The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of defense mechanisms in the association between personality factors and depression. Using both self- and same-sex best-friend reports to assess relevant personality factors (Dependency, Self-criticism, and Efficacy), defense factors (Mature, Immature, and Emotion avoiding), and depression, the present study aimed to overcome some of the shortcomings involved in self-report designs, and to extend understanding of the interpersonal aspects of depressive symptomatology.

Integrating psychoanalytic ego psychology with developmental-cognitive theory, Blatt (1991) characterized personality development as “the integration of a person’s capabilities for self-definition (Self-criticism) and interpersonal relatedness (Dependency)”. The self-definition process relates to “the development of a realistic, essentially positive and increasingly integrated self-definition and self-identity” (Blatt, p. 453). The interpersonal-relatedness process is defined as “the capacity to establish increasingly mature, reciprocal and satisfying interpersonal relationships” (Blatt, p. 453). These two basic modalities of human existence have been referred to also in different theoretical contexts as autonomy and surrender (Angyal, 1951), agency and communion (Baken, 1966), and achievement or power versus affiliation or intimacy (McAdams, 1985; McClelland, 1985; Winter, 1973).

A considerable body of empirical research has demonstrated the relevance of high levels of Self-criticism and Dependency as trait vulnerability dimensions for depression (e.g., Besser, Flett, & Davis, 2003; Besser & Priel, 2003a, b, c, d, e; Flett, Hewitt, Endler, & Bagby, 1995; Klein, 1989; Priel & Besser, 1999, 2000; Quimette & Klein, 1993; Robins, Hayes, Block, Kramer, & Villena, 1995). These basic personality configurations delineate two major types of negative experiences that might lead to vulnerability to depression: (a) the disruption of gratifying interpersonal relationships, and (b) the disruption of an effective, essentially positive, sense of self (Blatt, 1974; Blatt, D’Afflitti, & Quinlan, 1976; Blatt, Quinlan, Chevron, McDonald, & Zuroff, 1982; Blatt & Shichman, 1983). According to Blatt and colleagues, normality can be defined as an integration of (a) the capacity to develop meaningful and satisfying interpersonal relations, and (b) a consolidated, realistic, essentially positive self-concept. Overemphasis on one of these dimensions at the cost of the other defines the self-critical and dependent personality configurations respectively and vulnerability to depression is likely to increase (Blatt, 1990; Blatt & Blass, 1990; Blatt & Shichman, 1983). Each personality configuration is associated with a particular experiential mode, a mode of adaptation, preferred forms of cognition, and particular defenses (Blatt & Shichman). Excessive preoccupation with either of these dimensions (relatedness/Dependency or self-definition/Self-criticism) might create a selective vulnerability to stressful life events that can lead to depression (for a recent extensive review see Blatt, 2004).

The concepts of Dependency and Self-criticism have been empirically validated using the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ). The DEQ includes items chosen to represent common experiences, rather than overt symptoms, of depressed individuals (Blatt et al., 1976). The first DEQ factor, Dependency, includes concerns about abandonment, helplessness and loneliness, and the need for close and dependent interpersonal relationships. The items loading on the second DEQ factor, Self-criticism, reflect a continuous preoccupation with failure, ambivalent feelings about self and others, and a self-critical stance (Blatt et al., 1976).

This study centers on the roles played by different defenses in the association between personality vulnerability and depression. Defense mechanisms have been conceptualized as internal, nonintentional, intrapsychic transformations that occur in response to a threatening affect. The purpose of a defense mechanism is to protect the individual from experiencing excessive anxiety. Cramer (1998a, 1998b) included additional purposes: the protection of self-esteem and, in more pathological cases, the protection of self-integration.

Defense mechanisms vary in their adaptiveness or maturity. Defense mechanisms are defined as adaptive or Mature when they effectively ward off a threatening affect without undue distortion of the reality perceived, whereas maladaptive defense mechanisms often involve significant reality distortion (Cramer, 1991; Vaillant, 1977). Moreover, adaptive or mature defense mechanisms usually lead to constructive action, whereas maladaptive or Immature defense mechanisms generally produce inaction or inappropriate action (Vaillant, 1977). Frequent use of maladaptive defense mechanisms has been found to be associated with increased psychopathology and maladjustment (Andrews, Pollock, & Stewart, 1989; Bond, Gardner, Christian, & Sigal, 1983; Perry & Cooper, 1989; Vaillant, 1974, 1976, 1977, 1994; Vaillant & Vaillant, 1992).

It is believed that dependent individuals, in their desire to maintain interpersonal relationships while neglecting the development of the self, characteristically use defense mechanisms that lead to the avoidance of threat, such as denial, repression, and displacement (Blatt & Shichman, 1983). In contrast, it has been suggested that self-critical individuals are characterized by the propensity to protect and preserve the self by transforming conflictual situations through the use of counteractive defenses such as projection, externalization, introjection, doing and undoing, reaction formation, overcompensation, and identification with the aggressor (Blatt & Shichman, 1983; Blatt & Zuroff, 2002). Thus, it has been suggested that both the self-critical and the dependent vulnerability dimensions include the use of immature or maladaptive defenses (also see Zuroff, Moskowitz, Wielgus, Powers, & Franko, 1983). Moreover, the extensive use of maladaptive defenses leading to specifically biased perceptions of reality might be seen as a main dimension of vulnerability.

An empirical test of the defense styles in Self-criticism and Dependency was conducted by Cramer, Blatt, and Ford (1988), who investigated the use of the denial, projection, and identification defense mechanisms by hospitalized psychiatric patients diagnosed as depressed with either a clinically determined anaclitic or introjective personality configuration. The results of this study demonstrated that both clinical depression types were characterized by the use of similar and very immature defenses; this finding was explained either as related to the severity of the pathology of the participants or as associated with the effects of other variables such as gender. These findings suggest that immature defenses may exacerbate the relationship between trait vulnerability and depression (Cramer, 1991, 1998a, 1998b; Kwon, 2000a, 2000b). However, on the basis of this study, the exact association between defense styles and Self-criticism and Dependency is unclear because there were no significant differences in defense styles between the self-critical and dependent groups. Moreover, Cramer et al. (1988) did not include a comparison group of patients who were not characterized by elevated levels of Self-criticism or Dependency. Thus, although there are indications that anaclitic and introjective personality styles are linked with maladaptive defenses, this has not been clearly established in the existing literature.

The model specified by Blatt and colleagues also includes a dimension of non-vulnerability or resilience: Efficacy (Blatt et al., 1976). This dimension is unrelated to depression and assesses the individual’s adequate goal striving, feelings of independence, sense of confidence about his or her resources, capacities and inner strength, sense of responsibility, pride, and satisfaction about self-accomplishments (Blatt et al., 1976, pp. 384-385). In the present investigation, it has been assumed that this dimension of resilience involves the use of mainly mature and adaptive defenses. The investigation of the defenses associated with Efficacy was intended to validate the basic assumption that Efficacy, but not Dependency or Self-criticism, will associate with Mature defenses.

There are important differences between the empirical findings regarding Self-criticism and Dependency as trait vulnerability configurations. The propensity to depression among self-critical individuals has been amply demonstrated in different community samples (e.g., Besser & Priel, 2003a, b, c, d, e; Fichman, Koestner, Zuroff, & Gordon, 1999; Klein, 1989; Priel & Besser, 1999, 2002; Quimette & Klein, 1993; Santor & Zuroff, 1997; Thompson & Zuroff, 1999; Zuroff, Igreja, & Mongrain, 1990). The empirical associations between Dependency and depression are more complex, indicating, in addition to the propensity to depression, the possibility of adaptive aspects of Dependency in specific populations (Aube & Whiffen, 1996; Besser & Priel, 2003a, 2003b; Blatt, Zohar, Quinlan, Zuroff, & Mongrain, 1995; Bornstein, 1992; Mongrain, 1998; Priel & Besser, 1999, 2000). Differences between Dependency and self-critical vulnerabilities have been attributed to methodological constraints (e.g., Blatt et al., 1995) as well as to gender differences (Helgeson, 1994). In a review of studies with different populations, whereas Helgeson presented extensive evidence for orientation-towards-self as a vulnerability factor in mental health, she also found that a primary orientation-towards-others among women did not seem to constitute a mental health vulnerability at all, even though it may have been a diathesis for physical illness. Empirical evidence suggests that the capacity of highly dependent women to enlist social support may be the core of their relative resilience (Helgeson, 1994; Priel & Besser, 2000). There are also indications that Dependency might generate supportive interpersonal relationships that moderate depressive feelings (Mongrain, Lubbers, & Struthers, 2004). In congruence with the differences between Dependency and Self- criticism that have been reported in the empirical literature, in this study it has been assumed that self-critical vulnerability involves more, and more frequently used, Immature defense mechanisms than does Dependency.

