Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 421

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

An objective instrument for measuring defense mechanisms.

Gleser, Goldine C., Ihilevich, David·1969·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

measure the relative intensity of usage of five major groups of defenses, is described. The inventory consists of 10 brief stories, two per conflict area, followed by four questions regarding S's actual behavior, fantasy behavior, thoughts, and feelings in the situations described. Five responses typifying the five defenses (i.e., hostility-out, projection, principalization, turning-against-self, and reversal) are provided for each question, from which S selects the one most representative and the one least representative of his reaction. Reliability, validity, and normative studies are presented, all indicating that this inventory has many potential uses as a clinical and research instrument. Increased preoccupation with the theory of ego processes during the last few decades has led to greater concentration on operational definition, classification, and measurement of various ego functions. Recently, several in-vestigators (e.g., Haan, 1963; Kroeber, 1963) have made progress in differentiating and assessing defensive and adaptive ego function-ing. However, there is still much need for ob-jective studies in this area. This preliminary report on the construction and validation of a new instrument designed specifically for the measurement of five general defense mecha-nisms should be, therefore, of considerable interest to researchers and clinicians. Many defense mechanisms have been identi-fied, some with rather tenuous differences. This multiplicity has led to attempts to achieve a more parsimonious classification

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/h0027381

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 421

Metadata

Authors
Gleser, G. C., & Ihilevich, D.
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
1969
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
51-60
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2114765081
Cited by
421
References
0
FWCI
17.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An objective instrument for measuring defense mechanisms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/h0027381
The paper
Gleser, G. C., & Ihilevich, D. (1969). An objective instrument for measuring defense mechanisms. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027381

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.