z-logo
Premium
Further Distinctions between Coping and Defense Mechanisms?
Author(s) -
Miceli Maria,
Castelfranchi Cristiano
Publication year - 2001
Publication title -
journal of personality
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.082
H-Index - 144
eISSN - 1467-6494
pISSN - 0022-3506
DOI - 10.1111/1467-6494.00146
Subject(s) - coping (psychology) , psychology , confusion , unconscious mind , cognition , cognitive psychology , social psychology , defence mechanisms , clinical psychology , neuroscience , psychoanalysis , biochemistry , chemistry , gene
In the current literature there is a great confusion between coping and defense mechanisms. As Cramer (1998) points out, a distinction between them is both possible and worthwhile in that they possess different cognitive features. Cramer proposes two basic criteria: the conscious/unconscious and the intentional/unintentional nature of the processes. We focus on a further criterion, the manipulation versus revision of one’s mental attitudes, which so far has been neglected in the relevant literature. We suggest that responses to adversity implying manipulation are typical of defense mechanisms, while those implying the revision of one’s mental attitudes characterize coping strategies. Finally, we address emotion‐focused coping as the area where coping and defense meet, and we suggest that responses displaying defensive features should be excluded from the category of coping in accordance with the distinctions identified.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom