Discriminant Analysis of Cluster B Personality Disorders Based on The Type of Defense Mechanism and Empathy

Babak  Asghari; Parviz  Sabahi; Nima Hajitabar  Firouzjaei

doi:10.18502/tbj.v24i5.21976

Babak Asghari M.A. in Clinical Psychology, Department of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran
Parviz Sabahi Associate Professor, Department of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran.
Nima Hajitabar Firouzjaei M.A. in Clinical Psychology, Department of Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/tbj.v24i5.21976

Keywords: Cluster B Personality Disorders, Defense Mechanisms, Empathy, Discriminant Analysis

Abstract

Introduction: Cluster B personality disorders (antisocial, borderline, narcissistic, and histrionic personality disorders) are often difficult to differentiate because of substantial clinical overlap. Drawing on a psychodynamic and social–cognitive framework that incorporates emotion regulation, unconscious defensive processes, and interpersonal functioning, this study examined whether defense mechanisms and empathy dimensions could differentiate these diagnostic groups.

Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2024 and included 100 participants, comprising 80 patients with Cluster B personality disorders (20 individuals in each of the borderline, antisocial, narcissistic, and histrionic personality disorder groups) and 20 healthy controls. Data were collected using the Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ) and the Davis Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI). The data were analyzed using multivariate discriminant analysis in SPSS version 26.

Results: Individuals with antisocial and narcissistic personality disorders reported greater use of immature defense mechanisms and lower levels of empathic concern than the other groups. Participants with borderline personality disorder reported higher levels of personal distress. The discriminant model correctly classified 95% of individuals with antisocial personality disorder, 90% of healthy controls, 75% of individuals with narcissistic personality disorder, 65% of individuals with borderline personality disorder, and 50% of individuals with histrionic personality disorder.

Conclusion: The findings suggest that patterns of defense mechanisms and empathy dimensions may help distinguish among Cluster B personality disorders. However, discriminative performance varied across diagnostic subgroups, and the findings should be interpreted in light of the cross-sectional design and the limitations of the classification model.