跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.236.84.188) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/08/03 14:24
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:楊芷融
研究生(外文):Yang Chih-Jung
論文名稱:焦慮狀態之防衛機轉-主題統覺測驗防衛機轉手冊探討
論文名稱(外文):Defense Mechanisms in anxious state: Exploring Defense Mechanism Manual of Thematic Apperception Test
指導教授:洪志美洪志美引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hong Chi-Mei
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:輔仁大學
系所名稱:臨床心理學系碩士班
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:心理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2007
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:126
中文關鍵詞: 主題統覺測驗 TAT 防衛機轉 防衛機轉手冊 DMM 焦慮
外文關鍵詞:TATdefense mechanismDefense Mechanism ManualDMManxiety
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:11
  • 點閱點閱:4409
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:395
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:2
在台灣,臨床工作者較少使用主題統覺測驗(Thematic Apperception Test, TAT),主要是因為TAT的施測程序並未標準化,而計分方法和解釋取向也很多樣。然而,國外近年來已經發展出許多有信度與效度的TAT計分系統,如Cramer(1987)的防衛機轉手冊(Defense Mechanism Manual, DMM)即有令人滿意的評分者間信度和建構效度。本研究試圖以DMM分析台灣大學生在TAT故事中所呈現的防衛機轉,以及在焦慮狀態下防衛機轉的改變。
本研究共有60位大學生參與,研究過程可分為三個階段。第一階段包括(1) 所有參與者首次填寫目測量尺(Visual Analogue Scale, VAS)作為自評的情緒基準值(以VAS1表示);(2) 施測TAT卡片1,2,3BM,4,6BM。然後在第二階段時將參與者隨機分配至控制組與實驗組,控制組無做任何操弄;實驗組以WAIS-III算術分測驗後六題誘發焦慮情緒,誘發焦慮情緒前再次填寫VAS(以VAS2表示),誘發情緒後第三次填寫VAS(以VAS3表示)。最後在第三階段時(1) 控制組與實驗組皆施測TAT卡片7GF,8BM,9GF,10,13MF;(2) 施測完TAT卡片後,參與者最後一次填寫VAS(以VAS4表示)。此外,研究者在進行這三個階段前,請每位參與者保持放鬆心情五分鐘,然後為其測量皮膚導電度作為情緒的客觀生理測量指標,此測量一直持續至三個階段結束。
研究結果發現: (1) 台灣大學生使用的防衛機轉次數依序為否認作用(M=6.800)、認同作用(M=6.900)、投射作用(M=5.033),其中否認作用和認同作用二者的次數均顯著大於投射作用次數。(2) 在算術壓力作業介入前,控制組與實驗組呈現的防衛機轉次數未達顯著差異。(3) 在算術壓力作業介入後,實驗組呈現的防衛機轉次數顯著的高於控制組呈現的防衛機轉次數。
VAS與膚電阻測量分別為主觀與客觀的情緒測量指標,比較兩者的結果可發現:(1)男性與女性主觀感受的焦慮情緒無顯著差異,然而在客觀測量上男性的焦慮情緒顯著高於女性。(2)在接受TAT過程中焦慮情緒的變化方面,控制組主觀認為接受TAT前與施測結束後焦慮無改變,但客觀測量上發現接受後四張TAT卡片明顯的比接受前五張TAT卡片焦慮。(3)實驗組方面,雖然在算術壓力作業後不論主觀或客觀感受焦慮情緒皆顯著提高,但在施測TAT結束後實驗組主觀認為焦慮情緒下降,然而客觀的生理測量仍顯示其維持在焦慮狀態。
Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) has not been widely used among clinicians in Taiwan due to diversities of administering procedures, scoring systems and interpretation approaches. However, Cramer (1987) developed a Defense Mechanism Manual (DMM) to score subject’s defense mechanisms elicited by TAT and demonstrated satisfactory inter-rater reliability and construct validity. In this study, the researcher used DMM to score defense mechanisms elicited by TAT among college students in Taiwan and investigated changes in subjects’ defense mechanisms when they were in anxiety state.
