Defense mechanisms and coping strategies in conjugal relationships: An integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coping strategies and defence mechanisms are used to describe people's responses to stressful situations. The concept of coping strategies comes from the social psychological tradition, whereas the concept of defence mechanisms comes from the psychoanalytic tradition. According to the traditional view, the two concepts are very different. However, recently, a growing number of researchers suggested that coping strategies and defence mechanisms are more interrelated than what was assumed previously. This study was aimed at documenting the relationship between both concepts in the context of predicting adjustment in a specific situation, marital relationships, one of the most well‐suited situations to investigate people's responses to stressful situations. The sample consisted of 157 couples. Each partner completed the Ways of Coping Questionnaire, the Defense Style Questionnaire, and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Two theoretical models, the independence model and the effectiveness model, accounting for the relationship between coping strategies and defence mechanisms were first tested, using confirmatory factor analyses. According to the independence hypothesis, one latent dimension should measure defence mechanisms and the other latent dimension should measure coping strategies. According to the effectiveness hypothesis, coping strategies and defence mechanisms could vary along two dimensions: adaptive and maladaptive ways of dealing with marital difficulties. Results revealed that the effectiveness hypothesis was a better representation of the relationship between the two concepts than the independence hypothesis. The unique contribution of defence mechanisms and coping strategies to the prediction of marital adjustment was next examined using multiple regression analyses. Again, results were generally congruent with the effectiveness hypothesis. Positive and negative relationships with marital adjustment were observed for both concepts. In addition, coping strategies did not result in more positive outcomes on marital adjustment than defence mechanisms. It seems that coping strategies and defence mechanisms have both their specificity and their shared characteristics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".