Since defenses are defined as unintentional (Cramer, 1998a, 1998b), exclusive reliance on self-reported measurements may be methodologically questionable. In addition, social desirability may affect self-reports of defense mechanisms (Davidson & MacGregor, 1998). Moreover, the presence of specific defenses may affect both the self-report of defenses and the self-report of outcomes (Colvin, Block, & Funder, 1995; Costa & McCrae, 1987; Cramer, 1998a, 1998b; Larsen, 1992; Pearson, Ross, & Dawes, 1992). In order to overcome, at least in part, the methodological limitations involved in the use of self-reported evaluations of defense mechanisms, the present study used self- as well as same- sex best-friend reports of defensive style and also gathered best-friend perceptions of the target’s depression and personality vulnerabilities. Obtaining assessments from both a target individual and an observer who knew the target individual rather well allowed us to measure the congruency of the assessments of self and other. The current investigation expected only moderate congruence, because self-perceptions and best-friend perceptions of the target were assumed to be closely related - but different - constructs. The multisource approach used in the present study also allowed for the study of the separate as well as the conjoint self- and best-friend appraisals of personality, depression, and defense variables (Kurtz & Sherker, 2003; Watson, Hubbard, & Wiese, 2000) in the prediction of targets’ depression levels.

Additionally, the use of multisource data was important in order to further address the claim that the constructs of depression and Self-criticism might overlap considerably (Coyne & Whiffen, 1995), as well as the claim that there might be a possible overlap between these variables and Immature defense mechanisms. According to this argument, Self-criticism may also be seen as reflecting the effects of depression rather than as a vulnerability factor. Furthermore, both Self-criticism and depression might be reflections of specific underlying defense styles (Cramer, 1998a, 1998b). The use of two sources for the assessment of each variable (Self-criticism, depression, and defense styles) might contribute to the elucidation of these important questions. The inclusion of the best-friend perceptions of the target permitted us to estimate the associations between the study variables independent of the effects of self-report. Moreover, it allowed for the estimation of the relationship between personality vulnerability, depression, and defenses simultaneously, as measured within and between self-reports and best-friend reports, and the estimation of the convergent and divergent validity among these reports. A path model analysis explored these possibilities.

Accordingly, the present study investigated how individual differences assessed by means of self-reports and best-friend appraisals of personality vulnerabilities and defense mechanisms are associated with self- and best-friend evaluations of targets’ depressive symptomatology.

The following hypotheses were investigated:
H1: Self- and best-friend-reported assessments of Dependency and Self-criticism are both moderately correlated with Immature defenses.
H2: Self- and best-friend-reported Dependency and Self-criticism associate with self- and best-friend reports of depressive symptomatology, respectively. Similarly, Immature defenses associate with self- and best-friend reports of depressive symptomatology, respectively.
H3: Self- and best-friend-reported Efficacy associate with self- and best-friend reports of Mature defenses, respectively.
H4: Immature defense scores contribute to the prediction of the deleterious effects of self-reported personality vulnerabilities on depressive symptomatology.
H5: Negative assessments (i.e., high vulnerability levels or high Immature defense levels) by target participants and best friends (interactions) contribute uniquely to the prediction of targets’ depressive symptomatology. Higher levels of depression are expected for targets who are described as highly vulnerable by both themselves and their best friends, and for target participants who both rated themselves - and were rated by their best friends - as high in Immature defense.

Initially, 200 target/best-friend pairs (Israeli community sample) responded to an advertisement for volunteers to take part in a study on “best-friend perceptions.” Participants were contacted initially through advertisements in workplaces. Participants were young Israeli adults who had been released from their service in the Israeli army and who were in the process of making the transition back to civilian life and some of whom were attending university.

Potential participants were met and told that they would be required to bring with them their same-sex best friend, who should not be their roommate. Of this pool of potential participants, 82.5% participated in the study. The remaining 16.5% (13 pairs) did not participate, for the following reasons: (a) one or both members of the pair withdrew (3.5%, 7 pairs), or (b) one of the members of the pair did not appear at the scheduled time to complete the questionnaires (3%, 6 pairs). Thus, the final sample included 187 pairs who were eligible to participate and who completed the current study questionnaires.¹(Since pairs who did not participate were dropped from further consideration prior to completing the questionnaires, comparisons with participants who completed the study could not be made). See the Results section for additional information about the characteristics of the sample.

The Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ) The DEQ was used to assess vulnerability to depression. The DEQ (Blatt et al., 1976) is a 66-item scale that yields three orthogonal factors - Dependency, Self-criticism and Efficacy - when subjected to a Principal Components Analysis (PCA) with Varimax rotation. The first two factors assess patterns of experiences that contain predispositions to depressive states, and are therefore appropriate for use with a nonclinical sample. The Dependency factor reflects a preoccupation with abandonment and separation, feelings of being unloved and fear of loss (e.g., “Without the support of others who are close to me, I would be helpless.”) The second factor, Self-criticism, reflects concerns about failure and guilt, Self-criticism, and being unable to meet high standards set by the self and by others (e.g., “It is not who you are but what you have accomplished that counts.”) The third factor, Efficacy, represents personal resilience and inner strength (e. g., “I have many inner resources.”) Internal consistency and test-retest reliability for the DEQ are adequate (Blatt et al., 1982). Items were converted to z scores and multiplied by the factor weight coefficient according to Israeli norms (Priel, Besser, & Shahar, 1998). Correlations between pairs’ scores on the three DEQ factors as obtained using the English and the Hebrew versions of the DEQ were in the mean of .91 (Priel, Besser, & Shahar, 1998).

In this study, two versions of the DEQ were used: target individuals completed the original self-report assessments and their best friends completed a version in which they evaluated the best friend on the 66 items of the DEQ. In this recently adapted version of the DEQ (see Besser & Priel, 2003a), items assess the observer’s perception of the target personality’s vulnerability and Efficacy. For example, Item 1 of the DEQ was formulated as “My friend sets his/her personal goals and standards as high as possible.” For the current sample the α internal consistency reliability coefficients were .90 and .88 for targets’ self-report and best-friend report respectively.² (According to Blatt and colleagues (1976) the standardized scores of each of the 66 items should be multiplied by the factor weight coefficient obtained in the normed sample for the loadings on both Self-criticism and Dependency. In this unit weight scoring system, all 66 items, relative to their factor weight coefficients, contribute to form the final scores of both Dependency and Self-criticism. Thus, internal consistency reliability coefficients are reported only for the entire DEQ questionnaires.)

The Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) The CES-D (Radloff, 1977) was used to measure depressive symptoms. This is a 20-item scale designed to measure current levels of depressive symptomatology in the general population. The items, each of which is assessed on a scale from 0 to 3, measure the following aspects of depression: depressed mood; feelings of guilt and worthlessness; feelings of helplessness and hopelessness; psychomotor retardation; loss of appetite; and sleep disturbances (Radloff). This scale has been shown to be valid and reliable in many different samples, including in pregnancy and postpartum research (see, e.g., Besser & Priel, 2003a, 2003b; Besser, Priel, & Wiznitzer, 2002; Priel & Besser, 1999, 2000, 2002). Although the scale is typically used as a continuous measure, a score of 16 or higher is regarded as the clinical cutoff point for at least a mild case of depression (Radloff). In the present study, two versions were used: the original CES-D for targets’ self-reports, and a version in which each best friend evaluated the target friend on 20 items adapted from the original CES-D (see Besser & Priel, 2003a) in order to assess the perception of the best friend regarding the target friend’s depressive symptomatology. For example, Item 1 was formulated as “My friend was bothered by things that usually do not bother him/her.” For the current sample the α internal consistency reliability coefficients were .86 and .85 for self-reports and best-friend reports respectively.

The Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ) The Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ-40) is a 40-item self-report inventory that measures specific defense mechanisms in terms of the Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 3rd edition (DSM-III-R: Andrews, Singh, & Bond, 1993). In this study, the short version consisting of 36 items, which are allocated to 17 defense mechanisms (Muris & Merckelbach, 1996) was used. The following defenses are assessed: sublimation, humor, anticipation, suppression, undoing, idealization, reaction formation, projection, passive aggression, acting out, isolation, devaluation, autistic fantasy, denial, splitting, rationalization, and somatization. Each item has a 9-point scale (1-Strongly Disagree to 9-Strongly Agree). The defense mechanism score is obtained by summing the scores of the relevant items. Since each defense mechanism score is composed of two items, Cronbach’s α s were not calculated. Nevertheless, Andrews et al. showed that the DSQ possesses reasonable psychometric properties.

