CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 89Attachment and Relationship DynamicsPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

The challenge of treatment for clients with dismissing states of mind

Dozier, Mary, Lomax, Laura, Tyrrell, Christine L., Lee, Spring W.·2001·Attachment & Human Development
DOI 10.1080/14616730122704
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Thirty-four clients with serious psychopathological disorders were videotaped solving interpersonal problems with significant others or with case managers. Differential reliance on dismissing states of mind was examined in relation to behavioral ratings of clients during the interactions, and in relation to changes in clients' and partners' reports of feelings. Clients who relied more on dismissing strategies showed greater rejection of significant others, but not of case managers, compared with clients who relied more on preoccupied strategies. The partners of dismissing clients reported greater sadness following problem-solving interactions than the partners of preoccupied clients. Clients who relied more on dismissing strategies spent less time on task when interacting with their case managers than clients who relied more on preoccupied strategies, and reported more confusion following these interactions. These findings suggest that treatment is likely to provide a particularly challenging context for adults with dismissing states of mind.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14616730122704

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Factors such as dismissive attachment, perfectionism, shame, and devaluation have tended to predict worse outcome in treatment of narcissistic personality disorder.

    “Factors, such as dismissive attachment, perfectionism, shame, and devaluation, have tended to predict worse outcome (90–93).”

    From Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Progress in Understanding and Treatment (2022) · cites this paper as [92]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dozier, M., Lomax, L., Tyrrell, C. L., & Lee, S. W.
Affiliations
University of Delaware (US)
ORCID
Dozier, Mary
Venue
Attachment & Human Development
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2001-04
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
62-76
ISSN
  • 1461-6734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-2988
DOI
10.1080/14616730122704
OpenAlex
W2132263949
Cited by
88
References
17
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
FWCI
4.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Attachment & Human Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (7r29mh044691-06)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH052135, MH-44691, MH52135)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
social problem solving, case managers, attachment styles, psychopathological disorders, treatment challenges, attachment-based psychotherapy
MeSH terms
Adult, Bipolar Disorder, Defense Mechanisms, Family Relations, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Middle Aged, Object Attachment, Personality Assessment, Problem Solving, Professional-Patient Relations, Psychotherapy, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Case Management

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