Developing an assessment of epistemic trust: a research protocol

Epistemic trust (ET) describes the willingness to accept new information from another person as trustworthy, generalizable, and relevant. It has been recently proposed that a pervasive failure to establish epistemic trust may underpin personality disorders. Although the introduction of the concept of ET has been inspiring to clinicians and is already impacting the field, the idea that there may be individual differences in ET has yet to be operationalized and tested empirically. This report illustrates the development of an Epistemic trust assessment and describes the protocol for its validation. The sample will include 60 university students. The Trier Social Stress Test for Groups will be administered to induce a state of uncertainty and stress, thereby increasing the relevance of information for the participants. The experiment will entail asking information from the participants about their performance and internal states during a simulated employment interview, and then tracking how participants are able to revise their own judgments about themselves in light of the feedback coming from an expert committee. To control for social desirability and personality disorder traits, the short scale for social desirability (Kurzskala Soziale Erwünschtheit-Gamma) and the Inventory of Personality Organization are utilized. After the procedure, the participants will complete an app-based Epistemic trust questionnaire (ETQ) app. Confirmatory Factor Analysis will be utilized to investigate the structure and dimensionality of the ETQ, and ANOVAs will be used to investigate mean differences within and between persons for ET scores by item category. This study operationalizes a newly developed ET paradigm and provides a framework for the investigation of the theoretical assumptions about the connection of ET and personality functioning

The relationship between epistemic stance, mentalizing, paranoid distress and conspiracy mentality: an empirical investigation

Epistemic stance, comprising epistemic trust, mistrust, and credulity, and the closely related construct of mentalizing have been related to paranoid ideation and conspiracy mentality. All phenomena are common in the general population and may become clinically and societally relevant at an extreme expression by influencing an individual’s positioning towards socially transmitted information possibly as far as complete social detachment or attachment to extremist views. Herein, an individual’s experienced distress may play an important role, which has however largely been neglected in empirical research. Thus, this study aims to empirically investigate the effect of epistemic stance on a clinically relevant aspect of paranoid ideation, namely paranoid distress. We assume that epistemic stance will be associated with paranoid distress, but that this association will be mediated by mentalizing. Moreover, we assume that epistemic stance will be indirectly associated with conspiracy thinking via paranoid distress. Data of 595 participants (mean age = 43.05; SD = 13.87; female = 48.32%, male = 51.18%, diverse = 0.51%) were collected via self-report questionnaires through an online-based cross-sectional study. Structural equation modeling was performed for data analysis. As expected, epistemic mistrust was associated with paranoid distress via mentalizing deficits. Unexpectedly, epistemic trust was associated with more paranoid distress. Indirectly, epistemic trust was associated with conspiracy mentality via paranoid distress. Findings partially confirmed the hypothesized associations. Mentalizing may be a target for reducing distress associated with a distrusting epistemic stance. Epistemically trusting individuals with high paranoid distress may turn to conspiracy theories for regulation

Parental Mental Illness, Borderline Personality Disorder, and Parenting Behavior: The Moderating Role of Social Support.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW Parental mental disorders, particularly borderline personality disorder (BPD), impair parenting behavior. Consequently, the children exhibit an elevated risk for psychopathology across their lifespan. Social support for parents is thought to moderate the relationship between parental mental illness and parenting behavior. It may dampen negative effects and serve as starting point for preventive interventions. This paper provides a literature overview regarding the impact of social support on the sequelae of parental mental illness and BPD for parenting behavior. RECENT FINDINGS Current literature highlights the increased burden of families with a mentally ill parent and associated changes in parenting behavior like increased hostility and affective dysregulation, especially in the context of parental BPD. Literature further demonstrates the powerful impact of social support in buffering such negative outcomes. The effect of social support seems to be moderated itself by further factors like socioeconomic status, gender, or characteristics of the social network. Social support facilitates positive parenting in mentally ill parents and may be particularly important in parents with BPD. However, social support is embedded within a framework of influencing factors, which need consideration when interpreting scientific results

The ICD-11 classification of personality disorders: a European perspective on challenges and opportunities