Muris and Merckelbach’s (1996) factor analysis on the short form of the DSQ demonstrated that 14 of the 17 defense mechanisms are loaded on three factors: Immature defense (acting out, undoing, somatization, projection, devaluation, and autistic fantasy), Mature defense (humor, anticipation, sublimation, suppression, and rationalization), and Emotion-avoiding defense (denial, isolation and splitting). In the present study, two versions of the DSQ were used: the original DSQ for target individuals’ self-reports, and a version in which the target individual’s best friend evaluated his/her friend on 36 items adapted from the original DSQ. For example, in this version, the first DSQ item was formulated as “My friend gets satisfaction from helping others and if this were taken away from him/her he/she would get depressed.” For the current sample the α internal consistency reliability coefficients were .91 (.90, .87 and .88 for Immature, Mature and Emotion-avoiding respectively) and .87 (.84, .86 and .83 for Immature, Mature and Emotion-avoiding respectively) for self-reports and best-friend reports respectively.

After preliminary analyses of sample characteristics, background variables, and self- and best-friend reports, four main sets of analyses were conducted. First, mean differences and correlations were computed to determine the extent of agreement between target and best-friend reports. Second, correlations and regressions were computed to examine the relations between Dependency and Self-criticism and the three measures of defense mechanisms (Mature, Immature, and Emotion-avoiding). Third, a hierarchical multiple regression (HMR) analysis was performed to examine the effects of personality and defense mechanisms (as measured by self- and other reports), as well as the effects of interactions between personality and defense mechanisms, on self-reported depression levels. Fourth, structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the effects of self-reported variables on best-friend reports.

Table 1 presents means and standard deviations for target and best-friend DEQ, DSQ, and CES-D scores. In a preliminary MANOVA analysis, no significant Gender x Rater (target vs. best-friend reports) interaction effects were obtained. The significances of the differences between the scores obtained from target reports and best-friend reports (across gender) on the DEQ, DSQ, and CES-D scales were calculated using MANOVA. The results revealed significant source differences for Dependency, Efficacy and for the Mature defense factor scores. Targets evaluated themselves as more dependent, higher on Efficacy and on the Mature defense factor as compared to the levels attributed to them on these variables by their best friends. There was no significant difference involving CES-D scores, but there were indications that, as a whole, the sample was characterized by relatively high levels of distress. A score of 16 or higher on the CES-D constitutes at least mild depression, and 115 participants (61.5%) had scores of 16 or more, both in terms of self-reports and informant ratings (i.e., best-friend reports). Elevated depressive symptoms could reflect several contributing factors including the participants’ developmental stage and life transitions, uncertainty about their individual futures, economic difficulties, and physical-safety concerns.

A set of analyses assessed differences in the magnitudes of correlations between Dependency and the DSQ and CES-D scores on one hand, and between Self-criticism and the DSQ and CES-D scores on the other hand. In particular, of the defense factors, significant differences were found between the magnitudes of the correlations of Dependency and of Self-criticism with Immature defense. According to both raters, Self-criticism was significantly more strongly correlated with Immature defense (.56 for target reports and .57 for best-friend reports) and CES-D scores (.48 for target reports and .51 for best-friend reports) than Dependency scores were with Immature defense (.21 for target reports and .22 for best-friend reports) and CES-D scores (.25 for target reports and .22 for best-friend reports); Z = 4.2, p < .0001 (target reports) and Z = 4.3, p < .0001 (best-friend reports) for Immature defense, and Z = 2.6, p < .01 (target reports) and Z = 3.4, p < .001 (best-friend reports) for CES-D.

Finally, Immature and Emotion-avoiding scores were significantly different in the magnitude of their correlations with CES-D scores. According to both raters, Immature defense was more strongly associated than was Emotion-avoiding defense with depression scores (.54 vs. .29 for target reports and .53 vs. .28 for best-friend reports; Z = 3.0, p < .004 and Z = 3.0, p < .004, respectively).

In order to estimate the association between the DEQ factors and the DSQ factors while controlling for their associations (i.e., the shared variance) with CES-D scores, three separate regression analyses were conducted. In these analyses, Self-criticism, Dependency and Efficacy served as the criterion variables. The set of predictors included the three defense factors (Mature, Immature and Emotion-avoiding); these were entered as a second block after CES-D scores were entered in the first step. Regressions were performed twice: first with the targets’ self-reports and then with the best-friend reports as criterion variables. Results indicated that the correlations presented in Table 2 are stable and not affected by depressive symptoms scores.

The current investigation analyzed interactions involving the vulnerability and defense variables, controlling for targets’ depression levels as reported by best friends. This analytic strategy allowed us to detect the specific effects of the personality and defense variables on targets’ depressive symptomatology, beyond the known effects of the common variance related to the self-reported method. The HMR analyses focused primarily on the following three issues: (a) the relative contribution of defense styles and personality vulnerability variables (as assessed by means of target reports and best-friend reports) to the prediction of the targets’ depression; (b) the contribution of best-friend reports of defense styles and personality variables to the prediction of depression by targets’ self- reported defense styles and personality variables; and (c) the interaction between defense style variables (as assessed by means of target reports and best-friend reports) and targets’ self-reported personality variables in terms of their effects on depression.

Analytical Strategy
To explore the three issues just outlined, two HMRs with interaction terms (Cohen & Cohen, 1983) were computed, separately for each of the two defense factors found to be associated with depression: Immature and Emotion-avoiding defenses. The criterion was self-reported depressive symptomatology. In the first step of the HMR, best-friend-reported CES-D³ (By entering best-friend-reported CES-D, the variance common to self-reported CES-D and the other ratings obtained from the friend was controlled. Moreover, the criterion became the difference between the level of depression expressed by target and that expressed by the friend. This residual score might be thought to reflect a more reliable criterion for targets’ depression because it is measured by two sources. However, all regressions presented were performed without entering friend-reported CES-D; the obtained significant results remained essentially the same.) was controlled. In the next two steps, the target- and best-friend-reported DSQ factors and target- and best- friend-reported Self-criticism and Dependency were entered. These two steps permitted us to test the study’s main hypothesis after controlling for the shared variance between the target reports and best-friend reports for Self-criticism, Dependency dimensions and defense factors, and their associations with the criterion variable. The two steps also permitted us to control for the variables forming the interactions before testing the interactions (Cohen, 1978). Next, the target and best-friend report interactions for each construct were entered (Funder, 1995, 1999; Funder & West, 1993). Finally, after controlling for covariations and main effects, the moderating (interaction)4 (In line with Baron and Kenny (1986), the term moderator is used to refer to a variable Z (e.g., Immature defense) that qualifies the effect of a predictor variable X (e.g. personality) on a criterion variable Y (e.g., depression).) effects were tested by entering the interactions between each of the target-reported DEQ factors and each of the target-reported and best-friend-reported DSQ factors.

Predicting Targets’ Self-Reported Depressive Symptomatology
Table 3a presents the HMR for the prediction of target-reported depressive symptomatology with the Immature defense factor as the moderator. As can be seen, best-friend reports of depressive symptomatology explained a significant 10% of the variance of targets’ self-reported depressive symptomatology. Among the reports for Immature defenses, only target-reported Immature defense scores were associated positively with target-reported depressive symptoms. These contributed an additional 23% to the explanation of the variance of targets’ self-reported depressive symptoms. In the next step, the personality variables were entered and it was found that target-reported Self-criticism, but not Dependency, was significantly associated with targets’ depressive symptoms. High levels of Self-criticism were positively associated with high depressive symptom scores; this step added a significant additional 7% to the prediction of the variance of depressive symptomatology. In the subsequent steps (Step 4 and Step 5), a total of 7 interactions were entered: three in Step 4, representing the target report × best-friend report interactions for the Self-criticism, Dependency, and Immature defense variables, and four in Step 5, representing the moderating effect of the target and best-friend reports of Immature defense variables on the association between target and best-friend reports of personality variables and depression. Significant interactions were plotted according to the recommendation of Cohen and Cohen (1983, p. 323 and p. 419).

In the final stage of the analyses, a path analysis model was explored to test the sequence between target and best-friend reports of Self-criticism, defense factors and depression. The current investigation combined analytic strategies (HMR and the path models) and took into account the elements of accuracy and bias (e.g., Kenny & Acitelli, 2001) elements in the best-friend perceptions of targets’ personality vulnerability, defense factors and depressive mood.

