Defense Mechanisms, Gender, and Adaptiveness in Emerging Personality Disorders in Adolescent Outpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study focused on demographic and personality differences in the use of 30 defense mechanisms in adolescents with personality psychopathology and explored the hierarchical organization of personality traits based on the adaptiveness of defensive functioning. A total of 102 self-referred adolescent outpatients were interviewed and assessed on defense mechanisms and personality traits using the Defense Mechanisms Rating Scales and the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure 200 for Adolescents, respectively. Age and gender differences were found throughout the hierarchy. Pearson's correlations revealed a hierarchical organization of emerging personality disorders (PDs) in adolescence. More adaptive defenses were clearly associated with healthier personality style, whereas more pathological personality styles such as those with borderline traits were characterized by more rigid and maladaptive defenses. Dissociation was also associated with maladaptive personality types. Identifying the defenses associated with emerging personality disorders may inform the unconscious function of defense mechanisms in specific PDs. The systematic assessment of defense mechanisms might also help therapists to monitor changes during treatment.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".