Abstract
The present study investigated compartmentalization and self-complexity of self-structure in people with a history of bipolar disorder. Remitted bipolar, recovered depressed and healthy control participants described aspects of themselves using experimenter-provided positive and negative traits. Compartmentalization was assessed by the partitioning of positive and negative traits between self-aspects. Complexity was assessed by both the number of self-aspects people generated and the degree of overlap between the self-aspects. The remitted bipolar and recovered depressed groups demonstrated greater compartmentalization than healthy controls and the remitted bipolar group also demonstrated greater self-complexity than healthy controls when self-aspects relating to the depressed and manic states were included. Compartmentalization may be a generic feature of mood disorder. In addition, bipolar disorder is characterized by a complex, differentiated self-concept with distinctive beliefs about the self in depressed and manic states. Therapeutic implications are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
From the overall ratio of positive and negative words chosen across the whole sort, expected frequencies of positive and negative words within each self-aspect can be computed. As these represent chance values, Cramer’s V can then be used to assess the deviation from a random sort. Cramer’s V ranges from 0 to 1, with 0 representing a wholly random sort and 1 representing a perfectly compartmentalized sort.
Overlap is computed as follows:
$$ OL = (\Sigma _i \Sigma _j C_{ij} )/T_i )/n*(n - 1) $$C relates to the number of common features in 2 aspects, T the total number of features in the referent self-aspect and n refers to the total number of aspects within the individual’s sort. OL is derived by first computing the pair-wise communality between the referent aspect and all other aspects in terms of the proportion of traits in common, within the total number of traits in the referent aspect. As pair-wise comparisons are conducted between all combinations of two groups, each aspect becomes the referent aspect. The mean of all proportions of pair-wise comparisons is then computed to provide an index of OL. In the present study, OL was computed for each participant across all aspects and subsequent to the ‘illness’ self-aspects being omitted in the two mood-disorder groups.
References
American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th rev.ed. Washington DC, USA: American Psychiatric Association.
Bech, P., Rafaelson, O. J., Kramp, P., & Bolwig, T. G. (1978). The mania rating scale: scale construction and inter-observer agreement. Neuropharmacology, 17, 430–431.
Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996) Beck Depression Inventory -II. London: The Psychological Corporation, Harcourt Brace & Company.
Cramer, H. (1974). Mathematical models of statistics. Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press.
Francis, W. N., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage. lexicon and grammar. Boston, Mass.: Houghton and MifflH:\journals\Springer\Space\10608\9027\Stage300\Upload\Author\10608_2006_9027_OnlinePDF.pdf.
Gara, M. A., Woolfolk, R. L., Cohen, B. D., Goldston, R. B., Allen, L. A., & Novalany, J. (1993). Perception of self and other in major depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 102, 93–100.
Hammen, C., & Gitlin, M. (1997). Stress reactivity in bipolar patients and its relation to prior history of disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154, 856–857.
Jamison, K. R. (1996). An unquiet mind. London: Picador.
Lam, D. H., Jones, S. H., Hayward, P., & Bright, J. A. (1999). Cognitive therapy for bipolar disorder. London: Wiley.
Linville, P. W. (1985). Self-complexity and affective extremity: Don’t put all your eggs in one cognitive basket. Social Cognition, 3, 94–120.
Linville, P. W. (1987). Self-complexity as a cognitive buffer against stress-related illness and depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 663–676.
Lyon, H. M., Startup, M., & Bentall, R. P. (1999). Social cognition and the manic defense: Attributions, selective attention and self-schema in bipolar affective disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108, 273–282.
Nelson, H. E. (1991). National adult reading test. Windsor: NFER- Nelson.
Piotrowski, C., Sherry, D., & Keller, J. W. (1985). Psychodiagnostic test usage: a survey of the society for personality assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 115–119.
Power, M. J., de Jong, F., & Lloyd, A. (2002). The organization of the self-concept in bipolar disorders: An empirical study and replication. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 26, 553–561.
Rafaeli-Mor, E., Gotlib, I. H., & Revelle, W. (1999). The meaning and measurement of self-complexity. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 341–356.
Showers, C. (1992). Compartmentalization of positive and negative self-knowledge: Keeping bad apples out of the bunch. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 1036–1049.
Showers, C. (2000). Self-organization in emotional contexts. In J.P. Forgas, (Ed.) Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Showers, C. Abramson, L. Y., & Hogan, M. E. (1998). The dynamic self: How the content and structure of the self-concept change with mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 478–493.