Sixty college students were recruited and participated the three phases in this research. In the first phase, (1) all subjects used Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) as a subjective measurement of their anxiety baseline (VAS1). (2) All subjects were administered TAT card1, 2, 3BM, 4, and 6BM. Then in the second phase, subjects were randomly assigned to control group and experiment group. Subjects in experiment group were administered the last six items of Arithmetic subtest of WAIS-III to elicit anxiety. Subjects in control group were not administered WAIS-III. VAS was again used to measure each subject’s anxiety before WAIS-III administration (VAS2) and after administration (VAS3). In the final phase, (1) all subjects were administered card 7GF, 8BM, 9GF, 10, and 13MF of TAT. (2) All subjects used VAS to measure their anxiety the last time (VAS4). In addition, all subjects were instructed to relax for five minutes before the first phase began and then each subject’s skin conductance level was measured as an objective index of anxiety. This measurement of skin conductance level was continued through the whole research period.
The findings of this research were as follows. (1) College students in Taiwan used significantly more Denial (M=6.800) and Identification (M=6.900) than Projection (M=5.033). (2) Before administering Arithmetic of WAIS-III, there were no significant differences in terms of defense mechanisms used by subjects from control group and subjects from experiment group. (3) After administering Arithmetic of WAIS-III, subjects from experiment group used significantly more defense mechanisms than subjects form control group.
In this research, VAS was a subjective index of anxiety and skin conductance level was an objective index of anxiety. Comparison of VAS and skin conductance level resulted in the following findings. (1) There were no significant differences between males’ subjective index of anxiety and females’ subjective index of anxiety. However, in terms of objective index of anxiety, males were significantly higher than females. (2) For control group, there were no significant differences in subjective index of anxiety through the whole research period. However, skin conductance level were significantly higher when subjects were administered the last four TAT cards than they were administered the first five TAT cards. (3) For experiment group, both VAS and skin conductance level increased significantly after subjects were administered Arithmetic of WAIS-III. However, in the end of the research, subjects’ VAS decreased significantly while their skin conductance level remained high.
第一章 研究動機與目的……………………………………………1
第二章 文獻探討…………………………………………………6
第一節 主題統覺測驗理論……………………………………6
第二節 主題統覺測驗解釋方法……………………10
