‘Rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: Do expert mentalizers exist?

Mentalization theory is concerned with the capacity to notice, and make sense of, thoughts and feelings in self and others. This development may be healthy or impaired and therefore, by extension, it may be theorized that expertise in mentalizing can exist. Furthermore, a continuum from impairment t...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Simon Rogoff, Alesia Moulton-Perkins, Fiona Warren, Tobias Nolte, Peter Fonagy
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/953fc6d293354ea5a5a8e9b843bf91b1
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:953fc6d293354ea5a5a8e9b843bf91b1
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:953fc6d293354ea5a5a8e9b843bf91b12021-11-04T06:09:18Z‘Rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: Do expert mentalizers exist?1932-6203https://doaj.org/article/953fc6d293354ea5a5a8e9b843bf91b12021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8544847/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203Mentalization theory is concerned with the capacity to notice, and make sense of, thoughts and feelings in self and others. This development may be healthy or impaired and therefore, by extension, it may be theorized that expertise in mentalizing can exist. Furthermore, a continuum from impairment to expertise should exist within separate dimensions of mentalizing: of self and of others. This study hypothesized that three groups would be distinguishable on the basis of their mentalizing capacities. In a cross-sectional design, Psychological Therapists (‘expert’ mentalizers; n = 51), individuals with a diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder (‘poor’ mentalizers; n = 43) and members of the general population (‘non-clinical controls’; n = 35) completed a battery of self-report measures. These assessed the mentalizing of self and of others (using an extended version of the Reflective Function Questionnaire (RFQ18)), alexithymia and cognitive empathy. As hypothesized, Psychological Therapists’ scores were higher than controls on self-mentalizing and control group scores were higher than those with BPD. Cognitive empathy scores in the BPD group indicated markedly lower capacities than the other two groups. Contrary to predictions, no significant differences were found between groups on mentalizing others in RFQ18 scores. The Psychological Therapist and BPD profiles were characterized by differential impairment with regards to mentalizing self and others but in opposing directions. Results suggest that the RFQ18 can identify groups with expertise in mentalizing. Implications of these results for the effectiveness of psychological therapy and of Psychological Therapists are discussed.Simon RogoffAlesia Moulton-PerkinsFiona WarrenTobias NoltePeter FonagyPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 10 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Simon Rogoff Alesia Moulton-Perkins Fiona Warren Tobias Nolte Peter Fonagy ‘Rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: Do expert mentalizers exist?
description	Mentalization theory is concerned with the capacity to notice, and make sense of, thoughts and feelings in self and others. This development may be healthy or impaired and therefore, by extension, it may be theorized that expertise in mentalizing can exist. Furthermore, a continuum from impairment to expertise should exist within separate dimensions of mentalizing: of self and of others. This study hypothesized that three groups would be distinguishable on the basis of their mentalizing capacities. In a cross-sectional design, Psychological Therapists (‘expert’ mentalizers; n = 51), individuals with a diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder (‘poor’ mentalizers; n = 43) and members of the general population (‘non-clinical controls’; n = 35) completed a battery of self-report measures. These assessed the mentalizing of self and of others (using an extended version of the Reflective Function Questionnaire (RFQ18)), alexithymia and cognitive empathy. As hypothesized, Psychological Therapists’ scores were higher than controls on self-mentalizing and control group scores were higher than those with BPD. Cognitive empathy scores in the BPD group indicated markedly lower capacities than the other two groups. Contrary to predictions, no significant differences were found between groups on mentalizing others in RFQ18 scores. The Psychological Therapist and BPD profiles were characterized by differential impairment with regards to mentalizing self and others but in opposing directions. Results suggest that the RFQ18 can identify groups with expertise in mentalizing. Implications of these results for the effectiveness of psychological therapy and of Psychological Therapists are discussed.
format	article
author	Simon Rogoff Alesia Moulton-Perkins Fiona Warren Tobias Nolte Peter Fonagy
author_facet	Simon Rogoff Alesia Moulton-Perkins Fiona Warren Tobias Nolte Peter Fonagy
author_sort	Simon Rogoff
title	‘Rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: Do expert mentalizers exist?
title_short	‘Rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: Do expert mentalizers exist?
title_full	‘Rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: Do expert mentalizers exist?
title_fullStr	‘Rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: Do expert mentalizers exist?
title_full_unstemmed	‘Rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: Do expert mentalizers exist?
title_sort	‘rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: do expert mentalizers exist?
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/953fc6d293354ea5a5a8e9b843bf91b1
work_keys_str_mv	AT simonrogoff richandpoorinmentalizingdoexpertmentalizersexist AT alesiamoultonperkins richandpoorinmentalizingdoexpertmentalizersexist AT fionawarren richandpoorinmentalizingdoexpertmentalizersexist AT tobiasnolte richandpoorinmentalizingdoexpertmentalizersexist AT peterfonagy richandpoorinmentalizingdoexpertmentalizersexist
_version_	1718445102727168000

‘Rich’ and ‘poor’ in mentalizing: Do expert mentalizers exist?

Ejemplares similares