An empirical look at the Defense Mechanism Test (DMT): Reliability and construct validity

Abstract

Although the Defense Mechanism Test (DMT) has been in use for almost half a century, there are still quite contradictory views about whether it is a reliable instrument, and if so, what it really measures. Thus, based on data from 39 female students, we first examined DMT inter-coder reliability by analyzing the agreement among trained judges in their coding of the same DMT protocols. Second, we constructed a "parallel" photographic picture that retained all structural characteristic of the original and analyzed DMT parallel-test reliability. Third, we examined the construct validity of the DMT by (a) employing three self-report defense-mechanism inventories and analyzing the intercorrelations between DMT defense scores and corresponding defenses in these instruments, (b) studying the relationships between DMT responses and scores on trait and state anxiety, and (c) relating DMT-defense scores to measures of self-esteem. The main results showed that the DMT can be coded with high reliability by trained coders, that the parallel-test reliability is unsatisfactory compared to traditional psychometric standards, that there is a certain generalizability in the number of perceptual distortions that people display from one picture to another, and that the construct validation provided meager empirical evidence for the conclusion that the DMT measures what it purports to measure, that is, psychological defense mechanisms.