Self-Deceptive Coping: Adaptive Only in Ambiguous Contexts

ABSTRACT Two experiments investigated claims for the efficacy of self-deceptive coping (e.g., Sackeim, 1983, 1988). In Study I the performance of self-deceivers on solvable anagrams was found to he remarkably poor relative to that of non-self-deceivers after both groups were exposed to unsolvable problems. The starkly unambiguous failure experience may have precluded self-deception. Therefore, in Study 2 participants were exposed to unsolvable problems either with or without an excuse. Self-deceivers who encountered failure with an excuse subsequently performed much better on the solvable tasks than those without an excuse. These findings suggest that the use of self-deception following threat is constrained by the availability of contextual ambiguity (e.g., excuses). The effect of the excuse was not related to participants' mood or attributions for performance.     

Marital attributions in spouses of depressed patients

Causal attributions (i.e., locus, stability, globality) and responsibility attributions (i.e., bad intent, selfish motivation, blame) were assessed in the spouses of 27 depressed psychiatric inpatients and 30 nondepressed dyads to test predictions derived from Hooley's (1987) symptom-controllability model of marital distress. Results indicated that (1) depressed patients and their spouses were less dyadically adjusted than nondepressed spouses, (2) causal and responsibility attributions about depressive behaviors predicted lower dyadic adjustment, and (3) attributions of causality mediated the relationship between group status (depressed or nondepressed) and dyadic adjustment among spouses who had higher expectations for their partner to change. Results suggest that among spouses with a high expectancy for change, depression may be a risk factor for marital distress.     

An investigation of the effects of comorbid Axis II pathology on outcome of inpatient treatment for unipolar depression

DSM-based research on comorbidity has suggested thatdepression andpersonality disorder frequently occur together and that the combination of syndromes is associated with a poor response to treatment for depression. The present study was designed to explore the effect of comorbid Axis II pathology for a sample of 45 inpatients who received treatment for major depression. Both categorical and dimensional ratings of personality disorder were used in the statistical analysis. Positive categorical diagnosis of Cluster C (anxious-avoidant) disorder, as well as higher dimensional rating of Cluster A (odd-eccentric) pathology, was predictive of a poor response to treatment (p<.05), as measured by change in pre-post clinical ratings on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. These results were construed as indicative of a significant Axis II comorbidity effect in the context of an inpatient, multimodal treatment setting for depression. The results also spotlight the influence of techniques of measurement in determining the outcome of statistical analysis.     

Thinking About “Tests and Assessment” and the Career Beliefs Inventory

The author (a) comments briefly on the “Tests and Assessment” section of the Journal of Counseling & Development (JCD)—what it has covered and has not covered in recent years—and (b) introduces a set of articles that discuss a new career-oriented inventory of potential interest to counselors.     

Accreditation Standards for University and College Counseling Centers

The accreditation standards outlined in the article are used by the International Association of Counseling Services, Inc., as the basis for the formal accreditation of college and university counseling programs throughout the United States and Canada. They reflect the program elements and practice standards that are deemed essential in a counseling center that provides high-quality services to students.     

Personality disorder correspondence between the million behavioral health inventory (MBHI) and the minnesota multiphasic personality inventory (MMPI)

The MBHI and MMPI personality disorder scales were analyzed for convergent and discriminant validity. Correlational data demonstrated that six of the eight scales were significantly related, while the remaining two scales approached significance. Further analyses of these data, however, demonstrated that none of the scales correlated significantly better with its convergent scale compared to nonconvergent scales. The MBHI classified significantly more of the sample as personality disordered (93%) compared to the MMPI personality disorder scales (17%). Furthermore, the MBHI tended to describe the sample as falling within the Anxious cluster of personality disorders, whereas the MMPI described them within the Dramatic cluster. Single scale codetype correspondence was found to be 15%, while two-point concordance was 12.5%, indicating very low congruence between personality style codetypes. These two measures do not appear to be measuring the same personality style constructs.