Compatibility of Linehan's biosocial theory and the DSM‐5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders for borderline personality disorder

Abstract

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by affective, interpersonal, and identity instability, as well as marked impulsivity. There is evidence that BPD may be best operationalized dimensionally using models such as the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) described in Section III of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM). Moreover, biosocial theory is a well‐known etiological theory of BPD emphasizing emotion dysregulation, inherited impulsivity, and development within invalidating contexts as key etiological mechanisms. Given that current research and clinical efforts for BPD are informed by both nosology and etiology, this narrative review examined how well biosocial theory (a) aligns with AMPD conceptualizations, (b) accounts for psychiatric comorbidity, and (c) accounts for heterogeneity in BPD presentation. Findings suggested that tenets of biosocial theory align well with Criteria A and B of the AMPD; however, biosocial theory focuses narrowly on roles of emotion dysregulation, impulsivity, and invalidating contexts, and empirical support is lacking in some ways for several etiological explanations proposed by biosocial theory. Additionally, although biosocial theory captures empirically supported features of BPD and emphasizes high‐risk subgroups, the theory may not account for lower‐risk subgroups. Finally, the theory accounts for diagnostic co‐occurrence via the central role of emotion dysregulation, but biosocial theory may not be specific to BPD and may broadly apply to a range of psychopathology. Based on the literature reviewed, implications for future research and clinical efforts are highlighted.