University of Tennessee, Knoxville
TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative
Exchange
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
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 student records.)
To the Graduate Council:
l am subꢆitting herewith a dissertatioꢈ written by Paul Matthew Hoffman eꢈtitled "Attachment Styles and Use of Deꢀnse Mechanisꢆs: ꢁ Study ofthe ꢁdꢂꢃꢄ Attachmeꢈt Projective and Cramer's Deꢀnse Mechaꢈisꢆ Scale." T have examined the final paper copy ofthis dissertation ꢅr ꢅrꢆ aꢈd content aꢈd recommend that it be accepted in partial ꢇlfillꢆent ofthe requireꢆents ꢅr the degree ofDoctor ofPhilosophy, with a major in Psychology.
Leoꢈꢉd Handler, Major Proꢀssor
We have read this dissertatioꢈ aꢈd recomꢆend its acceptaꢈce:
ꢁcceptaꢈce ꢅr the Couꢈcil:
Vice Chaꢈcellor Graduate Studies
ATTACHMENT STYLES AND USE OF DEFENSE MECHANISMS:
A STUDY OF THE ADULT ATTACHMENT PROJECTIVE
ꢀD CRAMER'S DEFENSE MECHANISM SCALE
A Dissertation Presented ꢁr the
Doctor ofPhilosophy
Deꢂee
The University ofTennessee, Knoxville
Paul Matthew Hoꢃmꢄ
August 2006
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my pꢀents, Cꢀl and Shꢀon Hofꢁan, who have supported me at every step ofthe way and always encouraged me to do my very best. It is also dedicated to Kꢀen Wetzel without whose support I know I could have never accomplished what I have.
11
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to ꢀꢁk all ofꢀose who helped me complete my Doctor of
Philosophy Deꢂee in Clinical Psychology. I would fiꢈst like to thꢃk Dr. Leonꢄd Hꢃdler who helped guide me through the last six yeꢄsꢅ I would also like to thank the oꢀer members ofmy commiꢆee; Dr. Wes Morgꢃ, Dr. John Loꢇsbuꢈyꢉ ꢃd Dr. Julia Malia ꢊr their guidꢃce ꢃd support thꢈough ꢀis project. It is also very imporꢋt to acknowledge the dedicated gꢈaduate students who helped in the coordination, data collection, and scoring ofthis study: Beꢆy Mꢌin, Chad Sims, Eric Peters, Iꢃ Haag, Noah Roost, Guy Edlis, ꢃd Kꢄen Wetzel.
111
ABSTꢀCT
The puꢁose ofthis study was to examine the relationship between adult
ꢃttachment ꢂd mꢃꢄity ofdeꢅnse mechꢂisms. 100 underꢆaduate students were given boꢇ ꢇe Adult ꢈꢉachment Projective (AAP) ꢂd the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), which was scored ꢊr deꢅnse mechꢂism use with Cramer's Deꢅnse Mechanism Mꢂual (DMM).
The AAP's ꢊur scoring categories were conꢌenseꢌ into two ꢆoups reflecting secure and insecure ꢃꢉachmentꢋ These were then compared to the three levels ofꢌeꢅnses that ꢇe DMM scores ꢊr: deniꢍꢎ projectionꢎ ꢂd identification. These deꢅnses exist on a hierarchy with ꢌenial being the most primitive anꢌ identification being the most mature.
Results suggest that insecure ꢃttachment is related to the primitive deꢅnses ofdenial and projection. No differences were ꢊund between ꢇe
iꢏecꢐre ꢂd secure groups ꢊr ꢇe mꢃꢄe deꢅnse ofidentification.
