Changes in defensive functioning in completed psychoanalyses: the penn psychoanalytic treatment collection

What Do Therapist Defense Mechanisms Have to Do With Their Experience of Professional Self-Doubt and Vicarious Trauma During the COVID-19 Pandemic?

This is the first study to examine psychotherapists' levels of defense mechanisms, their concurrent relationship with professional work-related stress (professional self-doubt and vicarious trauma), and how their levels of defense mechanisms predict the changes in these professional stresses over the course of 3 months since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from two online studies (Study 1; N = 105 and Study 2; N = 336), using two self-report measures of therapists' defense mechanisms (Defense Style Questionnaire-40 in Study 1 and Defense Mechanism Rating Scales Self-Report-30 in Study 2), are presented. Therapists reported higher levels of mature defense mechanisms, and lower levels of immature defense mechanisms, compared to published community and clinical populations assessed before and during the pandemic. Therapists' lower level of mature defense mechanisms and higher levels of neurotic and immature defense mechanisms were related to higher concurrent levels of vicarious trauma and professional doubt. Therapists who reported higher levels of mature defense mechanisms at 3-month follow-up showed less vicarious trauma and professional self-doubt at follow-up, after controlling for these professional stressors at baseline. Implications for clinical supervision and training are discussed. The context and professional challenges during the pandemic are unique and future replications of the results outside the pandemic context are warranted.

Comparison and change of defense mechanisms over the course of psychotherapy in patients with depression or anxiety disorder: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Defense mechanisms play an important role in the development and maintenance of both health and psychopathology. Research is still in the early stages of investigating the specific relationships among diagnostic groups and defense mechanisms along with their response to different treatment types.

METHODS

For the present study a total of 47 outpatients diagnosed with depression or anxiety disorders were randomized to receive 25±3 sessions of cognitive-behavioral therapy with integrated elements of either emotion-focused therapy (CBT + EFT) or treatment components based on self-regulation theory (CBT + SR). An observer-rated method, the Defense Mechanism Rating Scale (DMRS) was used to code transcripts of the 1st, 8th, 16th and 24th session to assess change in defensive functioning.

RESULTS

Over the course of therapy, overall defensive functioning (ODF) as well as adaptive defenses increased significantly, whereas maladaptive and neurotic defenses did not change. At the beginning of treatment, the proportion of adaptive defenses and ODF was significantly higher in patients diagnosed with anxiety disorders than in patients with depressive disorders. However, depressed patients exhibited greater improvement in their defensive functioning over the course of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Results support the view of defense mechanisms as a useful transdiagnostic and transtheoretical concept and supports the notion that change of defense mechanisms may be a relevant mechanism of change in psychotherapy.

What Defense Mechanisms Do Therapists Interpret In-Session?

One of the key technical guidelines outlined by psychodynamic theorists and clinicians is for therapists to interpret a patient's most prominent defenses (Greenson, 1967; Langs, 1973). However, a debate exists about what constitutes a patient's most prominent defense and which defenses therapists actually choose to interpret in-session. This study aimed to shed light on this debate by examining 35 psychotherapy sessions (18 high alliance and 17 low alliance dyads) of individuals in therapy at a university counselling center. The analysis focused on comparing the patients' most prominent defenses and the range of defenses they utilized, and the therapists' most prominent interpretation level as well as the range of interpretation level. Paired sample t-tests showed no significant mean difference between sessions with low and high alliance scores in patient defense levels (e.g., frequency and range) and therapist interpretation levels (e.g., frequency and range). Significant differences were found between the range of patient defense levels and the range of therapist interpretation levels. Correlational analyses showed no significant relationship between patient defense levels and therapist interpretation levels on both the frequency and range levels. Clinical implications of these results, and directions for future research are discussed.