第三節 主題統覺測驗的信度與效度 ………………………17
第四節 防衛機轉理論………………………………………21
第五節 測量防衛機轉的方法………………………………34
第六節 Cramer的防衛機轉手冊……………………………37
第三章 研究問題與假設……………………………………………53
第一節 研究目的……………………………………………………53
第二節 研究架構……………………………………………54
第三節 研究假設……………………………………………55
第四節 研究方法……………………………………………56
第五節 研究工具……………………………………………58
第四章 正式研究結果……………………………………………65
第一節 正式研究程序………………………………………65
第二節 參與者…………………………………………66
第三節 DMM的評分者間信度………………………………67
第四節 防衛機轉之結果分析……………………………68
第五節 目測量尺(VAS) 之結果分析……………………80
第六節 膚電阻測量之結果分析…………………………83
第五章 討論
第一節 研究假設之驗證與討論…………………………87
第二節 目測量尺(VAS)與膚電阻測量之討論…………94
第三節 研究限制…………………………………………97
第四節 未來的研究方向…………………………………98
參考文獻………………………………………………………………99
附錄……………………………………………………………………112


表目次

表2-1 Murray的需求清單…………………………………………8
表2-2 Murray的壓力清單…………………………………………9
表2-3 Westen(1991)的社會認知和客體關係量表(簡版)……12
表2-4 Bellak的TAT分析表格……………………………………14
表2-5 TAT卡中需提及的人物或物體……………………………37
表3-1 TAT卡片說明與主題描述…………………………………61
表3-2 WAIS-III三組分測驗於誘發焦慮前後之VAS差異性檢定
………………………………………………………………64
表4-1 不同性別、組別的參與者在年齡的差異性檢定…………66
表4-2 不同性別、組別的參與者在教育程度的差異性檢定 66
表4-3 防衛機轉作用的評分者間信度 67
表4-4 男女受試所呈現的防衛機轉的獨立t檢定 68
表4-5 男女參與者在不同卡片所呈現否認作用的獨立t檢定 69
表4-6 男女參與者在不同卡片所呈現投射作用的獨立t檢定 69
表4-7 男女參與者在不同卡片所呈現認同作用的獨立t檢定 70
表4-8 組別、卡片、與防衛機轉的三因子變異數分析 71
表4-9 控制組在九張卡片上的單純主要效果 71
表4-10 控制組在九張卡片上的單純主要效果之事後檢定 72
表4-11 不同卡片在組別上的單純主要效果 73
表4-12 控制組的不同防衛機轉在九張卡片上反應的單純主要效果 73
表4-13 控制組的否認機轉在九張卡片上的單純主要效果之事後檢 74
表4-14 控制組的投射機轉在九張卡片上的單純主要效果之事後檢定 74
表4-15 控制組的認同機轉在九張卡片上的單純主要效果之事後檢定 75
表4-16 控制組在不同卡片上的三種防衛機轉之單純主要效果事後檢定 76
表4-17 實驗組與控制組在不同防衛機轉與不同卡片上的反應之單純主要效果 78
表4-18 控制組與實驗組在VAS基準值的獨立樣本t檢定 80
表4-19 控制組的男性與女性在VAS上的變異數分析 81
表4-20 實驗組的男性與女性在VAS上的變異數分析 81
表4-21 組別、性別在VAS之變異數分析 82
表4-22 控制組與實驗組在膚電阻基準值的獨立樣本t檢定 83
表4-23 控制組男性與女性在不同階段膚電阻差值之變異數分析 84
表4-24 實驗組男性與女性在不同階段膚電阻差值之變異數分析 85
表4-25 組別、性別在不同階段膚電阻與基準值差值之變異數分析 86
表5-1 控制組防衛機轉的單因子變異數分析及事後比較………89
表5-2 控制組防衛機轉的單因子變異數分析及事後比較(扣除3BM、4、8BM)………………………………………………89
表5-3 本研究與洪志美的研究結果比較-不同卡片上的三種防衛機轉反應 91


圖目次

圖2-1 Murray的人格理論大綱……………………………………9
圖2-2 防衛機轉發展模式圖………………………………………28
圖3-1 研究架構……………………………………………………54
圖3-2 研究流程圖…………………………………………………57
圖4-1 正式研究流程………………………………………………65
圖4-2 VAS流程圖…………………………………………………80
圖4-3 膚電阻的流程圖……………………………………………83
一、中文部份
心理衡鑑大全(張本聖、洪志美譯)(2004)。台北市:雙葉書廊有限公司。(原著出版年:1999年)
林彥鴻(民92)。焦慮症、憂鬱症及混合焦慮與憂鬱症之婦女在史楚普作業及回想作業上的差異。國立成功大學碩士論文。
洪志美(民93)。大學生在主題統覺測驗(TAT)中呈現的主題和防衛機轉。輔仁醫學期刊,2,73-88。
當代精神分析導論─理論與實務(林玉華、樊雪梅譯)(2001)。臺北市:五南出版社。(原著出版年:1995年)
葛樹人(民85)。心理測驗學(3版)。臺北市:桂冠。
劉如蓉(民90)。受保護處分少年自我防衛機轉及其相關因素之分析研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商學系博士論文。
劉秋木、林美珠(民88)。道德價值的評量:TAT的可行性研究(一)、理論基礎研究。花蓮師院學報,9,1-32。
劉秋木、林美珠(民89)。從詮釋學觀點看主題統覺測驗(TAT)故事的解釋。國家科學委員會研究彙刊:人文及社會科學,10(2),217-231。
韓幼賢(民54)。我國大學生在主題統覺測驗上的反應。測驗年刊,12,52-70。

二、英文部分
Aaron, N. S. (1967). Some personality differences between asthmatics, allergic, and normal children. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23, 336-340.
