Change in Defense Mechanisms and Depression in a Pilot Study of Antidepressive Medications Plus 20 Sessions of Psychotherapy for Recurrent Major Depression.

Treatment studies of major depression commonly focus on symptoms, leaving aside change in putative psychological risk factors. This pilot study examines the relationship between changes in eight depressive defenses and depressive symptoms. Twelve adults with acute recurrent major depression were given antidepressive medications and randomized to 20 sessions of either cognitive behavioral therapy or dynamic psychotherapy and followed for 1 year. Defenses were assessed using the Defense Mechanism Rating Scales (DMRS) and Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ) at intake, termination, and 1-year follow-up. Depression improved highly significantly on both the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and Beck Depression Inventory, respectively, eight (67%) and nine (75%) patients attained recovery by 1 year. Depressive defenses improved significantly by termination (mean ES = 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-2.16), but retrogressed somewhat by 1 year. A mean of 12.17% (SD = 10.60) depressive defenses remained; only five subjects (50%) attained normative levels. Although causal relationships were not established, depressive defenses are promising candidates for mediating treatment effects on outcome of major depression.

What Defense Mechanisms Do Therapists Interpret In-Session?

One of the key technical guidelines outlined by psychodynamic theorists and clinicians is for therapists to interpret a patient's most prominent defenses (Greenson, 1967; Langs, 1973). However, a debate exists about what constitutes a patient's most prominent defense and which defenses therapists actually choose to interpret in-session. This study aimed to shed light on this debate by examining 35 psychotherapy sessions (18 high alliance and 17 low alliance dyads) of individuals in therapy at a university counselling center. The analysis focused on comparing the patients' most prominent defenses and the range of defenses they utilized, and the therapists' most prominent interpretation level as well as the range of interpretation level. Paired sample t-tests showed no significant mean difference between sessions with low and high alliance scores in patient defense levels (e.g., frequency and range) and therapist interpretation levels (e.g., frequency and range). Significant differences were found between the range of patient defense levels and the range of therapist interpretation levels. Correlational analyses showed no significant relationship between patient defense levels and therapist interpretation levels on both the frequency and range levels. Clinical implications of these results, and directions for future research are discussed.

Therapist interventions using the Psychodynamic Interventions Rating Scale (PIRS) in dynamic therapy, psychoanalysis and CBT.

One requirement for psychotherapy research is an accurate assessment of therapeutic interventions across studies. This study compared frequency and depth of therapist interventions from a dynamic perspective across four studies, conducted in four countries, including three treatment arms of psychodynamic psychotherapy, and one each of psychoanalysis and CBT. All studies used the Psychodynamic Intervention Rating Scales (PIRS) to identify 10 interventions from transcribed whole sessions early and later in treatment. The PIRS adequately categorized all interventions, except in CBT (only 91-93% categorized). As hypothesized, interpretations were present in all dynamic therapies and relatively absent in CBT. Proportions of interpretations increased over time. Defense interpretations were more common than transference interpretations, which were most prevalent in psychoanalysis. Depth of interpretations also increased over time. These data can serve as norms for measuring where on the supportive-interpretive continuum a dynamic treatment lies, as well as identify potentially mutative interventions for further process and outcome study.

Changes in defensive functioning in completed psychoanalyses: the penn psychoanalytic treatment collection.

Theory predicts that patients completing psychoanalysis should improve in their dynamic functioning. The aim of this naturalistic study is to examine whether a sample of 17 subjects from the Penn Psychoanalytic Treatment Collection with completed, tape-recorded psychoanalyses demonstrated improvement in one dynamic aspect: their defense mechanisms. The pre-post effect size for the change in overall defensive functioning (ODF) of the sample was large (.76) and statistically significant (p = .01). The percentage of subjects who improved in their ODF (71%) was similar to that found by others who studied the same sample using general functioning measures. These findings provide the first empirical evidence to support a trait-like change in dynamic personality functioning in patients who have undergone psychoanalysis. Randomized controlled studies with homogeneous samples are needed to further confirm these findings.