The correlational and HRM models did not address the possibility of a causal sequence among target- and best-friend-reported Self-criticism, Immature defense, Emotion-avoiding defense, and depression. It may be argued, for instance, that depressed targets lead their best friends to perceive them as more self-critical or as high on Immature and Emotion-avoiding defenses, and/or that self-critical targets lead their best friends to perceive them as more depressed or as high on Immature and Emotion-avoiding defenses. In addition, targets high on Immature and Emotion-avoiding defenses might lead their best friends to perceive them as more depressed or self-critical. One could also assume that self- critical and/or depressed targets lead their best friends to perceive them as high on Immature and/or Emotion-avoiding defenses.

In order to evaluate these possibilities, while at the same time assessing measurement errors in the dependent and independent variables, two path models - both using SEM (Hoyle & Smith, 1994) - were performed. Using AMOS 4.0 software based on the variance-covariance matrix (Arbuckle, 1999), the fit of the models was tested using maximum likelihood estimation. These models were evaluated separately with both the Immature defense and the Emotion-avoiding defense factors. In each model, the shared variance of Self-criticism, defense factor and depression within target-reports and best-friend reports was controlled (i.e., controlled for their association relating to the same source of report).

Two models were explored: the “Bias” model and the “Accuracy” model (see, for example, Besser & Priel, 2003a; Kenny & Acitelli, 2001).

The Bias model According to the Bias model, depressed targets lead their best friends to perceive them as more self-critical, and/or self-critical targets lead their best friends to perceive them as more depressed. The current investigation delineated the effect of target-reported depression on best-friend - reported Self-criticism and the effect of target-reported Self-criticism on best-friend-reported depression. Moreover, the effect of target-reported Immature or Emotion-avoiding defenses on best-friend-reported Self-criticism and the effect of target-reported Self-criticism on best-friend - reported Immature or Emotion - avoiding defenses were also delineated. These two paths represent a bias: targets who are high on Immature or Emotion-avoiding defense may lead their best friends to perceive them as more self-critical, and/or self-critical targets may lead their best friends to perceive them as higher on Immature or Emotion-avoiding defenses. Finally, the effect of target-reported depression on best-friend-reported Immature or Emotion-avoiding defenses and the effect of targets’ self-reported Immature or Emotion-avoiding defenses on best-friend-reported depression were delineated. As can be seen, these two paths also represent a bias: depressed targets lead their best friends to perceive them as being higher on Immature or Emotion-avoiding defenses, and/or targets who are high on Immature or Emotion-avoiding defenses lead their best friends to perceive them as more depressed.

The Bias models specified resulted in nonacceptable indices of fit: RMSEA = .22; χ²[3, N = 187] = 30.21; χ²/_df = 10.01; p < .0001 for the model with the Immature defense factor, and RMSEA = .23; χ² [3, N = 187] = 31.83; χ²/_df = 10.61; p < .0001 for the model with the Emotion-avoiding factor. Targets’ levels of Self-criticism did not affect their best friends’ perception of them as more depressed (β = .00, ns); similarly, targets’ levels of depression did not affect their best friends’ perceptions of them as highly self-critical (β = .00, ns). In addition, targets’ levels of Immature defense or Emotion-avoiding defense did not affect their best friends’ perception of them as highly self-critical (β = .12, ns and β = .01, ns, respectively). Also similarly, targets’ levels of Self-criticism did not affect their best friends’ perceptions of them as using a higher level of Immature or Emotion-avoiding defense styles (β = .06, ns and β = .07, ns, respectively). Finally, targets’ levels of Immature or Emotion-avoiding defense did not affect their best friends’ perceptions of them as highly depressed (β = .06, ns and β = .07, ns, respectively). Similarly, targets’ levels of depression did not affect their best friends’ perceptions of them as using a higher level of Immature defense style (β = .02, ns and β = .00, ns, respectively).

The Accuracy model In this model, target and best-friend reports are assumed to be congruent. The current investigation delineated the following effects: (a) the effects of target-reported depression on best-friend reports of target depression, (b) the effects of target-reported Self-criticism on best-friend reports of target Self-criticism, and (c) the effects of target-reported defense factors on best-friend reports of target defense factors. These three paths convey accuracy, since depressed targets are perceived by their best friends as more depressed, and/or self-critical targets are perceived by their best friends as more self-critical, and/or targets who are high on Immature or Emotion-avoiding defense factors are perceived as high on these factors. The model specified resulted in the following acceptable indices of fit: RMSEA = .000; χ²[6, N = 187] = 2.65; χ²/_df = .44; p > .85; GFI = .1.0; AGFI = .98; CFI = 1.0 for the model with the Immature factor, and RMSEA = .000; χ²[6, N = 187] = 2.99; χ²/_df = .49; p > .81; GFI = .1.0; AGFI = .98; CFI = 1.0 for the model with the Emotion-avoiding factor.

In both models, targets’ levels of Self-criticism affected their best friends’ perceptions of them as highly self-critical (β = .18, t = 3.07, p < .002 and β = .19, t = 3.29, p < .001, respectively). Targets’ levels of depression affected their best friends’ perceptions of them as highly depressive (β = .29, t = 4.60, p < .0001 and β = .28, t = 4.69, p < .0001), and targets’ high levels of Emotion-avoiding defenses affected their best friends’ perceptions of them as high on this factor (β = .20, t = 3.20, p < .001 and β = .21, t = 3.58, p < .0001).

The above findings of the path models (see Figure 5 for the combined model)^{7, 8}(A combined model estimating the simultaneous Bias and Accuracy paths yielded identical results, that is, no significant effects were found for any of the biased paths and significant effects were found for all of the accuracy ones. However this model had zero degrees of freedom, so fit indices could not be estimated.) (It should be noted that the models estimated are highly conservative, because the accuracy paths were estimated with the high correlations among the CES-D, DEQ, and DSQ variables within reporter being simultaneously controlled (i.e., controlled for their associations relating to the same report source). The unit of analysis (Kenny, 2003; Kenny & Judd, 1986) was the two sources of information (n = 187 pairs).), indicate that significant but modest relationships exist between target and best-friend reports of similar variables (convergent validity), but no relationships exist across different variables (divergent validity). This suggests that the levels of Self-criticism reported by best friends are not simply a symptom of targets’ depression or of their levels of defense styles (as would be the case if the Bias model were correct); nor are the levels of defense reported by best friends a response to targets’ depression levels or levels of Self-criticism. Moreover, the levels of depression reported by best friends are not simply a reflection of targets’ personality vulnerability, nor are they a reflection of targets’ levels of defense styles.

The findings of the present study contribute to the understanding that the quantity and intensity of defense mechanisms used by an individual constitute a basic dimension that differentiates between vulnerability and nonvulnerability personality traits, as well as between different configurations of vulnerability to depression. A robust finding of this study, after controlling for depression and taking into account two data sources, is that Mature defenses are reported and perceived as associated with personality resilience only. This finding corroborates the basic model of vulnerability and resilience proposed by Blatt and colleagues. Although Efficacy was not found to be negatively correlated with depression, Efficacy might imply resilience to other maladaptive outcomes through the use of adaptive defensive strategies. While it may be argued that Efficacy is the result of the use of adaptive defenses, the direction of this causality should be explored longitudinally. Moreover, this study’s results suggest that the use of Immature defense mechanisms defines a main aspect of personality vulnerability to depression.

The findings of the present study also contribute to the understanding of a basic difference between Dependency and self-critical vulnerabilities. Vulnerability aspects of high Self-criticism have been amply documented (Besser, Flett, & Davis, 2003; Besser & Priel, 2003a, 2003b; Priel & Besser, 1999, 2000), and links between Self-criticism and negative interpersonal outcomes have been reported (Fichman et al., 1999; Mongrain, Vettese, Shuster, & Kendal 1998; Mongrain & Zuroff, 1995; Santor, Pringle, & Israeli, 2000; Santor & Zuroff, 1997; Thompson & Zuroff, 1999; Vettesse & Mongrain, 2000; Zuroff, 1994; Zuroff & Fitzpatrick, 1995). Studies with different populations have reiterated the complex characteristics of Dependency vulnerability (e.g., Aube & Whiffen, 1996; Besser, Flett, & Davis, 2003; Besser & Priel, 2003a, 2003b; Blatt et al., 1995; Bornstein, 1992; Mongrain, 1998; Mongrain & Zuroff, 1995; Priel & Besser, 1999, 2000; Santor & Zuroff, 1997; Zuroff, 1994; Zuroff & Fitzpatrick, 1995). The findings of the present study corroborate this extensive body of research, characterizing the differences between Dependency and Self-criticism in relation to the use of defense mechanisms. A main finding of this study is the difference in the magnitude of the associations between Dependency and less adaptive defense mechanisms on the one hand, and between Self-criticism and less adaptive defense mechanisms on the other. According to both self- and best-friend reports, Self-criticism is associated with Emotion-avoidance defenses, while Dependency is not, and both vulnerability configurations are associated with the Immature defense factor and with depression, but these associations were found to be significantly lower for Dependency than for Self-criticism. These associations between the DEQ factors and the defense factors were stable even when controlling for depression levels and the correlations among the defense factors. Self-criticism’s associations with maladaptive defense styles might suggest more biased perceptions of reality and interpersonal relationships that may constitute a basic aspect of this vulnerability.