Archer, R. P., Maruish, M., Imhof, E. A., & Piotrowski, C. (1991). Psychological test usage with adolescent clients: 1990 survey findings. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 22, 247-252.
Atkinson, J. W., & Feather, N. T. (Eds.). (1966). A theory of achievement motivation. New York: Wiley.
Bauer, S. F., & Rockland, LH. (1995). The inventory of defense-related behaviors An approach to measure defense mechanisms in psychotherapy. In H.R. Conte & R. Plutnik (Eds.). Ego defenses: Theory and measurement. 300-314. New York John Wiley & Sons.
Bellak, L. (1993). The TAT, CAT, and SAT in clinical use (5th ed.). New York: Grune & Stratton.
Bellak, L., & Abrams, D. M. (1997). The Thematic Apperception Test, The Children’s Apperception Test, and The Senior Apperception Technique in Clinical Use (6th ed.). New York: Grune & Stratton.
Berends, A., Westen, D., Leigh, J., & Silbert, D. (1990). Assessing affect-tone of relationship paradigms from TAT and interview data. Psychological Assessment, 2, 329-332.
Blum, IL P. (Ed.). (1985). Defense and Resistance. New York: International Universities Press.
Bond, M., Gardner, S. T., Christian, J., & Sigal, J. J. (1983). Empirical study self-rated defense styles. Archives of General Psychiatry. 40, 333-338.
Camara, W. J., & Merenda, P. F. (2000). Using personality tests in preemployment screening issues raised in soroka v. dayton hudson corporation. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law. 6(4), 1164-1186.
Chess, S. & Thomas, A. (1976). Defence mechanisms in middle childhood. Canadian Psychiatric Association Journal. 21, 519-525.
Clark, D. M & Teasdale, J. D. (1985). Constraints on the Effects of Mood on Memory. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. 48(6), 1595-1608.
Compton, A. (1985). The concept of identification in the work of Freud, Ferenczi, and Abraham: A review and commentary. Psychoanalytic Quarterly. 54, 200-233.
Cramer, P. (1987). The development of defense mechanism. Journal of Personality, 55, 597-614.
Cramer, P. (1991a). Anger and the use of defense mechanism in college students. Journal of personality, 51(1), 39-55.
Cramer, P. (1991b). The development of defense mechanisms: Theory, research, and assessment. New York: Springer-Verlag Inc.
Cramer, P. (1995). Identity, narcissism and defense mechanisms in late adolescence. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 341–346.
Cramer, P. (1996). Story-telling, narrative, and the Thematic Apperception Test. New York: Guilford Press.
Cramer, P. (1998a). Threat to gender representation: Identity and identification. Journal of Personality, 66, 335–357.
Cramer, P. (1998b). Defensiveness and defensive mechanism. Journal of Personality, 66(6), 879-894.
Cramer, P. (1998c). Coping and defense mechanisms: What’s the difference? Journal of Personality, 67(3), 535-554.
Cramer, P. (1999a). Personality , personality disorders, and defense mechanisms. Journal of personality, 67(3), 535-554.
Cramer, P. (1999b). Futher directions for the Thematic Apperception Test. Journal of Personality, 67(3), 535-554.
Cramer, P. (2000). Defense mechanism in psychology today: further processes for adaptation. American Psychologist, 55(6), 637-346.
Cramer, P. (2002). Defense mechanisms, behavior, and affect in young adulthood. Journal of Personality, 70(1), 103-126.
Cramer, P. (2003).Defense mechanisms and physiological
reactivity to stress. Journal of Personality, 71(2), 221-244.
