Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Transcript of CRAMER, 1997
IDENTITY, PERSONALITY AND DEFENCE MECHANISMS
Whether a young person with committed
goals is less likely to use defence mechanisms than a young
person with no strong goals.
The more anxious & ‘in crisis’ a person is, the more likely they are to sue defence mechanisms, so supporting Freudian theory.
91 23 yr old males & females were given a Thematic apperception test (TAT).
This is where pictures are shown & participants are asked to tell/interpret the ‘story’ of the picture.
They were also given a Q-sort, where they were asked to sort a list of characteristics according to how they applied to them.
These identity characteristics were to measure self-esteem & commitment to goals: there were 4 types: diffused (not yet reached crisis); foreclosed (adopted goals without crisis); moratorium (in crisis); and achieved (passed through crisis & adopted own goals).
A large sample was used
To ensure reliability inter-rater reliability was applied to the interpretation of the TAT stories by the coders of the stories & experienced coders were used.
APPLICATION TO REAL LIFE
Self-esteem, anxiety, defence mechanisms,
goal achievement are all important to psychological well-being.
Good construct validity because it was found that in the Q-sort achieved & foreclosed identity were strongly correlated with high commitment; diffused & moratorium states were not: as was expected to the case of the Q-sort was valid & had construct validity.
However, there are still some validity issues. Defence mechanisms are unconscious mechanisms & so difficult to measure scientifically & objectively; also the interpretation of the TAT test is open to interpretation. Furthermore, the Q-sort had only 4 categories (diffused, foreclosed, moratorium, achieved); participants may have had overlapping traits but were placed in to 1 of the 4 categories, so reducing the validity.
Diffused & moratorium states showed anxiety & used denial defence mechanisms; diffused state also used projection.
The achieved state showed the least use of defence mechanisms & were lowest in anxiety, presumably no unconscious conflicts occurring. Foreclosed showed positive attitudes.
Self-esteem was low for both diffused & moratorium states, & high for both achieved & foreclosed states.
There were no gender differences.
Defence mechanisms are a feature of human experience, especially during a period of crisis & their use is linked to high anxiety & low self-esteem.
High self-esteem, goal achievement & commitment to goals corresponds to low use of defence mechanisms.