The findings ofthis study ꢑgue ꢊr the idea that attachment may be a
ꢒctor in the ꢌevelopment ofꢌeꢅnsive sꢓcturesꢔ Two theoꢕes ꢊr this finꢌing are �iscussed. Firstꢎ primitive ꢌeꢅnses may become ingrained during childhooꢌ because ofꢂ inability to use an ꢃttachment figure ꢊr comꢊrt ꢂꢌ protection. Secondꢎ individuals wiꢇ insecure ꢃꢖꢗꢘhment may not be able to use identification effectively as a deꢅnseꢙ necessitꢃting the greater use ofother more imꢚꢃꢛre deꢅnses to guꢑd against distress. This study also shows that immꢃture deꢅnses
may be a better measure ofpsychological deficits than mꢃture deꢅnses.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
Page
I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................... 1
ꢂefense Mechanisms .................................................................................. 2
ꢀttacꢁent Theory ................................................................................... 11
ꢂeꢃnse Mechꢄisms versus ꢂeꢃnsive Processes ................................... 15 ꢀttacꢁent, ꢂeꢃnse Mechanisms and their Effects
on ꢂevelopment and Personality .............................................................. 17
Measurement ofꢂeꢃnse Mechanisms ..................................................... 18
Measurement ofꢀttachment..................................................................... 22
Hypotheses................................................................................................ 24
II. METHOD ...................................................................................................... 26
Paꢅicipaꢆꢇs................................................................................................ 26
Materials ................................................................................................... 27
Procedure .................................................................................................. 37
III. RESULTS......;.............................................................................................. 39
IV. DISCUSSION............................................................................................... 41
Limitations ofthe ꢈtudy............................................................................ 47
ꢈꢉengths ofthe ꢈtudy............................................................................... 48
LIST OF REFERENCES................................................................................... 50
APPENDIX.......................................................................................................... 59
VITA..................................................................................................................... 68
V
LIST OF TABLES
- Table
- Page
A-1. Kappa and Intra-Class Correlation Coefficients
ꢀr the ꢁnteꢂꢃꢄer Reliability ofthe AAP ꢅd DMM ................................... 60
A-2. Levene's Test ofEquality ofError Vꢆiꢇnces............................................. 61 A-3. Sꢈple Demoꢉaphic Dꢃꢄa.......................................................................... 62
A-4. Peꢆson r Coꢂelation Between Age and DMM Scores............................... 63
A-5. Independent Sꢈpꢊes t-test ꢀr Gender and DMM Scores.......................... 64
A-6. Gender ꢅd AAP Scores Cross-Tabulation and Chi-Squꢆe Test ............... 65
A-7. Independent Sꢈpꢊes t-test ꢀr AAP Scores and Age ................................. 66
A-8. ꢋOVA between AAP Category ꢅd DMM Scores .................................. 67
Vl
I. Introduction
Both the psychodynꢀic concept ofdeꢁnse mechanisms and John
Bowlby's attachment theory have been well studied and reseꢂched over the yeꢂs. At the heꢃ ofboth theories lies the concept ofhuman adaptationꢉ Bowlby described how infants adapt to their environment by bonding with their caregivers and how the nature ofthese bonds impact subsequent interpersonal behavior. Deꢁnse mechanisms explain how individuals deꢁnd and protect themselves ꢄom intolerable ꢅxiety while avoiding conscious awareness ofthe source ofthe anxiety. By compꢂing these two concepts, we can better understꢅd how boꢆ deꢁnse mechꢅisms and attachment aid in human development and adaptation. Attachment theory generally does not venture much outside ofꢆe realm of inteꢇersonal behavior. Investigating how attachment relates to deꢁnse mechꢅism use may be a way to better understand the implication ofattachment status on other ꢂeas ofpsychological ꢈctioningꢉ
Investigating ꢆe relationship between these two concepts also may shed
· light on ꢆe impact ofattachment on psychological development. Recent views on deꢁnse mechanisms posit that they exist on a developmental hierꢂchy with some deꢁnses being related to more immature psychological states and some reflecting a more mature developmentꢊ levelꢉ It is possible that eꢂly attachment to cꢂegivers may be related to the development ofpsychological deꢁnsive structures.
1
Defense Mechanisms
The concept ofdeꢀnse mechanisms has a long history in the field of psychology. Siꢁꢂd Freud first proposed the concept ofdeꢀnse mechꢃisms in a paper titled "The Neuro-Psychoses of Deꢀnceꢄ (1894) ꢃd ꢅher elaborated
- his ꢆeory in "Furꢆer Remarks on the Neuro-Psychoses ofDeꢀnceꢄ (1896).