Cramer, P. (2006). Protecting the self: Defense mechanism in action. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
Cramer, P. (2007). Longitudinal study of defense mechanisms: Late childhood to late adolescence. Journal of Personality, 75(1), 1-24.
Cramer, P., & Blatt, S. J., (1990). Use of the TAT to measure change in defense mechanisms following intensive psychotherapy. Journal of Personality Assessment, 54, 236-251.
Cramer, P., & Block, J. (1998). Preschool antecedents of defense mechanism use in young adults. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 159–169.
Cramer, P., & Gaul, R. (1988). The effects of success and failure on children’s use of defense mechanisms. Journal of Personality, 56, 729–742.
Davids, A., & Rosenblatt, D. (1958). Use of the TAT in assessment of alienation. Journal of Projective Techniques, 22, 145-152.
Dollinger, S.J. & Cramer, P. (1990). Children's defensive responses and emotional upset following a disaster: A projective assessment. Journal of Personalit Assessment, 54 (12), 116-127.
Dollinger, S. J., & McGuire, B. (1981). The development of psychological mindedness: Children's understanding of defense mechanisms. Journal of Clinical Child Psycholovy, 10, 117-121.
Dorprat, T. L. (1985). Denial and Defense in the Therapeutic Situation. New York: Jason Aronson.
Entwisle, D.R. (1972). To dispel fantasies about fantasy-based measures of achievement motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 77, 377-391.
Fenichel, 0. (1945). The Psychoanalytic Theory of Neurosis. New York: Norton. Frank, L. K. (1939). Projective methods for the study of personality. Journal of Personality, 8, 389-413.
Fleming, J. (1982). Fear of success in Black female and male graduate students: A pilot study. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 6(3), 327-341.
Freedenfeld, R.N., Ornduff, S.R., & Kelsey, R.M. (1995). Object relations and physical abuse: A TAT analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 552-568.
Freud, A. (1936). The ego and the mechanisms of defense. New York: International Universities Press, Inc.
Freud, A. (1965). Normality and Pathology in Childhood. New York International Universities Press.
Freud, S. (1894). The neuro-psychoses of defence. Standard Edition, 3, 45-61. London: Hogarth Press, 1962.
Freud, S. (1896) Heredity and the Aetiology of the Neuroses. Standard Edition, 3, 43-56.
Freud, S. (1900). Interpretation of dreams. Standard Edition (Vols. 4 & 5). London: Hogarth Press.
Freud, S. (1911). Psycho-analytic notes on an autobiographical account of a case of paranoia. Standard Edition, 12, 1-161.
Freud, S. (1923). The ego and the id. Standard Edition, 19, 12-66. London: Hogarth Press, 1961.
Freud, S. (1962). The neuro-psychoses of defense. In J.P. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The standard edition of the complete works of Sigmund Freud (Vol.3, pp.45-61). London: Hogarth Press. (Originally published in 1894).
Gacono C. B., Meloy J. R., & Bridges M. R. (2000). A Rorschach comparison of psychopaths, sexual homicide perpetrators, and nonviolent pedophiles: Where angels fear to tread. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56(6), 757-77.
Greenson, R. (1967). The technique and practice of psychoanalysis. New York: International Universities Press.
Greenspan, S. L. (1989). The Development of the Ego: Implications for Personality Theory. Psychopathology, and the Psychotherapeutic Process. Madison, CT; International Universities Press, Inc.
Groth-Marnat G. (2003). Handbook of psychological assessment (4th ed.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Haan, N. (1963). Proposed model of ego functioning: Coping and defense mechanisms in relationship to IQ change. Psychological Monographs, 77(8), 1-23.
Hafner, A. J., & Kaplan, A. M. (1960). Hostility content analysis of the Rorschach and TAT. Journal of Projective Techniques, 24, 137-143.
