This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

I. Clinical Interview and Life Vignette Ratings

J. Christopher Perry, MPH, MD; Steven H. Cooper, PhD

Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1989;46(5):444-452.

Abstract
• The Defense Mechanism Rating Scales (DMRS) measure the use of defense mechanisms based on clinical interview or life vignette data. Using nonprofessional raters observing videotaped psychodynamic interviews of individuals with personality and affective disorders, the median intraclass interrater reliability (I_R) of the defense scales was.36 but was.57 for group consensus ratings and.74 when related defenses were grouped into defense summary scales. When follow-up data on life vignettes were rated, the median interrater IR was.55 for those defenses occurring at least 5% of the time and.66 for the defense summary scales. In relation to follow-up data, so-called immature defenses (denial, projection, acting out, hypochondriasis, passive-aggression) were associated with higher levels of symptoms, poorer global functioning, and higher proportion of time impaired in psychosocial role functioning. Borderline defenses (splitting, projective identification) displayed a similar pattern. Among narcissistic and neurotic defenses, only devaluation was associated with poorer functioning, whereas intellectualization was associated with higher functioning. Finally, action and borderline defenses demonstrated significant correlations across methods and across time (video vs life vignettes), whereas obsessional, disavowal, and narcissistic defenses showed nonsignificant trends. Overall, these results support the model of a hierarchy of defenses.

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Psychiatry, Cambridge (Mass) Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication April 4, 1988.

Reprint requests to Department of Psychiatry, Cambridge Hospital, 1493 Cambridge St, Cambridge, MA 02139 (Dr Perry).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Research on the Processes Involved in Treating Sexual Offenders
Drapeau
Sex Abuse 2005;17:117-125.
ABSTRACT  

Contribution of Patient Defense Mechanisms and Therapist Interventions to the Development of Early Therapeutic Alliance in a Brief Psychodynamic Investigation
Despland et al.
J. Psychother. Pract. Res. 2001;10:155-164.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Penn Psychoanalytic Treatment Collection: a Set of Complete and Recorded Psychoanalyses as a Research Resource
Luborsky et al.
J Am Psychoanal Assoc 2001;49:217-234.
ABSTRACT  

The Central Relationship Questionnaire (CRQ): Psychometric Properties in a Swedish Sample and Cross-Cultural Studies
Weinryb et al.
J. Psychother. Pract. Res. 2000;9:201-212.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Scientific Status of Unconscious Processes: Is Freud Really Dead?
Westen
J Am Psychoanal Assoc 1999;47:1061-1106.
ABSTRACT  

Validity of Self-Report Measures of Defense Mechanisms
Mehlman and Slane
Assessment 1994;1:189-197.
ABSTRACT