvalue-greater-than-one rule, scree plot inspection, and parallel analysis. The exploratory analyses identified a clean five-factor solution that accounted for approximately 48.6% of the total variance across the retained core items. Factor loadings for items onto their designated primary factors were robust, with primary loadings generally exceeding .40 and minimal cross-loadings above .25:

• Factor 1: Positive Sensation exhibited primary loadings from items 11 (Your body, .64), 13 (Your sexuality, .58), 18 (Who you want to be, .62), 19 (Optimism, .71), 20 (Self control, .66), 38 (Your intelligence, .68), 39 (Happiness, .76), 40 (Hope, .73), 42 (Your significant other, .44), and 43 (Excitement, .69).
• Factor 2: Challenges captured items 8 (Terror, .61), 9 (Hunger, .42), 10 (Your worst fear, .72), 12 (Stresses, .65), 15 (What you despise about your self, .59), and 29 (Sadness, .67).
• Factor 3: Temptations clustered items 3 (Money, .49), 5 (Internet, .53), 14 (Alcohol, .61), 17 (Food, .48), 22 (Non-prescribed drugs, .58), 23 (T.V. watching, .52), and 24 (Your cell phone, .56).
• Factor 4: Higher Power demonstrated sharp loadings from items 25 (God, .81), 30 (Spirituality, .84), 41 (Fate, .51), and 44 (Religion, .80).
• Factor 5: Family demonstrated consistent loadings from items 1 (Mother, .62), 4 (Other family members, .54), 28 (Your sibling(s), .51), and 31 (Father, .68).

Subsequent Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) testing this five-factor structure demonstrated acceptable model fit in independent adult samples: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .054 (90% CI [.047, .061]), Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .91, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = .90, and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = .058. These fit indices confirmed that the five-factor multidimensional construct adequately accounts for the covariance pattern among the scale items.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The complete instrument parameters and clinical administration characteristics are outlined below:

• Test Type: Psychometric self-report rating scale / multidimensional inventory.
• Administration Format: Paper-and-pencil or computerized self-administered questionnaire.
• Completion Time: Approximately 8 to 12 minutes.
• Item Count: 45 items in the full expanded version; an earlier preliminary development version utilized 31 items.
• Item Presentation: Prompted under the overarching instruction: “Relationship between your self and…” followed by 45 target referents.
• Response Scale: 4-point rating continuum:
  • (1) = Completely independent
  • (2) = Substantially independent / Moderate separation
  • (3) = Substantially connected / Minimal separation
  • (4) = No separation
• Subscale Item Composition:
  • Experience of Positive Sensation (10 items): Items 11, 13, 18, 19, 20, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43
  • Experience of Challenges (6 items): Items 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 29
  • Experience of Temptations (7 items): Items 3, 5, 14, 17, 22, 23, 24
  • Experience of Higher Power (4 items): Items 25, 30, 41, 44
  • Experience of Family (4 items): Items 1, 4, 28, 31
  • Unassigned / Exploratory Items (14 items): Items 2, 6, 7, 16, 21, 26, 27, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 45 (used for broader profile analysis and clinical qualitative inquiry into social power, temporal continuity, and fantasy life).
• Scoring Rules: Subscale scores are calculated by computing the mean or sum of the items corresponding to each validated factor. Higher scores reflect greater experiential fusion (diminished separation/boundary permeability), while lower scores reflect higher psychological autonomy, boundary rigidity, or independence. No reverse-coded items are utilized.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Experience of Sense of Self (E-SOS) / Experienced Self and Other Scale (ESOS) was systematically developed between 2007 and 2011, with primary peer-reviewed publication appearing in 2013 in the Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences (Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 1–20). The instrument is copyrighted by the authors (Efrat Shvil, Elizabeth Midlarsky, and Herbert H. Krauss).

The scale is available for academic, scientific, and non-commercial clinical research without royalties or licensing fees, provided that appropriate scholarly attribution is cited. Researchers wishing to use the scale in clinical practice, digital health applications, or commercial test batteries should seek permission from the primary author (Dr. Efrat Shvil) or referencing university institutional channels. The scale manuscript and dissertation documents are archived and accessible via open-access university repositories (e.g., Columbia University Academic Commons and the University of Arizona Library Open Access repository).

References

• Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
• Gratz, K. L., & Roemer, L. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOBA.0000007455.08539.94
• Kernberg, O. F. (1984). Severe personality disorders: Psychotherapeutic strategies. Yale University Press.
• Mahler, M. S., Pine, F., & Bergman, A. (1975). The psychological birth of the human infant: Symbiosis and individuation. Basic Books.
• Shvil, E., Krauss, H. H., Midlarsky, E., & Ward, A. W. (2007). Self and other scale: A technique for assaying one’s sense of self. Poster presented at the 19th Annual Convention of the Association for Psychological Science (APS), Washington, DC.
• Shvil, E., Midlarsky, E., & Krauss, H. H. (2009). Self and other scale: A technique for assaying one’s experience of self in relation to other. Poster presented at the 117th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association (APA), Toronto, ON, Canada.
• Shvil, E. (2011). The Experienced Self and Other Scale: A technique for assaying the experience of one’s self in relation to the other (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University). ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. https://core.ac.uk/display/27290747
• Shvil, E., Midlarsky, E., & Krauss, H. H. (2013). The Experienced Self and Other Scale: A technique for assaying the experience of one’s self in relation to the other. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 4(2), 1–20. https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/jmmss/article/download/17934/17673
• Skowron, E. A., & Friedlander, M. L. (1998). The Differentiation of Self Inventory: Development and initial validation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45(3), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.45.3.235

Items of the Scale