Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
Tip: To quickly return to the issue’s Table of Contents from an article…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

You can go back to to the issue’s Table of Contents in one click by clicking on the article title in the article view. What’s more, it will take you to the specific place in the TOC where the article appears.

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Gillett, E. (1987). Defence Mechanisms Versus Defence Contents. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 68:261-269.

(1987). International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 68:261-269

Defence Mechanisms Versus Defence Contents

Eric Gillett


My formulation of the distinction drawn by Wallerstein between defence mechanisms and defence contents (or other defensive behaviours) emphasizes two differences: (a) Defence mechanisms have an innate basis and originate with the differentiation of the rest of the ego, whereas defence contents are compromise formations produced by a complex process in which the defence mechanisms play an important part. (b) Defence mechanisms and their activity are unable to become conscious under any conditions, whereas defence contents, if not repressed, are capable of becoming conscious.

I clarify this distinction by using the concept of a causal chain in which the defence content is the proximal cause of the defence effect, defined by Brenner as the minimization of unpleasurable affect, and the operation of the defence mechanism is a more distal cause through its role in causing the defence content.

I compare my views with those of Brenner, Schafer, and Wallerstein regarding this distinction.

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2020, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.