Individuals with and without child maltreatment experiences are evaluated similarly and do not differ in facial affect display at zero- and first-acquaintance.

Lara-Lynn Hautle, Jennifer Kurath, Lena Jellestad, Antonia M Lüönd, Tanja S H Wingenbach, Sascha Frühholz, Billy Jansson, Inga Niedtfeld, Monique C Pfaltz
{"title":"Individuals with and without child maltreatment experiences are evaluated similarly and do not differ in facial affect display at zero- and first-acquaintance.","authors":"Lara-Lynn Hautle, Jennifer Kurath, Lena Jellestad, Antonia M Lüönd, Tanja S H Wingenbach, Sascha Frühholz, Billy Jansson, Inga Niedtfeld, Monique C Pfaltz","doi":"10.1186/s40479-023-00222-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Individuals with a history of child maltreatment (CM) are more often disliked, rejected and victimized compared to individuals without such experiences. However, contributing factors for these negative evaluations are so far unknown.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Based on previous research on adults with borderline personality disorder (BPD), this preregistered study assessed whether negative evaluations of adults with CM experiences, in comparison to unexposed controls, are mediated by more negative and less positive facial affect display. Additionally, it was explored whether level of depression, severity of CM, social anxiety, social support, and rejection sensitivity have an influence on ratings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty adults with CM experiences (CM +) and 40 non-maltreated (CM-) adults were filmed for measurement of affect display and rated in likeability, trustworthiness, and cooperativeness by 100 independent raters after zero-acquaintance (no interaction) and 17 raters after first-acquaintance (short conversation).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The CM + and the CM- group were neither evaluated significantly different, nor showed significant differences in affect display. Contrasting previous research, higher levels of BPD symptoms predicted higher likeability ratings (p = .046), while complex post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms had no influence on ratings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The non-significant effects could be attributed to an insufficient number of participants, as our sample size allowed us to detect effects with medium effect sizes (f<sup>2</sup> = .16 for evaluation; f<sup>2</sup> = .17 for affect display) with a power of .95. Moreover, aspects such as the presence of mental disorders (e.g., BPD or post-traumatic stress disorder), might have a stronger impact than CM per se. Future research should thus further explore conditions (e.g., presence of specific mental disorders) under which individuals with CM are affected by negative evaluations as well as factors that contribute to negative evaluations and problems in social relationships.</p>","PeriodicalId":48586,"journal":{"name":"Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10199758/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-023-00222-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Individuals with a history of child maltreatment (CM) are more often disliked, rejected and victimized compared to individuals without such experiences. However, contributing factors for these negative evaluations are so far unknown.

Objective: Based on previous research on adults with borderline personality disorder (BPD), this preregistered study assessed whether negative evaluations of adults with CM experiences, in comparison to unexposed controls, are mediated by more negative and less positive facial affect display. Additionally, it was explored whether level of depression, severity of CM, social anxiety, social support, and rejection sensitivity have an influence on ratings.

Methods: Forty adults with CM experiences (CM +) and 40 non-maltreated (CM-) adults were filmed for measurement of affect display and rated in likeability, trustworthiness, and cooperativeness by 100 independent raters after zero-acquaintance (no interaction) and 17 raters after first-acquaintance (short conversation).

Results: The CM + and the CM- group were neither evaluated significantly different, nor showed significant differences in affect display. Contrasting previous research, higher levels of BPD symptoms predicted higher likeability ratings (p = .046), while complex post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms had no influence on ratings.

Conclusions: The non-significant effects could be attributed to an insufficient number of participants, as our sample size allowed us to detect effects with medium effect sizes (f2 = .16 for evaluation; f2 = .17 for affect display) with a power of .95. Moreover, aspects such as the presence of mental disorders (e.g., BPD or post-traumatic stress disorder), might have a stronger impact than CM per se. Future research should thus further explore conditions (e.g., presence of specific mental disorders) under which individuals with CM are affected by negative evaluations as well as factors that contribute to negative evaluations and problems in social relationships.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
有虐待儿童经历的人和没有虐待儿童经历的人得到的评价相似,在零距离接触和初次见面时,面部情绪表现没有差异。
背景:有儿童虐待史(CM)的人与没有此类经历的人相比,更经常受到不喜欢、排斥和伤害。然而,造成这些负面评价的因素至今仍不得而知:基于以往对边缘型人格障碍(BPD)成人的研究,这项预先登记的研究评估了与未接触过CM的对照组相比,对有CM经历的成人的负面评价是否会通过更多的负面和更少的正面面部情绪表现来调节。此外,研究还探讨了抑郁程度、CM 严重程度、社交焦虑、社交支持和拒绝敏感性是否会对评价产生影响:方法:拍摄了 40 名曾有中风经历的成年人(中风+)和 40 名未受中风治疗的成年人(中风-),以测量他们的情绪表现,并由 100 名独立评分者在零距离接触(无互动)后和 17 名评分者在初次接触(简短对话)后对他们的可亲度、可信度和合作度进行评分:CM + 组和 CM- 组在评价上没有明显差异,在情感表现上也没有明显差异。与以往研究不同的是,BPD 症状水平越高,其好感度越高(p = .046),而复杂的创伤后应激障碍症状对好感度没有影响:不显著的效应可能是由于参与者人数不足,因为我们的样本量允许我们检测到中等效应大小的效应(评价效应 f2 = .16;情感显示效应 f2 = .17),检测功率为 .95。此外,存在精神障碍(如 BPD 或创伤后应激障碍)等方面的影响可能会比 CM 本身的影响更大。因此,未来的研究应进一步探讨 CM 患者受负面评价影响的条件(如存在特定的精神障碍),以及导致负面评价和社会关系问题的因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
9.80%
发文量
30
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation provides a platform for researchers and clinicians interested in borderline personality disorder (BPD) as a currently highly challenging psychiatric disorder. Emotion dysregulation is at the core of BPD but also stands on its own as a major pathological component of the underlying neurobiology of various other psychiatric disorders. The journal focuses on the psychological, social and neurobiological aspects of emotion dysregulation as well as epidemiology, phenomenology, pathophysiology, treatment, neurobiology, genetics, and animal models of BPD.
期刊最新文献
Feeling close to others? Social cognitive mechanisms of intimacy in personality disorders. A cluster analysis of attachment styles in patients with borderline personality disorder, bipolar disorder and ADHD. A thematic analysis of the subjective experiences of mothers with borderline personality disorder who completed Mother-Infant Dialectical Behaviour Therapy: a 3-year follow-up. Reduced positive attentional bias in patients with borderline personality disorder compared with non-patients: results from a free-viewing eye-tracking study Correction: Psychopathology and theory of mind in patients with personality disorders
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1