Assessing Defense Styles: Factor Structure and Psychometric Properties of the New Defense Style Questionnaire 60 (DSQ-60)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ) has undergone numerous revisions in an effort to\nimprove reliability and validity. More recently, another version, the DSQ-60, was designed\nto be congruent with the DSM-IV. The present study examined the underlying structure of\nthe DSQ-60 using both exploratory and confirmatory factor analytic procedures. The scale\nwas administered to a group of students attending an English-speaking university (n= 305)\nand a French-speaking university (n= 212). Three factors (image distorting, affect regulating,\nand adaptive) accounted for 47.93% of the variance. Confirmatory factor analysis corroborated\na three factor model. A new factor reflecting defensive functioning in healthy individuals\nwas found. Cronbach´s alpha for the three styles was .64, .72, and .61, respectively. Results\nare compared with prior research on the DSQ and suggest that the psychometric properties\nof the scale remain to be improved before broad use is warranted.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".