Fortuna Dominika, Golonka Krystyna
Doctoral School in the Social Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.
Department of Crisis Intervention and Psychotherapy, Institute of Applied Psychology, Faculty of Management and Social Communication, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.
Front Psychiatry. 2024 Oct 17;15:1481439. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1481439. eCollection 2024.
The clinical form of depersonalization affects approximately 1%-2% of the adult population. This study aimed to describe the symptoms of depersonalization in a non-clinical sample and to operationalize depersonalization as a regulatory mechanism. This article introduces the Depersonalization Mechanism Scale, 41-item measure developed to assess one's tendency for depersonalization in response to overstimulation. The aim of the study is to explore how depersonalization mechanism is associated with cognitive and behavioral emotion regulation strategies, depression, and anxiety.
The study included a sample of 300 Polish adults (149 men) from the general population, ranging in age from 18 to 60. Participants were administered the following questionnaires: Depersonalization Mechanism Scale (DMS), Behavioral Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (BERQ), Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ), Occupational Depression Inventory (ODI), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ), and Trait Anxiety Scale (SL-C).
An exploratory factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure of Depersonalization Mechanism Scale, with very high reliability coefficients for both subscales and full scale. A regression analysis revealed that depersonalization mechanism is a significant predictor of depressive symptoms. Depersonalization mechanism is strongly correlated with maladaptive regulation strategies such as withdrawal, ignoring, rumination, catastrophizing, self-blame, and blaming others. Weaker but significant connections were identified with certain adaptive strategies: acceptance, positive refocusing, putting into perspective, and seeking social support. Women were more prone to depersonalization than men.
Further research on depersonalization in non-clinical samples may improve understanding of this mechanism in the general population. This knowledge, combined with greater education about non-clinical forms of depersonalization, may support preventive programs against depression and professional assistance for people facing acute or chronic stressful life events.
人格解体的临床形式影响着约1% - 2%的成年人口。本研究旨在描述非临床样本中人格解体的症状，并将人格解体作为一种调节机制进行操作化定义。本文介绍了人格解体机制量表，这是一个由41个项目组成的测量工具，用于评估个体在面对过度刺激时的人格解体倾向。该研究的目的是探讨人格解体机制与认知和行为情绪调节策略、抑郁和焦虑之间的关联。
该研究纳入了300名来自波兰普通人群的成年人样本（149名男性），年龄在18至60岁之间。参与者接受了以下问卷测试：人格解体机制量表（DMS）、行为情绪调节问卷（BERQ）、认知情绪调节问卷（CERQ）、职业抑郁量表（ODI）、患者健康问卷（PHQ）和特质焦虑量表（SL - C）。
探索性因素分析揭示了人格解体机制量表的两因素结构，两个子量表和总量表的信度系数都非常高。回归分析表明，人格解体机制是抑郁症状的一个重要预测指标。人格解体机制与诸如退缩、忽视、沉思、灾难化、自责和指责他人等适应不良的调节策略密切相关。与某些适应性策略（接受、积极重新聚焦、正确看待和寻求社会支持）存在较弱但显著的联系。女性比男性更容易出现人格解体。
对非临床样本中人格解体的进一步研究可能会增进对一般人群中这种机制的理解。这些知识，再加上对非临床形式人格解体的更多教育，可能会支持针对抑郁症的预防项目以及为面临急性或慢性压力生活事件的人提供专业援助。
