Long-Term Effects Of Adoption: An Empirical Study Of Adult Adoptees

Mary G. Lieberman; John D. Morris

摘要

The present study seeks to identify psychological differences between extrafamilial adult adoptees and a non-adopted comparison group through projective tests and life history interviews. Two demographically matched groups (18 adoptees and 16 non-adoptees) were administered the Thematic Apperception Test and Loevinger's Sentence Completion Test (a measure of Ego Stage). The TAT was scored thematically for "Alienation" and McClelland's "Need For Affiliation". Interview data were examined for corroboration or refutation of themes present in the projective tests. Results indicated no between group differences in Ego Stage however adoptees were significantly higher on some "Alienation" scores and non-adoptees were significantly higher on some "Affiliation" scores (p < .05). In addition, adoption status was predictable (p < .05) from a discriminant analysis using variables that had significantly zero-order correlations with it . Introduction The purpose of this study was to compare extrafamilial adult adoptees and a group of non-adoptees on the Thematic Apperception Test and Loevinger's Sentence Completion Test. The TAT was scored using McClelland's “Need for Affiliation” and a system specifically developed for this study, called “Alienation.” The Sentence Completion Test yields a measure of Ego Stage. In addition various demographic variables were collected for descriptive purposes. Life history interviews were administered to the adopted group for the purpose of examining themes emergent in the projective tests.Adoptee research has been plagued by a dearth of comparative studies and statistical analyses, largely relying instead upon clinical case studies, interviews, and intuitive essays. Studies that do compare adoptees and nonadoptees have been inconclusive with respect to their findings. Most rely on standardized instruments to evaluate between group differences, rather than instruments, interviews, and questionnaires, designed to elicit material salient for adoptees.Cubito (1999) compared adoptees to normative data utilizing the Brief Symptom inventory as a measure of overall distress, the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale, and the Anger Content Scale of the MMPI-2. Adoptees were compared to two normative scales; one for everyday people in our society, and one for a sample of outpatient mental health clinic patients. The overall finding was the adoptees scored about halfway between the outpatient and normative data on all of the test instruments. The same author found another sample of adoptees to score significantly higher (p<.01) on the same measures of overall distress and depression but not on the anger scale when compared with normative data for these tests (Cubito, 1996). Cubito and Brandon (2000) reported higher levels of psychological maladjustment among adult adoptees when compared to normative data; however, their scores did not approach those levels of a typical outpatient population. Their study also found that females scored higher on a scale measuring anger. Fletcher (1997) compared adopted and nonadopted adults with a survey instrument designed to identify correlates of psychosocial adjustment. Overall, the nonadopted group manifested better adjustment than the adopted group. Like the Cubito studies however, both groups were within the normal range of adjustment. Over four thousand adopted adolescents were compared to the same number of nonadopted adolescents on nine (9) factors of emotional and behavioral adjustment and three factors of family functioning. The study found that adoptees showed lower levels of adjustment on nine of the twelve scales (Sharma, McGue, & Benson, 1996). Earlier studies (Maughan, Collishaw, & Pickles, 1998) found that adopted women showed very positive adult adjustment in all areas; however, adopted men have difficulty in the employment and social support domains. Wasserman (1998) compared the psychosocial adjustment of a group of young adults who had been adopted as children with tha

机译：本研究旨在通过射影测验和生活史访谈来确定家庭外成年被收养人与未收养的比较组之间的心理差异。对两个在人口统计学上相匹配的组（18个被采用者和16个未采用者）进行了主题知觉测试和Loevinger句子完成测试（衡量自我阶段）。 TAT在主题上获得了“异化”和麦克莱兰德的“需要加入”的评分。检查面试数据以证实或否定投射测试中存在的主题。结果表明，在自我阶段，两组之间没有差异，但是在某些“异化”得分上，被领养者明显更高，而在某些“隶属度”得分上，未领养的人明显更高（p <.05）。此外，采用判别分析使用与变量具有显着零级相关性的判别分析，采用状态是可预测的（p <.05）。引言本研究的目的是比较主题知觉测验和Loevinger句子完成测验对成年家庭外收养者和一组未收养者的影响。 TAT是使用McClelland的“需要加入”和专门为该研究开发的系统“ Alienation”进行评分的。句子完成测验可测度自我阶段。另外，出于描述目的，收集了各种人口统计学变量。为了检查射影测试中出现的主题，对被收养的人群进行了生活史访谈。被收养者的研究由于缺乏比较研究和统计分析而备受困扰，而很大程度上依赖于临床案例研究，访谈和直观文章。确实比较收养者和未收养者的研究在其发现方面尚无定论。大多数人依靠标准化的工具来评估组间差异，而不是通过工具，访谈和问卷来评估被收养者的重要性。Cubito（1999年）将被收养人与标准数据进行了比较，并使用“简短症状”清单来衡量整体困扰。 Zung自评抑郁量表和MMPI-2的愤怒内容量表。将收养者与两个标准量表进行了比较。一个用于我们社会中的日常生活，另一个用于门诊精神卫生诊所患者的样本。总体发现是，被采纳者在所有测试工具的门诊和规范数据之间得分大约为一半。同一作者发现，与这些测试的规范数据相比，在相同的整体苦恼和抑郁测量中，收养者的另一个样本得分更高（p <.01），但在愤怒量表上却没有（Cubito，1996）。 Cubito和Brandon（2000）报道，与标准数据相比，成年收养者的心理失调水平更高。但是，他们的得分没有达到典型门诊患者的水平。他们的研究还发现，女性在测量愤怒上的得分更高。弗莱彻（Fletcher，1997）用一种旨在识别社会心理适应相关因素的调查工具，对已收养和未收养的成年人进行了比较。总体而言，未采用的组比采用的组表现出更好的调整。但是，像Cubito研究一样，两组均处于正常的调整范围内。在九（9）个情绪和行为调节因素以及家庭功能的三个因素中，将四千多名收养的青少年与相同数量的未收养青少年进行了比较。研究发现，收养者在十二个量表中的九个上显示出较低的适应水平（Sharma，McGue和Benson，1996）。较早的研究（Maughan，Collishaw和Pickles，1998年）发现，被收养的妇女在各个领域都表现出非常积极的成年人适应能力;但是，被收养的人在就业和社会支持领域有困难。瓦瑟曼（Wasserman，1998年）比较了一群被收养为儿童的年轻人的社会心理适应能力。

Long-Term Effects Of Adoption: An Empirical Study Of Adult Adoptees

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