AbstractBackground: The aim of this study was to investigate therelationship between patients' mentalizing problematicsand their personality; specifically, it aimed to identifyclusters of individuals characterized by specific patternsof mentalizing imbalances and to analyze the relationshipbetween these and diagnosis of personality disorder (PD),nonmentalizing modes, emotion dysregulation, and interpersonalreactivity.Methods: Four hundred therapeutic dyads were recruited.A part of these (n = 183) only completed clinician‐reportmeasures, Mentalization Imbalances Scale, and Modes ofMentalization Scale, while others (n = 217) also completedpatients' self‐report measures, which were ReflectiveFunctioning Questionnaire, Difficulties in Emotion RegulationScale, and Interpersonal Reactivity Index.Results: A latent profile analysis enlightened the presenceof four clusters with problematics in the dimensions ofmentalization, indicated by cluster names: (1) Affectiveself‐automatic profile (ASA‐P) (with higher percentageof PDs); (2) External profile (E‐P) (with lower percentageof PDs); (3) Others‐automatic‐affective profile (OAA‐P); (4)Cognitive‐self‐automatic profile (CSA‐P). Multivariate analysis of variances confirmed that the four clustersdiffered in relation to the quality of mentalization, emotionaldysregulation and interpersonal reactivity, withhigher levels of nonmentalization modes, uncertainty aboutmental states and emotion dysregulation in ASA‐P, higherlevels of good mentalization in E‐P, lower impulsivity inCSA‐P, and greater empathic concern in OAA‐P.
Personality and mentalization: A latent profile analysis of mentalizing problematics in adult patients
Giulia Gagliardini;
2023-01-01
Abstract
AbstractBackground: The aim of this study was to investigate therelationship between patients' mentalizing problematicsand their personality; specifically, it aimed to identifyclusters of individuals characterized by specific patternsof mentalizing imbalances and to analyze the relationshipbetween these and diagnosis of personality disorder (PD),nonmentalizing modes, emotion dysregulation, and interpersonalreactivity.Methods: Four hundred therapeutic dyads were recruited.A part of these (n = 183) only completed clinician‐reportmeasures, Mentalization Imbalances Scale, and Modes ofMentalization Scale, while others (n = 217) also completedpatients' self‐report measures, which were ReflectiveFunctioning Questionnaire, Difficulties in Emotion RegulationScale, and Interpersonal Reactivity Index.Results: A latent profile analysis enlightened the presenceof four clusters with problematics in the dimensions ofmentalization, indicated by cluster names: (1) Affectiveself‐automatic profile (ASA‐P) (with higher percentageof PDs); (2) External profile (E‐P) (with lower percentageof PDs); (3) Others‐automatic‐affective profile (OAA‐P); (4)Cognitive‐self‐automatic profile (CSA‐P). Multivariate analysis of variances confirmed that the four clustersdiffered in relation to the quality of mentalization, emotionaldysregulation and interpersonal reactivity, withhigher levels of nonmentalization modes, uncertainty aboutmental states and emotion dysregulation in ASA‐P, higherlevels of good mentalization in E‐P, lower impulsivity inCSA‐P, and greater empathic concern in OAA‐P.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