Defense Mechanisms in "Pure" Anxiety and "Pure" Depressive Disorders

Our study was intended to test whether there are any differences in the way defense mechanisms are used by patients suffering from pure anxiety and those with pure depressive disorders. The sample size was as follows: depressive disorders without psychotic symptoms 30, anxiety disorders 30, and the healthy control group 30. The assessment of defense mechanisms was made using the DSQ-40 questionnaire. Our findings show that "pure" anxiety disorders differ from "pure" depressive disorders only in the use of immature defense mechanisms. The group with depressive disorders was significantly more prone to use immature defense mechanisms than the group with anxiety disorders (p = 0.005), primarily projection (p = 0.001) and devaluation (p = 0.003). These defense mechanisms may therefore be used both to differentiate between anxiety and depressive disorders and also to determine which symptoms (anxiety or depressive disorders) are dominant at any given stage of treatment.

How does addressing patient's defenses help to repair alliance ruptures in psychodynamic psychotherapy?: An exploratory study

Interpreting or addressing defenses is an important aspect of psychoanalytic technique. Previous research has shown that therapist addressing defenses (TADs) can produce a positive effect on alliance. The potential value of TADs during the process of alliance rupture and resolution has not yet been documented. We selected patients (n = 17) undertaking a short-term dynamic psychotherapy in which the therapeutic alliance, measured with the Helping Alliance Questionnaire and monitored after each session, showed a pattern of rupture and resolution. Two control sessions (5 and 15) were also selected. Presence of TADs was examined in each therapist interpretation. Compared with control sessions, rupture sessions were characterized by fewer TADs and especially fewer TADs addressing specifically intermediate-essentially neurotic-defenses. Resolution sessions were characterized by more TADs addressing specifically intermediate defenses. This confirms the link between therapist technique and alliance process in psychodynamic psychotherapy.

Defense mechanisms in schizotypal, borderline, antisocial, and narcissistic personality disorders

Numerous authors have theorized that defense mechanisms play a role in personality disorders. We reviewed theoretical writings and empirical studies about defenses in schizotypal, borderline, antisocial, and narcissistic personality disorders, developing hypotheses about these differential relationships. We then examined these hypotheses using dynamic interview data rated for defenses in a study of participants (n = 107) diagnosed with these four personality disorder types. Overall, the prevalence of immature defenses was substantial, and all four disorders fit within the broad borderline personality organization construct. Defenses predicted the most variance in borderline and the least variance in schizotypal personality disorder, suggesting that dynamic factors played the largest role in borderline and the least in schizotypal personality. Central to borderline personality were strong associations with major image-distorting defenses, primarily splitting of self and other's images, and the hysterical level defenses, dissociation and repression. Narcissistic and antisocial personality disorders shared minor image-distorting defenses, such as omnipotence or devaluation, while narcissistic also used splitting of self-images and antisocial used disavowal defenses like denial. Overall, differential relationships between specific defenses and personality disorder types were largely consistent with the literature, and consistent with the importance that the treatment literature ascribes to working with defenses.

Defensive flexibility and its relation to symptom severity, depression, and anxiety

Numerous studies have examined which individual defense mechanisms are related with mental health, and which are linked with psychopathology. However, the idea that a flexible use of defensive mechanisms is related to psychological wellbeing remained a clinical assumption, which this study sought to test empirically. A total of 62 (N = 62) outpatients participated in the study and were assessed with the Symptom Checklist-90R and the Social Adjustment Self-rated Scale. A subsample of 40 participants was further assessed using the Hamilton Depression (HAMD-21) and Anxiety scales (HAMA-21). The first therapy session of all participants was transcribed and rated using the Defense Mechanisms Ratings Scales (), and the Overall Defensive Functioning (ODF) score, which indicates the maturity of one's defensive functioning, was computed. An indicator of flexible use of defenses was also calculated based on the Gini Concentration C measure. Results showed that defensive flexibility, but not ODF, could predict anxiety scores. Symptom severity was predicted by both ODF and defensive flexibility, although in directions opposite to our predictions. Results suggest that defensive flexibility captures another aspect of an individual's functioning not assessed by the ODF, and that it is a promising new way of documenting defensive functioning.