The basic accuracy found in best-friend assessments corroborates the validity of the vulnerability factors used in this research. The findings of the current study show that the levels of Self-criticism reported by best friends are not simply a reflection of targets’ depression levels or levels of defense. In addition, the levels of defense reported by best friends do not seem to be biased by targets’ depression levels or by their levels of Self-criticism. Furthermore, targets’ personality vulnerability or levels of defense styles do not bias the levels of depression observed by best friends. These findings also strongly support an interpersonal perspective on vulnerability to depression. Best friends’ perceptions of targets’ personalities fulfill an important role as a buffer against targets’ vulnerability to depression.

This study’s findings also suggest that defense factors, personality factors, and depressive mood may all be accurately detected in close interpersonal relationships through their impact on others close to the individual. Beyond the methodological implications of multisource data, this design allows an empirical approach to a perspective on depression as an interpersonal process (Coyne, 1976; Sacco, 1999).

The findings about the relationship between target and best-friend assessments highlight the importance of the specific interpersonal context studied. The importance of the specific interpersonal context becomes evident after comparing the results of this study with Besser and Priel’s (2003a) study on vulnerability to depression as assessed using self- and spouses’ reports in long-term, close, romantic interpersonal relationships. Partners’ ratings of targets’ Self-criticism and Dependency have been found to have both additive and interactive effects on the prediction of target depression. In the current study, however, only self-reported personality variables had predictive effects. Moreover, while the ratings of the moderator variable by spouses significantly moderated targets’ ratings, best friends’ ratings on the moderator variable in the present study - defense mechanisms - did not. These findings suggest the importance of the specific relationship between target individuals and additional reporters. In addition, although both studies investigated relatively long-term naturalistic relationships, in the study involving spouses (Besser & Priel, 2003a), the moderator was the “romantic attachment” construct, that is, an interpersonal variable. In the current study of friends, the moderator - defense mechanisms - may be considered a more intrapersonal or intrapsychic variable. In married couples, the higher predictive power of partner ratings as well as their moderating role could possibly be attributed to the closer and more intimate kind of interpersonal relationship investigated and to the fact that the moderator investigated there was an interpersonal one.

The results indicate that the Immature defense factor interacts with personality vulnerabilities when reported by targets, but not by best friends. The Emotion-avoiding defense factor did not interact with personality vulnerabilities either when reported by targets or when reported by best friends. Specifically, low Immature scores were found to moderate targets’ reports of Self-criticism on depression and high Immature scores were found to mediate the effect of Dependency on depression. Furthermore, it would seem that a higher level of Immature defense increases the vulnerability to depression of self-critical individuals. These findings are congruent with previous results on the effects of coping mechanisms in the vulnerability-depression association. In a longitudinal study of pregnant women, Self-criticism was found to correlate positively with high emotional-avoidance and low approach coping strategies (Besser & Priel, 2003b); moreover, higher scores on the approach coping style moderated the self- critical vulnerability to depression. These findings and the findings of the present study suggest a buffering role of high adaptive conscious (coping) mechanisms as well as of low maladaptive unconscious (defenses) strategies in self-critical vulnerability. The different patterns of interactions between maladaptive defenses and vulnerability factors suggest that while the Dependency trait might lead to depression because it is associated with Immature defense, and might not constitute a vulnerability trait if more adaptive defenses are used, Self-criticism makes a specific contribution to depression levels that may be exacerbated by the use of Immature defense.

Collectively, the results of this study have several implications, not only in terms of methodological and conceptual issues, but also in terms of practical issues involving treatments and interventions designed for self-critics and dependent individuals. First, in terms of methodological implications, the findings illustrate clearly the value of supplementing self-reports with observer ratings, not only in future research on Self-criticism and Dependency but also when assessing the levels of various dimensions of personality vulnerabilities in counseling and clinical contexts. In this study, most of the findings that emerged from the self-reports were replicated in the analyses of informant ratings, but this may not necessarily be the case in future investigations and in other contexts.

As for theoretical implications, at the conceptual level the current results provided general support for models of Self-criticism and Dependency, stress, and coping, including models that link Self-criticism, Dependency, maladaptive coping, and depression (see Besser & Priel, 2003b). The results constitute additional evidence for the usefulness of attempting to identify factors that may exacerbate or underscore the link between certain dimensions of personality vulnerability and psychological distress and well-being. Finally, at the practical level, it is evident from the results that individuals characterized by elevated levels of Self-criticism should benefit from therapeutic interventions designed to help them to develop a more mature or less maladaptive defense style. Research by Blatt and Zuroff and associates has shown that Self-criticism is relatively difficult to treat and is best suited to long-term interventions and that, as a result, direct efforts to reduce Self-criticism might not be appropriate (for a recent extensive review see Blatt, 2004). Perhaps, then, it is more advisable, at least in the initial stages of treatment, to focus counseling interventions on the maladaptive defense styles and facilitate an orientation comprised of more mature defenses, and then, subsequently, focus directly on reducing levels of Self-criticism. However, the development of mature defenses is likely to be no easy task. Vaillant (1994) observed that attempts to challenge irritating but partly adaptive, immature defenses can cause substantial anxiety and may rupture the therapeutic alliance. Other authors have also observed that negative reactions may ensue from direct attempts to challenge maladaptive defenses and it may be preferable to facilitate the development of flexible coping skills (Ihilevich & Gleser, 1993; Mahalik, Cournoyer, DeFranc, Cherry, & Napolitano, 1998). Vaillant (1994) cautioned that therapeutic efforts are best attempted with individuals who perceive, or who actually have available, high levels of social support. This is an important suggestion for the treatment of Dependency, given other evidence that social support mediates the link between Dependency and psychological distress (Priel & Besser, 2000).

Another potentially useful suggestion stems from research indicating that children who experience failure tend to rely on maladaptive and immature defenses, while children who experience success tend to utilize more mature defenses (Cramer & Block, 1988). Accordingly, given that self-critics are generally intolerant of failure and have elevated fears of failure (e.g., Blatt, 1991; Blatt, 2004), it follows that attempts to develop a more mature defense style among self-critics will be more effective if these individuals begin to experience successful outcomes and develop a heightened sense of self-efficacy.

Certain limitations of the current study should be noted. First, the study was based on a cross-sectional design and longitudinal research is needed. Accordingly, causal statements involving the variables are not warranted.

Second, some concerns have been expressed about whether best friends will be entirely truthful in research of this nature (see Klonsky, Oltmanns, & Turkheimer, 2002). Perhaps best friends were not entirely truthful, even though members of the dyad completed the questionnaires in separate locations.

Third, in order to get a more accurate assessment of depression, subsequent research should include multiple measures of depression. Similarly, because measures of anxiety and other forms of negative affectivity were not included, it is not possible to determine whether the current findings are specific to depression or apply to psychological distress in general.

Finally, the results of this study may apply only to the measure of defense styles used in this research. Further research, using comprehensive assessments of defense mechanisms such as semistructured interviews or projective techniques (Cramer, 1998b), and/or using person and situational variables obtained from multiple sources (as was done by, e.g., Davidson & MacGregor, 1998), and/or using external assessments of behavior, may prove useful in advancing the study of personality and defenses. Further research could also implement the present study’s multisource interactional model using a longitudinal design that controls for baseline levels of depression and personality variables.

In summary, despite some limitations, the current study represents a first attempt to examine the role played by defense mechanisms in the association between personality vulnerabilities and resilience on one hand, and between personality vulnerabilities and depression on the other hand, using a multisource approach. The findings obtained point to multifaceted relationships among personality vulnerability factors, defense mechanisms, and depressive symptoms, as well as the plausible impact of interpersonal relationships. The association between self-ratings and best-friend ratings of the Self-criticism and Dependency personality vulnerability traits, which goes beyond depression and defense styles, demonstrates the usefulness of multisource data collection as a method for the study of personality.

Alloy, L. B., & Abramson, L. Y. (1979). Judgment of contingency in depressed and nondepressed students: Sadder but wiser? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 441-485.

Andrews, G., Pollock, C., & Stewart, G. (1989). The determination of defense style by questionnaire.Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 455-460.

