Industrial Psychiatry Journal Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-29 DOI:10.4103/ipj.ipj_350_24
K Dharani Devi, Poornima Bhola, Prabha S Chandra
{"title":"Uncertain reflective functioning, anxious attachment, and cumulative impact of early relational trauma as predictors of severity in borderline personality disorder.","authors":"K Dharani Devi, Poornima Bhola, Prabha S Chandra","doi":"10.4103/ipj.ipj_350_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The mentalization model of borderline personality disorder (BPD) utilizes a developmental psychopathology lens, emphasizing an unstable or reduced capacity to mentalize-stemming from early attachment disruptions and relational trauma-as the core feature of BPD. While the empirical evidence for the proposed intersections between mentalizing, attachment, and trauma and the development and manifestations of borderline personality is still limited, this knowledge is essential for developing effective assessments and interventions.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To examine mentalizing, attachment, and early relational trauma as predictors of the severity of symptoms in BPD.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The sample included 60 individuals diagnosed with BPD, aged 18-45 years, recruited from inpatient and outpatient services in a tertiary care mental health center. Participants completed measures of mentalizing (Reflective Functioning Questionnaire, Interpersonal Reactivity Index, and Reading the Mind in the Eyes test), attachment (Attachment Style Questionnaire), early relational trauma (Complex Trauma Questionnaire), and symptom severity (Borderline Symptom List).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of the participants reported experiences of polyvictimization (93.3%) with the most common traumas being psychological abuse (93.3%), neglect (91.7%), and rejection (90.0%). Regression analyses revealed that uncertain reflective functioning, anxious attachment style, and the cumulative impact of trauma together predicted 53.1% of the variance in BPD symptom severity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Impaired mentalizing, characterized by inflexible understanding of mental states, is a critical target for therapeutic interventions in BPD. The significant role of anxious attachment and the necessity of assessing the perceived impact of traumatic experiences highlight the importance of trauma-informed and mentalization-based interventions for this vulnerable group.</p>","PeriodicalId":13534,"journal":{"name":"Industrial Psychiatry Journal","volume":"33 2","pages":"245-252"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11784668/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Industrial Psychiatry Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ipj.ipj_350_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:边缘型人格障碍(BPD)的精神化模型采用了发展性精神病理学视角,强调精神化能力的不稳定或降低--源于早期依恋关系的中断和关系创伤--是BPD的核心特征。虽然有关心智化、依恋和创伤与边缘型人格的发展和表现之间的交叉关系的实证证据仍然有限,但这些知识对于制定有效的评估和干预措施至关重要。目的:研究心智化、依恋和早期关系创伤作为 BPD 症状严重程度的预测因素:样本包括 60 名被诊断为 BPD 的患者,年龄在 18-45 岁之间,他们都是从一家三级心理健康中心的住院病人和门诊病人中招募的。参与者完成了精神化(反思功能问卷、人际反应指数和读心测试)、依恋(依恋风格问卷)、早期关系创伤(复杂创伤问卷)和症状严重程度(边缘型症状清单)的测量:大多数参与者报告了多重受害经历(93.3%),其中最常见的创伤是心理虐待(93.3%)、忽视(91.7%)和拒绝(90.0%)。回归分析表明,不确定的反思功能、焦虑的依恋风格和创伤的累积影响共同预测了 BPD 症状严重程度差异的 53.1%:结论:以对心理状态缺乏灵活理解为特征的心智受损是 BPD 治疗干预的关键目标。焦虑依恋的重要作用以及评估创伤经历感知影响的必要性凸显了对这一弱势群体进行创伤知情和以心理化为基础的干预的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Uncertain reflective functioning, anxious attachment, and cumulative impact of early relational trauma as predictors of severity in borderline personality disorder.

Background: The mentalization model of borderline personality disorder (BPD) utilizes a developmental psychopathology lens, emphasizing an unstable or reduced capacity to mentalize-stemming from early attachment disruptions and relational trauma-as the core feature of BPD. While the empirical evidence for the proposed intersections between mentalizing, attachment, and trauma and the development and manifestations of borderline personality is still limited, this knowledge is essential for developing effective assessments and interventions.

Aim: To examine mentalizing, attachment, and early relational trauma as predictors of the severity of symptoms in BPD.

Materials and methods: The sample included 60 individuals diagnosed with BPD, aged 18-45 years, recruited from inpatient and outpatient services in a tertiary care mental health center. Participants completed measures of mentalizing (Reflective Functioning Questionnaire, Interpersonal Reactivity Index, and Reading the Mind in the Eyes test), attachment (Attachment Style Questionnaire), early relational trauma (Complex Trauma Questionnaire), and symptom severity (Borderline Symptom List).

Results: The majority of the participants reported experiences of polyvictimization (93.3%) with the most common traumas being psychological abuse (93.3%), neglect (91.7%), and rejection (90.0%). Regression analyses revealed that uncertain reflective functioning, anxious attachment style, and the cumulative impact of trauma together predicted 53.1% of the variance in BPD symptom severity.

Conclusion: Impaired mentalizing, characterized by inflexible understanding of mental states, is a critical target for therapeutic interventions in BPD. The significant role of anxious attachment and the necessity of assessing the perceived impact of traumatic experiences highlight the importance of trauma-informed and mentalization-based interventions for this vulnerable group.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
审稿时长
39 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信