"Some authors (e.g. Allison et al., 2006 and Turkle, 1995) compare the player and avatar's relationship to a transmission field, as roughly defined by psychoanalysis: the avatar is not in exclusive competence of the player, while not being completely separated from them. It lies somewhere near the boarder of external and internal (psychological) reality. From the player's viewpoint, the avatar is a kind of individual overlap owing to which they may experiment with their identities. Wolfendale (2006) then describes directly the player and avatar's relationship as an attachment, i.e. as if with an absent or idealised or unreal person, while the feelings created around this relationship are real.
"Some psychodynamic schools point out the focal role of so-called images in one’s psyche (e.g. Hillman, 1997, Kast, 1992), which are certain complexes around which fantasies and emotions resolve and which can be experienced as certain independent parts of one’s psyche. The in-game character can be, in a certain sense, considered an “image” and can thus be an important aspect of a player’s life or psychical development. Understanding what the relationship between a player and his in-game character mean for the player can, to a certain extent, lead to an explanatory framework for e.g. excessive game-play."