Andrews, G., Singh, M., & Bond, M. (1993). The defense style questionnaire. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 181, 246-256.

Angyal, A. (1951). Neurosis and treatment: A holistic theory. New York: Wiley.

Arbuckle, J. L. (1999). AMOS: A structural equation modeling program. Chicago: Small Waters.

Aube, J., & Whiffen, W. E. (1996). Depressive styles and social acuity. Communication Research, 23,407-424.

Baken, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238- 246.

Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.

Besser, A., Flett, G. L., & Davis, R. (2003). Self-criticism, dependency, silencing the self, and loneliness: Testing for mediational model. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1735-1752.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003a). A multisource approach to self-critical vulnerability to depression: The moderating role of attachment. Journal of Personality, 71, 515-555.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003b). Trait vulnerability and coping strategies in the transition to motherhood. Current Psychology, 22, 57-72.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003c). Linear and nonlinear threshold models of dependency and self-criticism: Comparing high- and low-risk pregnancies. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003d). The apple does not fall far from the tree: Attachment styles and personality vulnerabilities to depression in three generations of women. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003e). Depression among older adults: The roles of dependency, self- criticism and self-efficacy. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Besser, A., Priel, B., & Wiznitzer, A. (2002). Childbearing depressive symptomatology in high-risk pregnancies: The roles of working models and perceived spouse support. Personal Relationships, 9, 395-413.

Blatt, S. J. (1974). Levels of object representation in anaclitic and introjective depression. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 24, 107-157.

Blatt, S. J. (1990). Interpersonal relatedness and self-definition: Two personality configurations and their implications for psychopathology and psychotherapy. In J. L. Singer (Ed.), Repression and dissociation (pp. 299-335). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Blatt, S. J. (1991). A cognitive morphology of psychopathology. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 179, 449-458.

Blatt, S. J. (2004). Experiences of depression: Theoretical, clinical, and research perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Blatt, S. J., & Blass, R. (1990). Attachment and separateness: A dialectic model of the products and processes of psychological development. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 45, 107-127.

Blatt, S. J., D’Afflitti, J. P., & Quinlan, D. M. (1976). Experiences of depression in normal young adults. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85, 383-389.

Blatt, S. J., Quinlan, D. M., Chevron, E. S., McDonald, C., & Zuroff, D. C. (1982). Dependency and self-criticism: Psychological dimensions of depression. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 150, 113-124.

Blatt, S. J., & Shichman, S. (1983). Two primary configurations of psychopathology. Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought, 6, 187-254.

Blatt, S. J., Zohar, A. H., Quinlan, D. M., Zuroff, D. C., & Mongrain, M. (1995). Subscales within the Dependency Factor of the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 319-339.

Blatt, S. J., & Zuroff, D. C. (2002). Perfectionism in the therapeutic process. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 393-406). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

Bond, M., Gardner, S. T., Christian, J., & Sigal, J. J. (1983). Empirical study of self-rated defense styles. Archives of General Psychiatry, 40, 333-338.

Bornstein, R. F. (1992). The dependent personality: Development, social, and clinical perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 3-23.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In I. K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Cohen, J. (1978). Partialed products are interactions; partialed powers are curve components. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 858-866.

Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Colvin, C. R., Block, J., & Funder, D. C. (1995). Overly positive self-evaluations and personality: Negative implications for mental health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1152- 1162.

Costa, P. T. J., & McCrae, R. R. (1987). Neuroticism, somatic complaints, and disease: Is the bark worse than the bite? Journal of Personality, 55, 299-316.

Coyne, J. C. (1976). Depression and the response of others. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85, 186-193.

Coyne, J. C., & Whiffen, V. A. (1995). Issues in personality as diathesis for depression: The case of sociotropy-dependency and autonomy-self-criticism. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 358-378.

Cramer, P. (1991). The development of defense mechanisms: Theory, research, and assessment. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Cramer, P. (1998a). Coping and defense mechanisms: What’s the difference? Journal of Personality, 66, 919-946.

Cramer, P. (1998b). Defensiveness and defense mechanisms. Journal of Personality, 66, 879-894.

Cramer, P., Blatt, S. J., & Ford, R. Q., (1988). Defense mechanisms in the anaclitic and introjective personality configuration. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 610-616.

Cramer, P., & Block, J. (1988). Prechool antecendents of defense mechanism use in young adults: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 159-169.

Davidson, K., & MacGregor, M. W. (1998). A critical appraisal of self-report defense mechanism measures. Journal of Personality, 66, 965-992.

Fichman, L., Koestner, R., Zuroff, D. C., & Gordon, L. (1999). Depressive styles and the regulation of negative affect: A daily experience study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 5, 483-495.

Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Endler, N. S., & Bagby, R. M. (1995). Conceptualization and assessment of personality factors in depression. European Journal of Personality, 9, 309-350.

Funder, D. C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach. Psychological Review, 102, 652-670.

Funder, D. C. (1999). Personality judgment: A realistic approach to person perception. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Funder, D. C., & West, S. G. (1993). Consensus, self-other agreement, and accuracy in personality judgment: An introduction. Journal of Personality, 61, 457-476.

Gleser, G. C., & Ihilevich, D. (1969). An objective instrument for measuring defense mechanisms. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51-60.

Helgeson, V. (1994). Relation of agency and communion to well-being: Evidence and potential explanations. Psychological Bulletin, 11, 498-515

Hoyle, R. H., & Smith, G. T. (1994). Formulating clinical research hypotheses as structural equation models: A conceptual overview. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 429-440.

Ihilevich, D., & Gleser, G. C. (1993). Defenses in psychotherapy: The clinical application of the Defense Mechanism Inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1985). LISREL VI: Analysis of linear structural relationships by the method of maximum likelihood. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.

Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using LISREL for structural equation modeling: A researcher’s guide. London: Sage.

Kenny, D. A. (March 9, 2003). Dyadic analysis. Retrieved from http://users.rcn.com/dakenny/dyad.htm

Kenny, D. A., & Acitelli, L. K. (2001). Accuracy and bias in the perception of the partner in a close relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 439-448.

Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (1986). Consequences of violating the independence assumption in analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 422-431.

Klein, D. N. (1989). The depressive experiences questionnaire: A further evaluation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 703-715.

Klonsky, E. D., Oltmanns, T. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2002). Informant-reports of personality disorder: Relation to self-reports and future research directions. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 9, 300-311.

Kurtz, J. E., & Sherker, J. L. (2003). Relationship quality, trait similarity, and self-other agreement on personality ratings in college roommates. Journal of Personality, 71, 21-48.

Kwon, P. (2000a). Attributional style and defense mechanisms: A synthesis of cognitive and psychodynamic factors in depression. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56, 723-735.

Kwon, P. (2000b). Hope and dysphoria: The moderating role of defense mechanisms. Journal of Personality, 68, 199-223.

Larsen, R. J. (1992). Neuroticism and selective encoding and recall of symptoms: Evidence from a combined concurrent-retrospective study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 480- 488.

McAdams, D. (1985). Power, intimacy and the life story: Personological inquiries into identity. New York: Guilford.

McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human motivation. Gleview, IL: Scott Foresman.

Mahalik, J. R., Cournoyer, R. J., DeFranc, W., Cherry, M., & Napolitano, J. M. (1998). Men’s gender role conflict and use of psychological defenses. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 247-255.

Mongrain, M. (1998). Parental representations and support-seeking behaviors related to dependency and self-criticism. Journal of Personality, 66, 151-173.

Mongrain, M., Lubbers, R., & Struthers, W. (2004). The power of love: Mediation of rejection in roommate relationships of dependents and self-critics. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 94-105.

Mongrain, M., Vettese, L. C., Shuster, B., & Kendal, N. (1998). Perceptual biases, affect, and behavior in the relationships of dependency and self-critics. Journal of Personality, 75, 230-241.

Mongrain, M., & Zuroff, D. C. (1995). Motivational and affective correlates of dependency and self- criticism. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, 347-354.

Muris, P., & Merckelbach, H. (1996). The short version of the defense style questionnaire: Factor structure and psychopathological correlates. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 123-126.

Pearson, R. W., Ross, M., & Dawes, R. M. (1992). Personal recall and the limits of retrospective questions in surveys. In J. M. Tanur (Ed.), Questions about questions (pp. 65-94). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Perry, J. C., & Cooper, S. H. (1989). An empirical study of defense mechanisms: I. Clinical interview and life vignette ratings. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 444-452.

Powers, T. A., Zuroff, D. C., & Topciu, R. A. (2004). Covert and overt expressions of self-criticism and perfectionism and their relation to depression. European Journal of Personality, 18, 61-72.

