林恩的生物社会理论与 DSM-5 人格障碍替代模式对边缘型人格障碍的兼容性

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY Personality and Mental Health Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.1002/pmh.1635
Nicholas R. Livingston, Kasey Stanton
{"title":"林恩的生物社会理论与 DSM-5 人格障碍替代模式对边缘型人格障碍的兼容性","authors":"Nicholas R. Livingston, Kasey Stanton","doi":"10.1002/pmh.1635","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by affective, interpersonal, and identity instability, as well as marked impulsivity. There is evidence that BPD may be best operationalized dimensionally using models such as the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) described in Section III of the <jats:italic>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders</jats:italic> (<jats:italic>DSM</jats:italic>). Moreover, biosocial theory is a well‐known etiological theory of BPD emphasizing emotion dysregulation, inherited impulsivity, and development within invalidating contexts as key etiological mechanisms. Given that current research and clinical efforts for BPD are informed by both nosology and etiology, this narrative review examined how well biosocial theory (a) aligns with AMPD conceptualizations, (b) accounts for psychiatric comorbidity, and (c) accounts for heterogeneity in BPD presentation. Findings suggested that tenets of biosocial theory align well with Criteria A and B of the AMPD; however, biosocial theory focuses narrowly on roles of emotion dysregulation, impulsivity, and invalidating contexts, and empirical support is lacking in some ways for several etiological explanations proposed by biosocial theory. Additionally, although biosocial theory captures empirically supported features of BPD and emphasizes high‐risk subgroups, the theory may not account for lower‐risk subgroups. Finally, the theory accounts for diagnostic co‐occurrence via the central role of emotion dysregulation, but biosocial theory may not be specific to BPD and may broadly apply to a range of psychopathology. Based on the literature reviewed, implications for future research and clinical efforts are highlighted.","PeriodicalId":46871,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Mental Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Compatibility of Linehan's biosocial theory and the DSM‐5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders for borderline personality disorder\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas R. Livingston, Kasey Stanton\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pmh.1635\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by affective, interpersonal, and identity instability, as well as marked impulsivity. There is evidence that BPD may be best operationalized dimensionally using models such as the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) described in Section III of the <jats:italic>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders</jats:italic> (<jats:italic>DSM</jats:italic>). Moreover, biosocial theory is a well‐known etiological theory of BPD emphasizing emotion dysregulation, inherited impulsivity, and development within invalidating contexts as key etiological mechanisms. Given that current research and clinical efforts for BPD are informed by both nosology and etiology, this narrative review examined how well biosocial theory (a) aligns with AMPD conceptualizations, (b) accounts for psychiatric comorbidity, and (c) accounts for heterogeneity in BPD presentation. Findings suggested that tenets of biosocial theory align well with Criteria A and B of the AMPD; however, biosocial theory focuses narrowly on roles of emotion dysregulation, impulsivity, and invalidating contexts, and empirical support is lacking in some ways for several etiological explanations proposed by biosocial theory. Additionally, although biosocial theory captures empirically supported features of BPD and emphasizes high‐risk subgroups, the theory may not account for lower‐risk subgroups. Finally, the theory accounts for diagnostic co‐occurrence via the central role of emotion dysregulation, but biosocial theory may not be specific to BPD and may broadly apply to a range of psychopathology. Based on the literature reviewed, implications for future research and clinical efforts are highlighted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Personality and Mental Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Personality and Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pmh.1635\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pmh.1635","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

边缘型人格障碍(BPD)的特点是情感、人际关系和身份不稳定,以及明显的冲动性。有证据表明,使用《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(DSM)第三部分中描述的人格障碍替代模型(AMPD)等模型,可以从多个维度对 BPD 进行最佳操作。此外,生物社会理论是一种众所周知的 BPD 病因学理论,强调情绪失调、遗传性冲动和在无效环境中发展是关键的病因机制。鉴于目前针对 BPD 的研究和临床工作都是以病名学和病因学为基础的,本叙述性综述研究了生物社会理论(a)与 AMPD 概念的一致性,(b)对精神疾病合并症的解释,以及(c)对 BPD 表现的异质性的解释。研究结果表明,生物社会理论的原则与 AMPD 的标准 A 和 B 非常一致;但是,生物社会理论狭隘地关注情绪失调、冲动和无效环境的作用,而且生物社会理论提出的一些病因学解释在某些方面缺乏经验支持。此外,虽然生物社会理论捕捉到了经验支持的 BPD 特征,并强调了高风险亚群,但该理论可能无法解释低风险亚群。最后,该理论通过情绪失调的核心作用解释了诊断的共存性,但生物社会理论可能并非专门针对 BPD,而是广泛适用于一系列精神病理学。在回顾文献的基础上,强调了未来研究和临床工作的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Compatibility of Linehan's biosocial theory and the DSM‐5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders for borderline personality disorder
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by affective, interpersonal, and identity instability, as well as marked impulsivity. There is evidence that BPD may be best operationalized dimensionally using models such as the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) described in Section III of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM). Moreover, biosocial theory is a well‐known etiological theory of BPD emphasizing emotion dysregulation, inherited impulsivity, and development within invalidating contexts as key etiological mechanisms. Given that current research and clinical efforts for BPD are informed by both nosology and etiology, this narrative review examined how well biosocial theory (a) aligns with AMPD conceptualizations, (b) accounts for psychiatric comorbidity, and (c) accounts for heterogeneity in BPD presentation. Findings suggested that tenets of biosocial theory align well with Criteria A and B of the AMPD; however, biosocial theory focuses narrowly on roles of emotion dysregulation, impulsivity, and invalidating contexts, and empirical support is lacking in some ways for several etiological explanations proposed by biosocial theory. Additionally, although biosocial theory captures empirically supported features of BPD and emphasizes high‐risk subgroups, the theory may not account for lower‐risk subgroups. Finally, the theory accounts for diagnostic co‐occurrence via the central role of emotion dysregulation, but biosocial theory may not be specific to BPD and may broadly apply to a range of psychopathology. Based on the literature reviewed, implications for future research and clinical efforts are highlighted.
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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
14.80%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Personality and Mental Health: Multidisciplinary Studies from Personality Dysfunction to Criminal Behaviour aims to lead and shape the international field in this rapidly expanding area, uniting three distinct literatures: DSM-IV/ICD-10 defined personality disorders, psychopathy and offending behaviour. Through its multi-disciplinary and service orientated approach, Personality and Mental Health provides a peer-reviewed, authoritative resource for researchers, practitioners and policy makers working in the areas of personality and mental health.
期刊最新文献
Assessing the dark personality traits with observer reports: A meta-analysis of inter-rater agreement on the Dark Triad and Dark Tetrad traits. Personality difficulty: A useful addition to the literature on personality disturbance. Verification of five-factor models and reference scores for personality dysfunction and trait domains of the Personality Assessment Questionnaire for ICD-11 (PAQ-11), revised version. Levels of grit in patients with borderline personality disorder: Description and prediction. Compatibility of Linehan's biosocial theory and the DSM‐5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders for borderline personality disorder
×
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