• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • Theses and Dissertations
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of TUScholarShareCommunitiesDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsGenresThis CollectionDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsGenres

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Help

    AboutPeoplePoliciesHelp for DepositorsData DepositFAQs

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Explicitly rejecting an implicit dichotomy: An integration of two contrasting approaches to assessing dependency

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    Name:
    umi-temple-1010.pdf
    Size:
    214.2Kb
    Format:
    PDF
    Download
    Genre
    Thesis/Dissertation
    Date
    2008
    Author
    Cogswell, Peter Alex
    Advisor
    Alloy, Lauren B.
    Committee member
    Karpinski, Andrew
    Fauber, Robert L.
    Bornstein, Robert F.
    Overton, Willis F.
    Drabick, Deborah A.
    Department
    Counseling Psychology
    Subject
    Psychology, Clinical
    Psychology, Personality
    Permanent link to this record
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/3646
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    DOI
    http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/3628
    Abstract
    Proponents of self-report and projective assessment traditions have approached the assessment of interpersonal dependency quite differently, in ways that are only recently becoming more aligned. The present study aimed to address the increasing convergence between the two sides, administering both self-report measures and a newly developed implicit measure of dependency in an attempt to characterize more precisely the relations between these seemingly disparate approaches. The study was moderately successful in validating the implicit measure using criteria proposed by two independent groups (Asendorpf, Banse, & Mucke, 2002; Bornstein, 2002). The implicit measure was found to be reliable, orthogonal to two self-report dependency instruments, and predictive of external criteria such as other personality constructs and past depression. This success, however, was hampered by the study's inability to replicate prior findings using a task assessing help-seeking, identified as a behavioral indicator of dependency. All implicit and self-report dependency indices were unrelated to all measures of help-seeking, which prevented any further analyses; potential explanations for the failure of this task are proposed in the Discussion. This study also provided an examination of dissociations between participants' scores on self-report and implicit measures of dependency, and has implications for the significance of such dissociations. That is, the possibility that dissociations themselves are pathological was not supported, and it was found that dissociations between self-report and implicit dependency scores were associated with different patterns of responding on a broadband personality instrument. Finally, the present study offered additional evidence for the relation between dependency and depressive sypmtomatology, and further identified implicit dependency as contributing unique variance in the prediction of past major depressive episodes.
    ADA compliance
    For Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu
    Collections
    Theses and Dissertations

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Temple University Libraries | 1900 N. 13th Street | Philadelphia, PA 19122
    (215) 204-8212 | scholarshare@temple.edu
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.