Priel, B., & Besser, A. (1999). Vulnerability to postpartum depressive symptomatology: Dependency, self-criticism and the moderating role of antenatal attachment. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18, 240-253.

Priel, B., & Besser, A. (2000). Dependency and self-criticism among first-time mothers: The roles of global and specific support. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19, 437-450.

Priel, B., & Besser, A. (2002). Representations of early relationships during the transition to motherhood: The mediating role of social support. Infant Mental Health Journal, 23, 343-360.

Priel, B., Besser, A., & Shahar, G. (1998). Israeli adaptation of the DEQ: Psychometric properties. Unpublished manuscript. Behavioral Sciences Department, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel.

Priel, B., & Shahar, G. (2000). Dependency, self-criticism, social context and distress: comparing moderating and mediating models. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 515-525.

Quimette, P., & Klein, D. N. (1993). Convergence of psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral theories of depression: An empirical review and new data on Blatt’s and Beck’s models. In J. M. Masling & R. F. Bornstein (Eds.), Psychoanalytic perspectives on psychopathology (pp. 191-224). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Radloff, L. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychosocial Measurement, 1, 385-401.

Robins, C., J, Hayes, A. M., Block, P., Kramer, R. J., & Villena, M. (1995). Interpersonal and achievement concerns and the depressive vulnerability and symptom specificity hypothesis: A prospective study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19, 1-20.

Sacco, W. P. (1999). A social-cognitive model of interpersonal processes in depression. In T. E. Joiner & J. Coyne (Eds.), The interactional nature of depression: Advances in interpersonal approaches (pp. 329-362). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Sacco, W. P., & Phares, V. (2001). Partner appraisal and marital satisfaction: The role of self-esteem and depression. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 504-513.

Santor, D. A., Pringle, J. D., & Israeli, A. L. (2000). Enhancing and disrupting cooperative behavior in couples: Effects of dependency and self-criticism following favorable and unfavorable performance feedback. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 379-397.

Santor D. A., & Zuroff, D. C. (1997). Interpersonal responses to treats to status and interpersonal relatedness: Effects of dependency and self-criticism. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 36, 521-542.

Thompson R., & Zuroff, D. C. (1999). Development of self-criticism in adolescent girls: Roles of maternal dissatisfaction, maternal coldness, and insecure attachment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28, 197-210.

Vaillant, G. E. (1974). Natural history of male psychological health: II. Some antecedents of healthy adult adjustment. Archives of General Psychiatry, 31, 15-22.

Vaillant, G. E. (1976). Natural history of male psychological health: V. The relation of choice of ego mechanisms of defense to adult adjustment. Archives of General Psychiatry, 33, 535-545.

Vaillant, G. E. (1977). Adaptation to life. Boston: Little, Brown.

Vaillant, G. E. (1994). Ego mechanisms of defense and personality psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 44-50.

Vaillant, G. E., & Vaillant, C. O. (1992). A cross-validation of two methods of investigating defenses. In G. E. Vaillant (Ed.), Ego mechanisms of defense: A guide for clinicians and researchers (pp. 159-170). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

Vettese, L. C., & Mongrain, M. (2000). Communication about the self and partner in the relationships of dependents and self-critics. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 609-626.

Watson, D., Hubbard, B., & Wiese, D. (2000). General traits of personality and affectivity as predictors of satisfaction in intimate relationships: Evidence from self- and partner-ratings. Journal of Personality, 68, 413-449.

Winter, D. (1973). The power motive. New York: Free Press.

Zuroff, D. C. (1994). Depressive personality styles and the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 453-472.

Zuroff, D. C., & Fitzpatrick, D. (1995). Depressive personality styles: Implications for adult attachment. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, 253-365.

Zuroff, D. C., Igreja, I., & Mongrain, M. (1990). Dysfunctional attitudes, dependency, and self- criticism as predictors of depressive mood states: A 12-month longitudinal study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14, 315-326.

Zuroff, D. C., Moskowitz, D. S., Wielgus, M. S., Powers, T. A., & Franko, D. L. (1983). Construct validation of the dependency and self-criticism scales of the depressive experiences questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 17, 226-241.

Alloy, L. B., & Abramson, L. Y. (1979). Judgment of contingency in depressed and nondepressed students: Sadder but wiser? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 441-485.

Andrews, G., Pollock, C., & Stewart, G. (1989). The determination of defense style by questionnaire.Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 455-460.

Andrews, G., Singh, M., & Bond, M. (1993). The defense style questionnaire. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 181, 246-256.

Angyal, A. (1951). Neurosis and treatment: A holistic theory. New York: Wiley.

Arbuckle, J. L. (1999). AMOS: A structural equation modeling program. Chicago: Small Waters.

Aube, J., & Whiffen, W. E. (1996). Depressive styles and social acuity. Communication Research, 23,407-424.

Baken, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238- 246.

Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.

Besser, A., Flett, G. L., & Davis, R. (2003). Self-criticism, dependency, silencing the self, and loneliness: Testing for mediational model. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1735-1752.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003a). A multisource approach to self-critical vulnerability to depression: The moderating role of attachment. Journal of Personality, 71, 515-555.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003b). Trait vulnerability and coping strategies in the transition to motherhood. Current Psychology, 22, 57-72.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003c). Linear and nonlinear threshold models of dependency and self-criticism: Comparing high- and low-risk pregnancies. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003d). The apple does not fall far from the tree: Attachment styles and personality vulnerabilities to depression in three generations of women. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2003e). Depression among older adults: The roles of dependency, self- criticism and self-efficacy. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Besser, A., Priel, B., & Wiznitzer, A. (2002). Childbearing depressive symptomatology in high-risk pregnancies: The roles of working models and perceived spouse support. Personal Relationships, 9, 395-413.

Blatt, S. J. (1974). Levels of object representation in anaclitic and introjective depression. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 24, 107-157.

Blatt, S. J. (1990). Interpersonal relatedness and self-definition: Two personality configurations and their implications for psychopathology and psychotherapy. In J. L. Singer (Ed.), Repression and dissociation (pp. 299-335). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Blatt, S. J. (1991). A cognitive morphology of psychopathology. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 179, 449-458.

Blatt, S. J. (2004). Experiences of depression: Theoretical, clinical, and research perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Blatt, S. J., & Blass, R. (1990). Attachment and separateness: A dialectic model of the products and processes of psychological development. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 45, 107-127.

Blatt, S. J., D’Afflitti, J. P., & Quinlan, D. M. (1976). Experiences of depression in normal young adults. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85, 383-389.

Blatt, S. J., Quinlan, D. M., Chevron, E. S., McDonald, C., & Zuroff, D. C. (1982). Dependency and self-criticism: Psychological dimensions of depression. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 150, 113-124.

Blatt, S. J., & Shichman, S. (1983). Two primary configurations of psychopathology. Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought, 6, 187-254.

Blatt, S. J., Zohar, A. H., Quinlan, D. M., Zuroff, D. C., & Mongrain, M. (1995). Subscales within the Dependency Factor of the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 319-339.

Blatt, S. J., & Zuroff, D. C. (2002). Perfectionism in the therapeutic process. In G. L. Flett & P. L. Hewitt (Eds.), Perfectionism: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 393-406). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

Bond, M., Gardner, S. T., Christian, J., & Sigal, J. J. (1983). Empirical study of self-rated defense styles. Archives of General Psychiatry, 40, 333-338.

Bornstein, R. F. (1992). The dependent personality: Development, social, and clinical perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 3-23.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In I. K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Cohen, J. (1978). Partialed products are interactions; partialed powers are curve components. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 858-866.

Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Colvin, C. R., Block, J., & Funder, D. C. (1995). Overly positive self-evaluations and personality: Negative implications for mental health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1152- 1162.

Costa, P. T. J., & McCrae, R. R. (1987). Neuroticism, somatic complaints, and disease: Is the bark worse than the bite? Journal of Personality, 55, 299-316.

Coyne, J. C. (1976). Depression and the response of others. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 85, 186-193.

Coyne, J. C., & Whiffen, V. A. (1995). Issues in personality as diathesis for depression: The case of sociotropy-dependency and autonomy-self-criticism. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 358-378.

Cramer, P. (1991). The development of defense mechanisms: Theory, research, and assessment. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Cramer, P. (1998a). Coping and defense mechanisms: What’s the difference? Journal of Personality, 66, 919-946.

Cramer, P. (1998b). Defensiveness and defense mechanisms. Journal of Personality, 66, 879-894.

Cramer, P., Blatt, S. J., & Ford, R. Q., (1988). Defense mechanisms in the anaclitic and introjective personality configuration. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 610-616.

