Familial dyadic patterns in defenses and object relations

The Dyadic Complexity Formula

“…Cook (1994) stated that "it is important to understand how patterns of dyadic interaction fit into the broader context of the family system" (p. 500). Similarly, Juni (1992) noted that "acting out styles (of behavior) correlate most consistently within the familial dyads" (p. 266). Interactions between any two members of a family may be referred to as a "dyadic exchange.…”

Theistic Dissonance Among Religious Jewish Holocaust Survivors: A Psychodynamic Perspective

“…(Personality research has shown that significant differentials among individuals in the degree of their need for relationships correlate with a wide array of adaptive functioning; e.g. Grimm, Brannon, & Juni, 1997;Juni, 1992Juni, , 2009Juni & Cohen, 1985;Juni, Gross, & Sokolowska, 2006;Juni, Ottomanelli, & Fine, 1992). Even more so in traumatic situations, the greater the need for object relations, the more damaging the negative effects to be expected based on perceived betrayal.…”

Academic Cheating as a Function of Defense Mechanisms and Object Relations

“…This measure has been shown to have reliability and validity indices which exceed those of the individual inventory components (Juni & Yanishevsky, 1983). Validity studies for the object relations measure cover a wide range of dispositions and behaviors which include, as illlustrations, tendency to accept feedback (Juni, 1982b), manifesting differential partial sexual erogeneity (Juni & Cohen , 1985), quality of familial relationships (Juni, 1992)) safe sex behaviors (Juni, OttomaneUi, & Fine, 1992), sex roles (Juni & Grimm, 1994)) and marital satisfaction (Grimm, Brannon, & Juni, 1997).…”

“…Turning Against the Object is an "acting out" response dealing with conflicts through externalizing frustration (Juni & Masling, 1980) where the experience of being threatened is transformed into making a threat. Projection involves blaming others for the source of personal difficulties to alleviate anxiety (Juni, 1979(Juni, , 1992. Reversal of Affect minimizes the severity of threats by failing to admit the existence of otherwise obvious dangers and uses the more general repressive defenses of denial, reaction formation, repression, and negation (Juni, 1981).…”