Showers, C., & Kling, K. C. (1996). Organization of self-knowledge: Implications for recovery from sad mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 578–590.
Steer, R. A., Beck, A. T., & Garrison, B. (1985) Applications of the Beck Depression Inventory. In N. Sartorius, & T.A. Ban (Eds.), Assessment of depression. New York: Springer-Verlag .
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.
Young, R. C., Biggs, J. T., Ziegler, V. E., Meyer, & D. A. (1978). A rating scale for mania: Reliability, validity and sensitivity. British Journal of Psychiatry, 133, 429–435.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
The self-concept task was comprised of 40 self-descriptive adjectives, including 20 positive words and 20 negative words. The words were drawn largely from previous research within this area (Showers & Kling, 1996). Positive and negative words were matched for approximate word length and frequency within the English language using word frequency tables. Each word was presented on a single white card (size 8 cm × 8 cm) and printed in Arial Bold, size 16 points typeface. Drawing from previous research in this area, administration of the task was derived from that of Linville (1987) and Showers (1992). Participants were presented with 40 cards each containing a personal adjective of either positive or negative valence. Participants were required to think of as many aspects of themselves and their lives as they could and sort the cards into groups, with each group describing an individual aspect. An example of a sort is presented below.
Sample sort
Mother | Partner | Artist | Friend | Depressed | Manic | Future |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
communicative | energetic | capable | fun | disagreeing | assertive | assertive |
fun | irritable | creative | kind | distracted | capable | confident |
honest | lazy | interested | outgoing | failure | confident | intelligent |
interested | tense | successful | hopeless | energetic | interested | |
kind | indecisive | fun | optimistic | |||
irritable | inferior | honest | successful | |||
irritable | independent | |||||
isolated | intelligent | |||||
lazy | interested | |||||
moody | disagreeing | |||||
sad | indecisive | |||||
tense | insecure | |||||
weak | moody | |||||
weary | tense | |||||
worthless | weary |
Participants were provided with the following instructions (adapted from Linville, 1985):
In this study, I am interested in how you describe yourself. There are forty cards in front of you. Each card contains the name of a characteristic, which could be used to describe a person. Characteristics can be grouped together to describe certain aspects of a person or their life. Your task is to think of the different aspects of yourself or your life and then sort the cards into groups where each group describes an aspect of yourself or your life. These aspects may include different roles you have in life such as you as a friend or you in different situations such as you at work or even you when you are feeling different things such as when you are happy or sad. You may sort the cards into as many groups as you wish but please remember to think about yourself while doing this. Each group of characteristics should describe a different aspect of yourself. Form as many or as few groups as you wish and continue forming until you feel you have formed all the important ones. Please stop when you feel that you are straining to form more groups.
Each group may contain as few or as many cards as you wish. You do not have to use every characteristic, only those that are descriptive of you in that aspect. Each characteristic may also be used in more than one group, so please keep reusing cards as many times as you like. For example, you may find that you want to use the characteristic kind in several aspects.
I have a sheet, which has a list of all the characteristics. I would like you to form one aspect at a time by providing me with a label or name of that aspect or group such as ‘wife’ or ‘me when I’m in a group of people socially’. I’d then like you to choose the characteristics, which describe you in this aspect. Please call them out to me as you are collecting them so that I can note them down.
You are free to choose which ever groups and aspects you wish.
At this stage, participants in the Remitted Bipolar and Recovered Depressed groups were given an additional instruction, which participants in the healthy control group did not receive.
The only thing that I would ask is that you also include you when you have been depressed (Recovered Depressed group) and also when you have been manic (Remitted Bipolar group). Other than this you are free to form the groups as you wish.
All participants received the following instructions.
As you are doing the task I ask you to remember a few things. Firstly, you are describing yourself, not people in general. You do not have to use all the cards and you may re-use cards in several groups. Take as much time as you like. Do you have any questions? Please let me know if you want me to explain in more detail what any of the characteristics mean.
The card-sort task also included 2 supplementary rating scales using a 7 point Likert scale for each self-aspect group generated, one which assessed Positivity of the aspect and one which assessed Importance. The instructions for this part of the task were as follows:
On the top scale, I would like you to rate how important each aspect is to you in terms of how central it is to your life (Example).
On the bottom scale I would also like you to rate how positive or negative each aspect is to you.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Taylor, J.L., Morley, S. & Barton, S.B. Self-Organization in Bipolar Disorder: Compartmentalization and Self-Complexity. Cogn Ther Res 31, 83–96 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-006-9069-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-006-9069-y