Hibbard, S., Farmer, L., Difillipo, E., Barry, V., Korman, R., & Sloan, P. (1994). Validation of Cramer's defense mechanism manual for the TAT. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63(2), 197-210.
Holt, R.R. (1954). Implications of some contemporary personality theories for Rorschach rationale. In B. Klopfer, M.D. Ainsworth, W.G. Klopfer, & R.R. Holt, Developments in the Rorschach techniques, technique and theory. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 501-560.
Horner, A. J. (1983). Refusal to identity: developmental impasse. Dynamic Psychotherapy, 1, 111-121.
Ihilevich, D., & Gleser, G.C. (1986). Defense mechanisms. Their classification, correlates, and measurement with the Defense Mechanism Inventory. Owosso, MI: DMI Associates.
Kernberg, O. (1975). Borderline conditions and pathological narcissism. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
Knight, R. P. (1940). Introjection, projection, and identification. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 9. 334-341.
Lichtenberg, J. D., & Slap, J. W. (1972). On the defense mechanism: A survey and synthesis. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 20, 776-792.
Lubin, B., Larsen, R. M., Matarazzo, J. D., & Seever, M. (1985). Psychological test usage patterns in five professional settings. American Psychologist, 40, 857-861.
Lundy, A. (1984). Testing conditions and TAT validity: Meta-analvsis of the literature through 1983. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto.
Lundy, A. (1988). Instructional set and Thematic Apperception Test validity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52, 309-320.
McAdams, D. P. (1980). A thematic coding system for the intimacy motive. Journal of research in personality, 14, 413-432.
McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. E., Clark, R. A., & Lowel, E. L. (1953). The achievement motive. New York: Irvington.
Mogg K., Kentish J., & Bradley B. P. (1993). Effects of anxiety and awareness on colour-identification latencies for emotional words. Behaviour Research & Therapy, 31(6), 559-67.
Morgan, C.D., & Murray, H. A. (1935). A method for investigating fantasies: The Thematic Apperception Test. Archives of Neurological Psychiatry, 34, 289-306.
Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality. New York: Oxford University Press.
Murray, H. A. (1943). Thematic Apperception Test Manual. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nigg, J., Silk, K., Westen, D., Lohr, N. Gold, L., Goodrich, S., & Ogata, S. (1991). Object representations in the early memories of sexually abused borderline patients. American Journal of Psychiatry, 148, 864-869.
Noam, G. G., & Recklitis, C. J. (1990). The relationship between defenses and symptoms in adolescent psychology. Journal of Personality Assessment, 54(182), 311-327.
Novick, J., & Kelly, K. (1970). Projection and externalization. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 25, 69-95.
Ornduff, S. R., Freedenfeld, R. N., Kelsey, R. M., & Critelli, J. W. (1994). Object relations of sexually abused female subjects: A TAT analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 223-238.
Ornduff, S.R., & Kelsey, R.M. (1996). Object relations of sexually and physically abused female children: A TAT analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66, 91-105.
Pennebaker, J. W. & King, L. A.(1999). Language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. 77(6), 1296-1312.
Plutchik, R., Kellerman, H., & Come, H. R. (1979). A structural theory of ego defenses and emotions. In C. E. Izard (Ed.), Emotions in personality and psychopathology. New York: Plenum Press.
Porcerelli J. H., Abramsky M. F., Hibbard S., & Kamoo R.(2000). Object relations and defense mechanisms of a psychopathic serial sexual homicide perpetrator: A TAT analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 77(1), 87-104.
Robinson, F. G. (1992). Love’s story told: A life of Henry A. Murray. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ronan, G. F., Colavito, V. A., & Hammontree, S. R. (1993). Personal problem-solving system for scoring TAT responses: preliminary validity and reliability data. Journal of Personality Assessment, 61, 28-40.
Ronan, G.F., Date, A.L., & Weisbrod, M. (1995). Personal problem-solving scoring of the TAT: Sensitivity to training. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 119-131.
