Personality profile and resilience of patients with alcohol dependence with varying degrees of social maladaptation

Relevance. Studies of patients with high levels of social adaptation show that the characterological features of this group differ significantly from the characteristics of most patients registered in drug treatment facilities. At the same time, the characterological approach in modern narcology is insufficiently developed, which makes it difficult to predict possible formation of alcohol dependence and risks of maladaptation at the early stages of the disease in the presence of certain characterological features. The influence of personality profiles on social adaptation in people with alcohol dependence has also been insufficiently studied.

The intention of the study was to identify personality profiles and resilience of patients with alcohol dependence and varying degrees of social maladaptation, as well as to assess their motivation for social desirability.

Methodology. 68 males and females aged 35 to 60 years with alcohol dependence were examined according to the criteria of ICD-10 (heading F10). Based on the analysis of socio-demographic and clinical-pathopsychological data, three groups of patients were identified: «adapted» (28 people), «maladapted» (27 people) and «borderline adaptation» (13 people). The methodological complex included: The Standardized method of personality research by L.N. Sobchik (SMIL-375), Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR) (Osin E.N., 2007), CD-RISC Resilience Scale (Connor M., Davidson J., 2003).

Results and Discussion. As a result, common and specific features of personality profiles in three groups of patients were identified, as well as their typical resilience indicators and differences in socially desirable behavior. It was found that in group of patients with risk of maladaptation, sharpening of certain personality features and emotional instability were combined with increased values of resilience. The groups of individuals with preserved and impaired adaptation demonstrated average resilience despite significant differences in personality features. Individuals with preserved social adaptation were distinguished by emotional stability and moderate increase in explosive traits and individualism. Persons with social maladaptation demonstrated exaggerated emotional instability, sharpening of explosive features and difficult interpersonal interaction; in the structure of resilience there was a decrease in meaningfulness.

Conclusion. The obtained data on the relationship of social adaptation of persons with alcohol dependence and characteristics of the personality profile should be taken into account when developing therapeutic and rehabilitation measures aimed at maintaining stable remission as well as returning patients back to social and professional life.

1. Bratus B.S., Rozovsky I.Ya., Tsapkin V.N. Psikhologicheskie problemy izucheniya i korrektsii anomalii lichnosti [Psychological problems of studying and correcting personality anomalies]. Moscow. 1988. 86 p. (In Russ.)

2. Derecha G.I. Psychopathology and pathopsychology of personality disorders in patients with alcoholism (clinical and systemic study) [Psikhopatologiya i patopsikhologiya rasstroistv lichnosti u bol’nykh alkogolizmom (klinikosistemnoe issledovanie)]: Abstract dissertation PhD Psychol. Sci. Orenburg. 2005. 23 p. (In Russ.)

3. Kozhinova T.A. Osobennosti formirovaniya i techeniya alkogolizma u lits s razlichnymi kharakterologicheskimi aktsentuatsiyami i lichnostnymi rasstroistvami [Features of the formation and course of alcoholism in persons with various characterological accentuations and personality disorders]. Sotsial’naya i klinicheskaya psikhiatriya [Social and clinical psychiatry]. 2018;(3):46–55. (In Russ.)

4. Kozhinova T.A. The formation and course of alcoholism in men with different character accentuations according to inpatient examination data [Formirovanie i techenie alkogolizma u muzhchin s razlichnymi aktsentuatsiyami kharaktera po dannym statsionarnogo obsledovaniya]: Abstract dissertation Dr. Med. Sci. Moscow. 2019. 40 p. (In Russ.)

5. Makhnach A.V. Zhiznesposobnost’ cheloveka i sem’i: sotsial’no-psikhologicheskaya paradigm [Human and family viability: a socio-psychological paradigm]. Moscow. 2016. 459 p. (In Russ.)

6. Mendelevich V.D. Psikhologiya deviantnogo povedeniya [Psychology of deviant behavior]. St. Petersburg. 2005. 445 p. (In Russ.)

7. Nemchin T.A., Tsitsarev C.B. Lichnost’ i alkogolizm [Personality and alcoholism]. Moscow. 1989. 191 p. (In Russ.)

8. Osin E.N. Problema sotsial’noi zhelatel’nosti v issledovaniyakh lichnostnogo potentsiala [The problem of social desirability in research of personal potential]. Lichnostnyi potentsial: struktura i diagnostika [Personal potential: structure and diagnostics]. Eds. by D.A. Leontiev. Moscow. 2011. Pp. 454–68. (In Russ.)

9. Ponizovsky P.A., Magalif A.Yu. Osobennosti alkogol’noi zavisimosti u aktivno rabotayushchego kontingenta bol’nykh [Features of alcohol dependence in an actively working contingent of patients]. Materialy XV s»ezda psikhiatrov Rossii [Materials of the XV Congress of psychiatrists of Russia]. Moscow. 2010. P. 264. (In Russ.)

10. Urakov I.G., Kachaev A.K. Metody kompleksnogo prognoza khroniches-kogo alkogolizma: Metodicheskie rekomendatsii [Methods of complex prognosis of chronic alcoholism: Methodological recommendations]. Moscow. 1976. (In Russ.)

11. Yashkina I.V. Clinic of alcoholism in persons with a high level of social adaptation [Klinika alkogolizma u lits s vysokim urovnem sotsial’noi adaptatsii]: Abstract dissertation PhD Med. Sci. Moscow. 1995. 21 p. (In Russ.)

12. Bonanno G.A. Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely adverse events? American Psychologist. 2004;59:20–28. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.20

13. Martinez S., Jones J.D., Brandt L. [et al.]. Factor structure and psychometric properties of the Connor-Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC) in individuals with opioid use disorder. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2021;226:108632. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108632.

14. Roy A., Sarchiapone M., Carli V. Low resilience in suicide attempters. Arch. Suic. Res. 2007;11(3):265–269. DOI: 10.1080/13811110701403916.

15. Seery M.D., Quinton W.J. Understanding resilience: From negative life events to everyday stressors. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 2016. Pp. 181–245. DOI: 10.1016/bs.aesp.2016.02.002.

16. Werner E.E. Protective factors and individual resilience. Handbook of Early Childhood Intervention. Eds.: J.P. Shonkoff, S.J. Meisels. UK: Cambridge, 2000. Pp. 115–132. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511529320.008.

17. Werner E.E. High-risk children in young adulthood: A longitudinal study from birth to 32 years. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 1989;59(1):72–81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1939–0025.1989.tb01636.x.

18. Wingo A.P., Wrenn G., Pelletier T. [et al.]. Moderating effects of resilience on depression in individuals with a history of childhood abuse or trauma exposure. The Journal of Affective Disorders. 2010;126(3):411–414. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2010.04.009.