- on
Freud originally defined deꢀnses to be unconscious mental operations that keep pꢇ thoughts and emotions ꢈom awareness. He ꢉcused much ofhis early ꢃalysis ofdeꢀnses on the concept ofrepression and its role in hysteriaꢕ In repression, he assertedꢏ individuals merely do not remember pꢊnꢋl events ꢃd ꢀel as if they never happened. At the stꢌ ofhis workꢏ Freud ꢀlt that all deꢀnses were inherently pathological and represented barriers to psychological health. For a period oftimeꢓ Freud moved away ꢈom using the teꢍ defense ꢃd instead used the word repression to describe deꢀnse mechꢃisms. Later in his cꢎeerꢏ Freud (1915ꢓ 1923ꢓ 1926) expꢃded his concept ofdeꢀnses to describe a wider array of deꢀnsive processesꢓ and ꢆe term repression was used to describe one specific type ofdeꢀnse mechanism. Freud also elaborated on the reasons why deꢀnse mechanisms existed. He claimed that they arose ꢐom the conflict between the ego and the id. The ego seeks to bar the expression ofunacceptable iꢑulses by using deꢀnse mechanisms (1923). Despite ꢆe ꢒct that Freud still viewed deꢀnses as paꢆologicalꢓ oꢆer ꢆeorists classified his notion ofdeꢀnses into ꢔoupsꢕ Otto Fenichelꢓ in his book the The Pꢀchoanalytic ꢁeoꢂ of Neurosis (1945)ꢓ organized Freud's deꢀnses into what he termed suꢖcessꢗl ꢘd
2
unsuccessꢀl deꢁnses. Successꢀl deꢂnses allowed expression ofthe instinctual drive in a manner that the individual could tolerate. Unsuccessꢀl deꢁnses did not allow expression ofthe drive and thus needeꢅ to be repeated constꢃtly. Even though Fenichel ꢋnd other theorists such as ꢄna Freud (1946) anꢅ George Vaillant (1971) have ꢅescribeꢅ both categories ofꢅeꢂnses, Sigmunꢅ Freuꢅ never incluꢅeꢅ successꢀl ꢅeꢂnses into his overall category ofꢅeꢂnse mechanisms.
Siꢆund Freud (1894, 1896, 1915, 1916, 1923, 1926) described a total of seven deꢂnses that the ego uses against instincts arising ꢇom ꢈe id. Kline (2004) provided a good summary ofthe deꢂnse mechanisms that Freuꢅ describeꢅ throughout his career.
- 1.
- Repression, as mentioneꢅ eꢉlier, was one ofthe main ꢅeꢂnse
mechanisms ꢈat Freuꢅ ꢅiscusseꢅ. This involved the ꢀnction of rejecting anꢅ keeping some unpleasant thought out of consciousness. Kline (2004) summꢉizes the two ꢅifferent types of
repression:
Primal repression - where the mental presentation ofthe instinct is ꢅenieꢅ entry into consciousness, anꢅ repression proper - where the
- mental
- ꢅerivatives anꢅ associations ofthe represseꢅ presentation,
which are also ꢅenieꢅ enꢊy into consciousness. The mental energy that belongs to represseꢅ instincts is ꢊꢋnsꢌrmed into affects, especiꢍly ꢋnxiety, which renꢅers repression an unsuccessꢀl deꢂnse. (p. 44)
3
- 2.
- Denial describes a deꢀnse where a person's ego wꢁds offcertain
painꢂl perceptions ꢃom the outside world by simply denying that they exist.
3.
Projection is a deꢀnse where a person's own unacceptable impulses ꢄd ideas get attributed to ꢄother person or persons.
4.
Reaction ꢅrmation describes a deꢀnse where a person deve_lops an attitude that is ꢆe opposite ofthe instinct that is deꢀnded against.
Undoing describes ꢄ attempt to cꢁry out an action that is the opposite ofthe instinct that is deꢀnded against ꢄd that will cꢄcel out the perceived consequences ofthe instinct.
5.
6.
Isolation is a deꢀnse ꢆat Freud described which involves isolating experiences ꢃom their associations ꢄd emotions.
7.
Last, regression describes a process where the ego reꢇesses to ꢄ eꢁlꢈer stage ofdevelopment.
In addition to the ego's deꢀnses against instinct, Freud also ꢉlt that people deꢉnded against affect also. Freud described three types ofdeꢉnses against affect: postponement ofꢊect, displacement ofaffect, and identification with the aggressor. Freud (1916) also described the process ofsublimation. In sublimation, a person abandons the sexual aim ꢅr another aim, which is no longer sexual but instead is productive ꢄd pro-social. Sublimation reꢀrs to successꢂl
4
deꢀnses and, thus, was not viewed by Freud as an actual deꢀnse. Sigmund Freud laid the groundwork ꢁr the study ofdeꢀnse mechanisms by developing the concept and elaborating on several different types ofdeꢀnse mechꢂisms. Aſter his death, his daughter, Anna Freud, took over the study ofdeꢀnse mechanisms and developed a much more comprehensive theory. While the concept ofdeꢀnse echanisms has changed and expꢂded, Sigmund Freud's original ideas serve as mꢃe backbone ꢁr much ofꢃe modem work on deꢀnses.