Attachment Styles and Use of Defense Mechanisms: a Study of the Adult Attachment Projective and Cramer's Defense Mechanism Scale
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 8-2006 Attachment Styles and Use of Defense Mechanisms: A Study of the Adult Attachment Projective and Cramer's Defense Mechanism Scale Paul Matthew Hoffman University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Education Commons Recommended Citation Hoffman, Paul Matthew, "Attachment Styles and Use of Defense Mechanisms: A Study of the Adult Attachment Projective and Cramer's Defense Mechanism Scale. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2006. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/4254 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Paul Matthew Hoffman entitled "Attachment Styles and Use of Defense Mechanisms: A Study of the Adult Attachment Projective and Cramer's Defense Mechanism Scale." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Philosophy. Leonard Handler, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: John Lounsbury, Wes Morgan, Julia Malia Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: l am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Paul Matthew Hoffman entitled "Attachment Styles and Use of DefenseMechanisms: A Study of the Adu).t Attachment Projective and Cramer's DefenseMechanism Scale." T have examined the finalpaper copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Psychology. LeonardHandler, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Acceptance for the Council: Vice Chancellor Graduate Studies ATTACHMENT STYLES AND USE OF DEFENSE MECHANISMS: A STUDY OF THE ADULT ATTACHMENT PROJECTIVE ANDCRAMER'S DEFENSE MECHANISM SCALE A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Paul Matthew Hoffman August 2006 DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Carland SharonHoffman, who have supported me at every step of the way and always encouraged me to do my very best. It is also dedicated to Karen Wetzel without whose support I know I could have never accomplished what I have. 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thankall of those who helped me complete my Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Clinical Psychology. I would first like to thankDr. LeonardHandler who helped guide me through the last six years. I would also like to thank the othermembers ofmy committee;Dr. Wes Morgan, Dr. John Lounsbury,and Dr. Julia Malia for their guidanceand support through this project. It is also very importantto acknowledge the dedicated graduate students who helped in the coordination, data collection, and scoring of this study: Betty Martin, Chad Sims, Eric Peters, IanHaag, Noah Roost, Guy Edlis, andKaren Wetzel. 111 ABSTRACT The purposeof this study was to examine the relationship between adult attachment andmaturity of defensemechanisms. 100 undergraduatestudents were given boththe Adult AttachmentProjective (AAP) andthe Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), which was scored fordefense mechanism use with Cramer's DefenseMechanism Manual(DMM). The AAP's fourscoring categories were condensed into two groups reflectingsecure and insecure attachment. These were then compared to the three levels of defensesthat theDMM scores for: denial, projection, andidentification. These defensesexist on a hierarchy with denial being the most primitive and identificationbeing the most mature. Results suggest that insecure attachment is related to the primitive defensesof denial and projection. No differenceswere foundbetween the insecureand secure groups forthe mature defense of identification. The findingsof this study arguefor the idea that attachment may be a factorin the development of defensivestructures. Two theoriesfor this finding are �iscussed. First, primitive defensesmay become ingrained during childhood because of aninability to use an attachment figure forcomfort and protection. Second, individuals withinsecure attachmentmay not be able to use identification effectivelyas a defense, necessitating the greater use of other more immature defensesto guardagainst distress. This study also shows that immature defenses may be a better measure of psychological deficitsthan mature defenses. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 Defense Mechanisms .................................................................................. 2 AttachmentTheory ................................................................................... 11 DefenseMechanisms versus DefensiveProcesses ................................... 15 Attachment, Defense Mechanisms and their Effects on Development and Personality .............................................................. 17 Measurement of DefenseMechanisms ..................................................... 18 Measurement of Attachment ..................................................................... 22 Hypotheses ................................................................................................ 24 II. METHOD ...................................................................................................... 26 Participants............... ................................................................................. 26 Materials ................................................................................................... 27 Procedure .................................................................................................. 37 III. RESULTS ...... ; .............................................................................................. 39 IV. DISCUSSION ............................................................................................... 41 Limitations of the Study.......................... .................................................. 47 Strengthsof the Study ............................................................................... 48 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................................................................... 50 APPENDIX .......................................................................................................... 59 VITA................................ ..................................................................................... 68 V LIST OF TABLES Table Page A-1. Kappa and Intra-Class Correlation Coefficients forthe lnterraterReliability of the AAP andDMM ................................... 60 A-2. Levene's Test of Equality of Error Variances....................... ...................... 61 A-3. Sa.rnpleDemographic Data .......................................................................... 62 A-4. Pearsonr CorrelationBetween Age and DMM Scores ............................... 63 A-5. Independent Sa.rnplest-test forGender and DMM Scores .......................... 64 A-6. Gender and AAP Scores Cross-Tabulation and Chi-SquareTest ............... 65 A-7. Independent Sa.rnplest-test for AAP Scores and Age ................................. 66 A-8. ANOVA between AAP Category andDMM Scores .................................. 67 Vl I. Introduction Both the psychodynamicconcept of defensemechanisms and John Bowlby's attachment theory have been well studied and researchedover the years. At the heart of both theories lies the concept of human adaptation. Bowlby described how infants adapt to their environment by bonding with their caregivers and how the nature of these bonds impact subsequent interpersonal behavior. Defensemechanisms explain how individuals defendand protect themselves from intolerable anxietywhile avoiding conscious awareness of the source of the anxiety. By comparingthese two concepts, we can better understandhow both defensemechanisms and attachment aid in human development and adaptation. Attachment theory generally does not venture much outside of therealm of interpersonal behavior. Investigating how attachment relates to defense mechanismuse may be a way to better understand the implication of attachment status on other areasof psychological functioning. Investigating therelationship between these two concepts also may shed · light on the impact of attachment on psychological development. Recent views on defense mechanisms posit that they exist on a developmental hierarchywith some defensesbeing related to more immature psychological states and some reflectinga more mature developmentallevel. It is possible that earlyattachment to caregiversmay be related to the development of psychological defensive structures. 1 Defense Mechanisms The concept of defensemechanisms has a long history in the fieldof psychology. SigmundFreud firstproposed the concept of defense mechanisms in a paper titled "The