The 11th revision of the World Health Organization (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) includes a fundamentally new approach to Personality Disorders (PD). ICD-11 is expected to be implemented first in European countries before other WHO member states. The present paper provides an overview of this new ICD-11 model including PD severity classification, trait domain specifiers, and the additional borderline pattern specifier. We discuss the perceived challenges and opportunities of using the ICD-11 approach with particular focus on its continuity and discontinuity with familiar PD categories such as avoidant PD and narcissistic PD. The advent of the ICD-11 PD classification involves major changes for health care workers, researchers, administrators, and service providers as well as patients and families involved. The anticipated challenges and opportunities are put forward in terms of specific unanswered questions. It is our hope that these questions will stimulate further research and discussion among researchers and clinicians in the coming years

An exploratory study on how attachment classifications manifest in group psychotherapy

Recently, attachment-informed researchers and clinicians have begun to show that attachment theory offers a useful framework for exploring group psychotherapy. However, it remains unclear whether patients with differing attachment classifications would behave and speak in distinct ways in group therapy sessions. Aim: In this study, we conducted an exploratory analysis of the discourse of patients in group therapy who had independently received different classifications with gold standard interview measures of attachment in adults. Each patient participant attended one of three mentalization-based parenting groups. Before treatment, the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) or the Parent Development Interview (PDI) were administered to each patient, and interviews were transcribed and coded to obtain the patient's attachment classification. Groups included 2, 5, and 5 patients, respectively, and any session was led by at least two co-therapists. A total of 14 group sessions were transcribed verbatim. Sessions were analysed through a semi-inductive method, in order to identify markers that would typify patients of different attachment classifications in session. Through transcript excerpts and narrative descriptions, we report on the differing ways in which patients of different attachment classifications communicate in group psychotherapy, with the therapist and with each other. Our work provides useful information for group therapists and researchers regarding how differences in attachment status may play out in group sessions

Euthanasia and assisted suicide in patients with personality disorders: a review of current practice and challenges.

Over the last two decades an increasing number of countries have legalized euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (EAS) leading to considerable debate over the inherent ethical dilemmas. Increasing numbers of people with personality disorders, faced with unbearable suffering, have requested and received assistance in terminating their lives. EAS in people with personality disorders has, however, received very sparse attention from clinicians and researchers. In this paper, we examine the literature on the practice and prevalence of EAS in people with personality disorders to date and discuss the associated challenges for research and practice. Narrative review of the literature combined with the authors' collective experience and knowledge of personality disorders. In six of the eight countries where EAS is currently legal, mental disorders are accepted as disorders for which EAS may be granted. In four of these countries, EAS in minors with mental disorders is also accepted. Our literature search resulted in 9 papers on the subject of EAS in people with personality disorders. These studies suggest that most clinicians who grant EAS have indeed perceived their patients' suffering as chronic, unbearable and untreatable without prospect of improvement. The majority of patients with personality disorders had tried some form of psychotherapy, but very few had received any of the relevant evidence-based treatments. The decision to grant EAS based on a perception of the patient's illness as being untreatable with no prospect of improvement, could, thus, in many cases fail to meet the due care criteria listed in EAS laws. People with personality disorders more often wish for death for extended periods of time than people without these disorders. However, there is ample empirical data to show that suicidal tendencies and behaviour can be treated and that they fluctuate rapidly over time. In light of our findings, we believe that the current legislation and practice of EAS for people with personality disorders is based on an inadequate understanding of underlying psychopathology and a lack of awareness about the contemporary treatment literature. Moreover, we assert that this practice neglects the individual's potential for having a life worth living

European guidelines for personality disorders: past, present and future

Personality disorders (PD) are common and burdensome mental disorders. The treatment of individuals with PD represents one of the more challenging areas in the field of mental health and health care providers need evidence-based recommendations to best support patients with PDs. Clinical guidelines serve this purpose and are formulated by expert consensus and/or systematic reviews of the current evidence. In this review, European guidelines for the treatment of PDs are summarized and evaluated. To date, eight countries in Europe have developed and published guidelines that differ in quality with regard to recency and completeness, transparency of methods, combination of expert knowledge with empirical data, and patient/service user involvement. Five of the guidelines are about Borderline personality disorder (BPD), one is about antisocial personality disorder and three concern PD in general. After evaluating the methodological quality of the nine European guidelines from eight countries, results in the domains of diagnosis, psychotherapy and pharmacological treatment of PD are discussed. Our comparison of guidelines reveals important contradictions between recommendations in relation to diagnosis, length and setting of treatment, as well as the use of pharmacological treatment. All the guidelines recommend psychotherapy as the treatment of first choice. Future guidelines should rigorously follow internationally accepted methodology and should more systematically include the views of patients and users