Regular Article Psychother Psychosom 1998;67:24–30 The French Version of the Defense Style Questionnaire Ch. Bonsack J.N. Despland J. Spagnoli Département Universitaire de Psychiatrie Adulte (DUPA) Lausanne, Suisse OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Key Words Defense mechanisms Rating scales Test validity Test reliability Personality measures OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Abstract Background: Bond et al. developed the Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ), a self-questionnaire that aims at empirically measuring conscious derivatives of defense mechanisms. The original analysis yielded 4 factors called Defense Styles (DS). DSQ discriminates between mature and immature defense styles. Objectives: Determine if the French version of DSQ has (a) face validity, (b) a similar structure to the original version, (c) internal consistency, (d) grouping of defense mechanisms into clinically pertinent defense styles, (e) evidence of nonpatients using more mature defense styles, (f) correlation with Defensive Functioning Scale (DFS) (DSM-IV) [2]. Methods: Reliability and validity study on 82 control subjects and 140 patients, 59 among them evaluated for defensive level. Results: Factor analysis of controls sample yielded 4 factors ranging from immature to mature defense styles. DSQ scores on factor I (mal- adaptive style) are significantly higher in outpatients than in controls. Mal- adaptive style score correlates with clinical evaluation of defensive level of functioning (DFS). Conclusion: Psychometric features of the French version are similar to the original scale, although minor differences in individual defense mechanisms are present. Factor I (maladaptive defense style) remains more stable than other factors, accounts for most of variance contribution, has high internal consistency and applies to behaviors, i.e. conscious derivatives of defense mechanisms that can be easily identified. The French version of DSQ is (a) an easy and economical way to rate immature defense style in popula- tions of ‘neurotic’ and borderline patients and (b) further provides a hierarchi- cal grouping of defense mechanisms in defense styles. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Charles Bonsack, MD Policlinique Psychiatrique A Sévelin 18 CH–1004 Lausanne (Switzerland) Tel. +41 21 626 13 26, Fax + 41 21 626 11 55, E-Mail Charles.Bonsack@inst.hospvd.ch ABC Fax + 41 61 306 12 34 E-Mail karger@karger. ch www.karger.com © 1998 S. Karger AG, Basel 0033–3190/98/0671–0024$15.00/0 This article is also accessible online at: http://BioMedNet.com/ karger Introduction Defense mechanisms is a psychoanalytic concept that has been well operationalized for empirical studies [1]. Indeed, it is the first psychoanalytic concept to be in- cluded in the fourth Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder as a ‘proposed axis for further study’. In this manual, defense mechanisms are considered equiva- lent to coping mechanisms and defined as ‘automatic psy- chological processes that protect the individual against anxiety and from the awareness of internal or external dangers or stressors [...]. The individual defense mecha- nisms are divided conceptually and empirically into relat- ed groups that are referred to as Defense Levels‘ [2]. Considering coping and defense styles as equivalent can be confusing, and others prefer to differentiate both concepts, coping mechanismes as being flexible and posi- tively oriented toward adaptation to reality and defense