Rossini, E., & Moretti, R. J. (1997). TAT interpretation: Practice recommendations from a survey of clinical psychology doctoral programs accredited by APA. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 28, 393-398.
Sandler, J. & Joffe, W. G. (1967). On the psychoanalytic theory of autonomy and the autonomy of psychoanalytic theory. International Journal of Psychiatry, 3, 512-515.
Sanford, N. (1955). The dynamics of identification. Psychological Review, 62, 106-118.
Schafer, R. (1954). Psychoanalytic Interpretation in Rorschach Testing. New York: Grune and Stratton.
Semrad, E., Grmspoon, L., & Fienberg, S.E. (1973). Development of an ego profile scale. Archives of General Psychiatry, 28, 70-77.
Singh, S. (1979). Relationships among projective and direct verbal measures of achievement motivation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 43, 45-50.
Sjoback, H. (1973). The Psychoanalytic Theory of Defensive Processes. New York: John Wiley.
Smith, C. P. (Ed.). (1992). Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Spangler, W. D. (1992). Validity of questionnaire and TAT measures of need for achievement: Two meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 140-154.
Tomkins, S. S. & Tomkins, E. J. (1947). History and Development of the Thematic Apperception Test.In S. S. Tomkins & E. J. Tomkins (Eds.). The Thematic Apperception Test: The theory and technique of interpretation. (pp. 1-20). New York: Grune & Stratton.
Tuller, O. V. (2003). The use of the TAT in measuring defense mechanisms (Doctoral dissertation, Biola University, 2002). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(11), 5565.
Vaillant, G. E. (1977). Adaptation to life. Boston: Little, Brown.
Vaillant, G. E. (1992). Ego mechanisms of defense: A guide for clinical and researchers. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
van der Leeuw, P. J. (1971). On the development of the concept of defense. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 52, 51-58
Vane, J. R. (1981). The thematic apperception test: A review. Clinical Psychology Review, 1, 319-336.
Wallerstein, R. S. (1985). Defenses, defense mechanisms, and the structure of the mind In H. P. Blum (Ed.), Defense and resistance. New York International Universities Press.
Westen, D. (1991). Social cognition and object relations. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 429–455.
Westen, D. (1995). Revision of Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale: Q-Sort for projective stories(SCORS-Q). Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychiatry, Cambridge Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, MA.
Westen, D., Lohr, N., Silk, K. R., Gold, L., & Kerber, K. (1990a).Object relations and social cognition in borderlines, major depressives, and normals: A thematic apperception test analysis. Psychological Assessment, 2, 355-364.
Westen, D., Lohr, N., Silk, K. R., Kerber, K., & Goodrich, S. (1985). Measuring object relations and social cognitions using the TAT: Scoring manual. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan.
Westen, D., Ludolph, P., Lerner, H., Ruffins, S., & Wiss, C. (1990b). Object relations in borderline adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 29, 338-348.
Westen, D., Ludolph, P., Silk, K., Kellam, A., Gold, L., & Lohr, N. (1990c). Object relations in borderline adolescents and adults: Developmental differences. Adolescent Psychiatry, 17, 360–384.
Westen, D., Klepser, J., Ruffins, S. A., Silverman, M., Lifton, N., & Boekmap, J. (1991). Object relations in childhood and adolescence: The development of working representations. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 400-409.
Whiteman, M. (1967). Children's conceptions of psychological causality. Child Development, 38, 143-156.
Willick, M. S. (1985). On the concept of primitive defenses. In H. P. Blum (Ed.), Defense and resistance. New York: International Universities Press.
Winnicott D. W. (1965). A Clinical study of the effect of a failure of the average expectable environment on a child’s mental functioning. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 46, 81-7.
Winter, D. G. (1973). The power motive. New York: Free Press.
Winter, D. G., Stewart, A. J., & McClelland, D. C.(1977). Husband's motives and wife's career level. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(3), 159-166.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top