Cramer, P., & Block, J. (1988). Prechool antecendents of defense mechanism use in young adults: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 159-169.

Davidson, K., & MacGregor, M. W. (1998). A critical appraisal of self-report defense mechanism measures. Journal of Personality, 66, 965-992.

Fichman, L., Koestner, R., Zuroff, D. C., & Gordon, L. (1999). Depressive styles and the regulation of negative affect: A daily experience study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 5, 483-495.

Flett, G. L., Hewitt, P. L., Endler, N. S., & Bagby, R. M. (1995). Conceptualization and assessment of personality factors in depression. European Journal of Personality, 9, 309-350.

Funder, D. C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach. Psychological Review, 102, 652-670.

Funder, D. C. (1999). Personality judgment: A realistic approach to person perception. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Funder, D. C., & West, S. G. (1993). Consensus, self-other agreement, and accuracy in personality judgment: An introduction. Journal of Personality, 61, 457-476.

Gleser, G. C., & Ihilevich, D. (1969). An objective instrument for measuring defense mechanisms. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51-60.

Helgeson, V. (1994). Relation of agency and communion to well-being: Evidence and potential explanations. Psychological Bulletin, 11, 498-515

Hoyle, R. H., & Smith, G. T. (1994). Formulating clinical research hypotheses as structural equation models: A conceptual overview. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 429-440.

Ihilevich, D., & Gleser, G. C. (1993). Defenses in psychotherapy: The clinical application of the Defense Mechanism Inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1985). LISREL VI: Analysis of linear structural relationships by the method of maximum likelihood. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.

Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using LISREL for structural equation modeling: A researcher’s guide. London: Sage.

Kenny, D. A. (March 9, 2003). Dyadic analysis. Retrieved from http://users.rcn.com/dakenny/dyad.htm

Kenny, D. A., & Acitelli, L. K. (2001). Accuracy and bias in the perception of the partner in a close relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 439-448.

Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (1986). Consequences of violating the independence assumption in analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 422-431.

Klein, D. N. (1989). The depressive experiences questionnaire: A further evaluation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 703-715.

Klonsky, E. D., Oltmanns, T. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2002). Informant-reports of personality disorder: Relation to self-reports and future research directions. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 9, 300-311.

Kurtz, J. E., & Sherker, J. L. (2003). Relationship quality, trait similarity, and self-other agreement on personality ratings in college roommates. Journal of Personality, 71, 21-48.

Kwon, P. (2000a). Attributional style and defense mechanisms: A synthesis of cognitive and psychodynamic factors in depression. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56, 723-735.

Kwon, P. (2000b). Hope and dysphoria: The moderating role of defense mechanisms. Journal of Personality, 68, 199-223.

Larsen, R. J. (1992). Neuroticism and selective encoding and recall of symptoms: Evidence from a combined concurrent-retrospective study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 480- 488.

McAdams, D. (1985). Power, intimacy and the life story: Personological inquiries into identity. New York: Guilford.

McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human motivation. Gleview, IL: Scott Foresman.

Mahalik, J. R., Cournoyer, R. J., DeFranc, W., Cherry, M., & Napolitano, J. M. (1998). Men’s gender role conflict and use of psychological defenses. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 247-255.

Mongrain, M. (1998). Parental representations and support-seeking behaviors related to dependency and self-criticism. Journal of Personality, 66, 151-173.

Mongrain, M., Lubbers, R., & Struthers, W. (2004). The power of love: Mediation of rejection in roommate relationships of dependents and self-critics. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 94-105.

Mongrain, M., Vettese, L. C., Shuster, B., & Kendal, N. (1998). Perceptual biases, affect, and behavior in the relationships of dependency and self-critics. Journal of Personality, 75, 230-241.

Mongrain, M., & Zuroff, D. C. (1995). Motivational and affective correlates of dependency and self- criticism. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, 347-354.

Muris, P., & Merckelbach, H. (1996). The short version of the defense style questionnaire: Factor structure and psychopathological correlates. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 123-126.

Pearson, R. W., Ross, M., & Dawes, R. M. (1992). Personal recall and the limits of retrospective questions in surveys. In J. M. Tanur (Ed.), Questions about questions (pp. 65-94). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Perry, J. C., & Cooper, S. H. (1989). An empirical study of defense mechanisms: I. Clinical interview and life vignette ratings. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 444-452.

Powers, T. A., Zuroff, D. C., & Topciu, R. A. (2004). Covert and overt expressions of self-criticism and perfectionism and their relation to depression. European Journal of Personality, 18, 61-72.

Priel, B., & Besser, A. (1999). Vulnerability to postpartum depressive symptomatology: Dependency, self-criticism and the moderating role of antenatal attachment. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18, 240-253.

Priel, B., & Besser, A. (2000). Dependency and self-criticism among first-time mothers: The roles of global and specific support. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19, 437-450.

Priel, B., & Besser, A. (2002). Representations of early relationships during the transition to motherhood: The mediating role of social support. Infant Mental Health Journal, 23, 343-360.

Priel, B., Besser, A., & Shahar, G. (1998). Israeli adaptation of the DEQ: Psychometric properties. Unpublished manuscript. Behavioral Sciences Department, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel.

Priel, B., & Shahar, G. (2000). Dependency, self-criticism, social context and distress: comparing moderating and mediating models. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 515-525.

Quimette, P., & Klein, D. N. (1993). Convergence of psychoanalytic and cognitive-behavioral theories of depression: An empirical review and new data on Blatt’s and Beck’s models. In J. M. Masling & R. F. Bornstein (Eds.), Psychoanalytic perspectives on psychopathology (pp. 191-224). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Radloff, L. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychosocial Measurement, 1, 385-401.

Robins, C., J, Hayes, A. M., Block, P., Kramer, R. J., & Villena, M. (1995). Interpersonal and achievement concerns and the depressive vulnerability and symptom specificity hypothesis: A prospective study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19, 1-20.

Sacco, W. P. (1999). A social-cognitive model of interpersonal processes in depression. In T. E. Joiner & J. Coyne (Eds.), The interactional nature of depression: Advances in interpersonal approaches (pp. 329-362). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Sacco, W. P., & Phares, V. (2001). Partner appraisal and marital satisfaction: The role of self-esteem and depression. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 504-513.

Santor, D. A., Pringle, J. D., & Israeli, A. L. (2000). Enhancing and disrupting cooperative behavior in couples: Effects of dependency and self-criticism following favorable and unfavorable performance feedback. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 379-397.

Santor D. A., & Zuroff, D. C. (1997). Interpersonal responses to treats to status and interpersonal relatedness: Effects of dependency and self-criticism. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 36, 521-542.

Thompson R., & Zuroff, D. C. (1999). Development of self-criticism in adolescent girls: Roles of maternal dissatisfaction, maternal coldness, and insecure attachment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28, 197-210.

Vaillant, G. E. (1974). Natural history of male psychological health: II. Some antecedents of healthy adult adjustment. Archives of General Psychiatry, 31, 15-22.

Vaillant, G. E. (1976). Natural history of male psychological health: V. The relation of choice of ego mechanisms of defense to adult adjustment. Archives of General Psychiatry, 33, 535-545.

Vaillant, G. E. (1977). Adaptation to life. Boston: Little, Brown.

Vaillant, G. E. (1994). Ego mechanisms of defense and personality psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 44-50.

Vaillant, G. E., & Vaillant, C. O. (1992). A cross-validation of two methods of investigating defenses. In G. E. Vaillant (Ed.), Ego mechanisms of defense: A guide for clinicians and researchers (pp. 159-170). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

Vettese, L. C., & Mongrain, M. (2000). Communication about the self and partner in the relationships of dependents and self-critics. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 609-626.

Watson, D., Hubbard, B., & Wiese, D. (2000). General traits of personality and affectivity as predictors of satisfaction in intimate relationships: Evidence from self- and partner-ratings. Journal of Personality, 68, 413-449.

Winter, D. (1973). The power motive. New York: Free Press.

Zuroff, D. C. (1994). Depressive personality styles and the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 453-472.

Zuroff, D. C., & Fitzpatrick, D. (1995). Depressive personality styles: Implications for adult attachment. Personality and Individual Differences, 18, 253-365.

Zuroff, D. C., Igreja, I., & Mongrain, M. (1990). Dysfunctional attitudes, dependency, and self- criticism as predictors of depressive mood states: A 12-month longitudinal study. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 14, 315-326.

Zuroff, D. C., Moskowitz, D. S., Wielgus, M. S., Powers, T. A., & Franko, D. L. (1983). Construct validation of the dependency and self-criticism scales of the depressive experiences questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 17, 226-241.