Suppr超能文献

使用防御机制区分抑郁组和焦虑组。

Differentiation of depression and anxiety groups using defense mechanisms.

作者信息

Olson Trevor R, Presniak Michelle D, MacGregor Michael Wm

机构信息

Institute of Community and Family Psychiatry at SMBD Jewish General Hospital, Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

出版信息

J Nerv Ment Dis. 2009 Nov;197(11):834-40. doi: 10.1097/NMD.0b013e3181beab34.

Abstract

We examined whether participants in depressed and anxious groups could be classified correctly using observer and self-report measures of defense mechanisms. A sample of 1182 university students completed the Personality Assessment Inventory and those scoring in the clinical range on either depression or anxiety indices were selected for participation. In total, 25 participants met criteria for the depressed group and 94 met criteria for the anxious group. Individual defense scores from the Defense-Q and the Defense Style Questionnaire were separately entered into 2 stepwise discriminant analyses. After cross-validation, the Defense-Q and Defense Style Questionnaire analyses classified participants with 75.0% and 71.3% accuracy, respectively. The results indicated that depression and anxiety groups can be significantly differentiated by defense use alone. Important differences in defensive functioning between these groups were confirmed and differences between observer and self-report measures of defenses mechanisms and current challenges in defense research were highlighted.

摘要

我们研究了能否使用防御机制的观察者评定和自我报告测量方法正确地将抑郁组和焦虑组的参与者分类。1182名大学生样本完成了《人格评估量表》,那些在抑郁或焦虑指标上达到临床范围分数的学生被挑选出来参与研究。总共有25名参与者符合抑郁组标准,94名符合焦虑组标准。分别将来自《防御问卷》和《防御方式问卷》的个体防御分数纳入两个逐步判别分析。交叉验证后,《防御问卷》和《防御方式问卷》分析分别以75.0%和71.3%的准确率对参与者进行了分类。结果表明,仅通过防御方式就可以显著区分抑郁组和焦虑组。证实了这些组在防御功能上的重要差异,并强调了防御机制的观察者评定和自我报告测量方法之间的差异以及防御研究当前面临的挑战。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验