Sociodemographic characteristics
The sociodemographic characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 1. There were 112 participants who agreed to participate in the study. Participants were recruited from different training centers and regions in Romania: Bucharest, Cluj-Napoca, Timisoara, Târgu Mures, and Sibiu. The average age of the lot was 27 (26–30) years, and there were 71 women (63.4%), with an average period of work in the field of 7 (3–42) months. Most residents were in the first year (38.4%), while 27.2% and 20.2% of the residents were in the fourth and third years, respectively.
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of the participants
Number of participants
|
112
|
Age [years](a)
|
27.0 (26.0 - 30.0)
|
Gender (female)(b)
|
71 (63.4%)
|
Citizenship(b)
|
Romanian
|
110 (98.2%)
|
Other
|
2(1.8%)
|
Education(b)
|
Bachelor's degree
|
108 (96.5%)
|
Master's degree
|
3 (2.6%)
|
PhD
|
1 (0.9%)
|
Year of residency(a)
|
2 (1 - 4)
|
Experience in psychiatry [months](a)
|
24 (7 - 41)
|
Civil status(b)
|
Married
|
32 (28.6%)
|
Unmarried
|
70 (62.5%)
|
Single
|
4 (3.6%)
|
Cohabiting partnership
|
6 (5.3%)
|
Number of children(a)
|
None
|
94 (83.9%)
|
One
|
14 (12.5%)
|
Two
|
4 (3.6%)
|
Working period [months](a)
|
7 (3 - 42)
|
Religion(b)
|
Orthodox
|
86 (76.8%)
|
Catholic
|
5 (4.5%)
|
Greco-catholic
|
1 (0.9%)
|
Reformed
|
3 (2.7%)
|
Agnostic
|
2 (1.8%)
|
Independent
|
1 (0.9%)
|
Atheist
|
5 (4.4%)
|
Undeclared
|
9 (8.0%)
|
(a)Continuous variables (with non-Gaussian distribution) are indicated by their median (interquartile range-IQR).
(b)Categorical variables are presented by absolute frequency and percentage in the sample.
More than half of the participants were unmarried (62.5%) and do not have children (83.9%). We also observed that more than half of the participants had a Christian orthodox religion (76.8%).
Table 2 presents the description of all coping strategies with problem-focused and emotion-based coping styles with a median of 36 (33 – 40) and 51 (47 – 56), respectively.
Table 2. Description of coping strategies.
Coping style
|
Median
|
25%
|
75%
|
Minimum
|
Maximum
|
Problem-focused
|
36
|
33
|
40
|
22
|
48
|
Emotion-focused
|
51
|
47
|
56
|
31
|
74
|
Social support
|
32.5
|
29
|
37
|
17
|
46
|
Avoidant
|
27
|
24
|
31
|
17
|
44
|
The dominant coping style was “problem-focused” for almost half of the participants (46.1%). The emotion-focused coping style was the dominant coping style for 26.3% of participants, while, for 25% of participants, the dominant coping style was social support. Moreover, 2.6% of the participants used avoidance-type coping as their dominant coping style.
Table 3 shows a description of the defensive mechanisms for both adaptive and nonadaptive strategies. Superior adaptation has a median of 95 (86–105), while mental inhibition and minor distortion presented a median of 52.5 (41–63) and 20 (15–26.5), respectively.
Table 3. Description of defensive mechanisms
Defensive mechanism
|
Median
|
25%
|
75%
|
Minimum
|
Maximum
|
Superior adaptation
|
95
|
86
|
105
|
61
|
129
|
Disavowal
|
23
|
19.5
|
28
|
10
|
52
|
Mental inhibition
|
52.5
|
41
|
63
|
28
|
92
|
Major distortion
|
21
|
14
|
28
|
8
|
51
|
Minor distortion
|
20
|
15
|
26.5
|
8
|
43
|
Action
|
27.5
|
22
|
36
|
10
|
59
|
We observed significantly consistent correlations (ranging from 0.2 to 0.5) between adaptive defense mechanisms and coping focused on the problem, emotion, or seeking social support. First, a significant positive correlation between superior adaptation and problem-focused coping style (Spearman’s r = 0.381, p < 0.01) was observed. We also found a significant positive correlation between superior adaptation and emotion-focused coping (Spearman’s r = 0.266, p < 0.01) and social support coping (Spearman’s r = 0.255, p < 0.01). Furthermore, the superior adaptation mechanism was negatively correlated with avoidant coping strategy (Spearman’s r = -0.091, p = 0.338) (Table 4).
The avoidant coping strategies were correlated with defense styles that are not adaptive (correlations between 0.2 and 0.5). More precisely, we observed a significant positive correlation between major distortion and avoidant coping style (Spearman’s r = 0.420, p < 0.001), between mental inhibition and avoidant coping style (Spearman’s r = 0.415, p < 0.001), and between action and avoidant coping style (Spearman’s r = 0.410, p < 0.001).
Another significant positive correlation was found between major distortion and social support coping mechanisms (Spearman’s r = 0.222, p = 0.019) and minor distortion and social support coping mechanisms (Spearman’s r = 0.202, p = 0.033). In contrast, disavowal and mental inhibition were not significantly correlated with social support coping style (Spearman’s r = 0.163, p = 0.086; Spearman’s r = 0.143, p = 0.134, respectively). Moreover, disavowal, mental inhibition, and major and minor distortions were significantly correlated neither with problem-focused coping nor with emotion-focused coping.
Table 4. Correlations between defensive mechanisms and coping strategies
Parameters
|
Problem-focused
|
Emotion-focused
|
Social support
|
Avoidant
|
Superior adaptation
|
0.381**
|
0.266**
|
0.255**
|
-0.091
|
Disavowal
|
0.027
|
0.059
|
0.163
|
0.191*
|
Mental inhibition
|
0.035
|
0.109
|
0.143
|
0.415**
|
Major distortion
|
-0.158
|
-0.112
|
0.222*
|
0.420**
|
Minor distortion
|
0.057
|
0.098
|
0.202*
|
0.277**
|
Action
|
-0.070
|
-0.069
|
0.198*
|
0.410**
|
*significant correlation at 0.05 level
** significant correlation at 0.01 level
We grouped coping and defense mechanisms into two types of adaptive processes: one type of adaptive process includes mature (or well adaptive) defenses and all forms of active coping (focused on the problem, focused on emotion, or focused on seeking social support); the other type includes nonadaptive defense mechanisms and avoidant coping (Figure 1).
Our model presented GFIs (X2(34) = 64.324, p < 0.001, GFI = 0.93, RMSE = 0.08). Moreover, the results indicated a very weak association (r = 0.07, p < 0.001) between the two types of adaptive processes. Correlation values close to zero were found between avoidant coping and adaptive defense mechanisms and between non-avoidant coping (problem-focused, emotion-focused) and non-adaptive defenses.