Defense Mechanisms Associated With Borderline Personality Disorder

Mary C. Zanarini · Jolie L. Weingeroff · Frances Rachel Frankenburg

80 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Personality Disorders

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Personality Disorders and Psychopathology Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research Personality Traits and Psychology

Abstract

This study assessed the defensive functioning of 290 criteria-defined borderline patients and compared it to that of 72 patients with other forms of axis II psychopathology. The Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ), a self-report measure with demonstrated criterion validity and internal consistency, was administered to 362 axis II inpatients diagnosed using semistructured interviews of proven reliability. Borderline patients had significantly higher scores than axis II comparison subjects on three of the four defense styles assessed by the DSQ: self-sacrificing, maladaptive action, and image-distorting defenses. They also had significantly higher scores than axis II comparison subjects on eight of the 19 defense mechanisms studied. More specifically, borderline patients had significantly higher scores on one neurotic-level defense (undoing), four immature defenses (acting out, emotional hypochondriasis, passive aggression, and projection), and two image-distorting/borderline defenses (projective identification and splitting). In contrast, axis II comparison subjects had a significantly higher score than borderline patients on one mature defense (suppression). When all significant defenses were considered together, three were found to be significant predictors of a borderline diagnosis: acting out, emotional hypochondriasis, and undoing. This model has both good sensitivity (.95) and positive predictive power (.86). Taken together, the results of this study suggest that the defensive profile of borderline patients is distinct from that of patients with other forms of axis II pathology. They also suggest that the defensive triad of acting out, emotional hypochondriasis, and undoing may serve as a useful clinical marker for the borderline diagnosis, particularly in settings where the base rate of the disorder is high.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 80 citations exist upstream.

References

1992The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID)1967Borderline Personality Organization 1993The Defense Style Questionnaire 2003The Longitudinal Course of Borderline Psychopathology: 6-Year Prospective Follow-Up of the Phenomenology of Borderline Personality Disorder 2001Attainment and maintenance of reliability of axis I and II disorders over the course of a longitudinal study 1986An Empirically Validated Hierarchy of Defense Mechanisms 1987The diagnostic interview for personality disorders: Interrater and test-retest reliability 2002Inter-Rater and Test-Retest Reliability of the Revised Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines

Cited by

2021Three Dimensional Approaches to Personality Disorders: a Review on Personality Functioning, Personality Structure, and Personality Organization

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.