PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is known to share characteristics with a variety of personality disorders (PDs) and exhibits diverse patterns of defense mechanisms. To enhance our understanding of BPD, it\'s crucial to shift our focus from traditional categorical diagnostics to the dimensional traits shared with other PDs, as the borderline personality organization (BPO) model suggests. This approach illuminates the nuanced spectrum of BPD characteristics, offering deeper insights into its complexity. While studies have investigated the comorbidity of BPD with other PDs, research exploring the relationship between various personality factors and defense mechanisms within BPD itself has been scarce. The present study was undertaken to investigate the complex interrelationships between various personality factors and defense styles in individuals diagnosed with BPD.
METHODS: Using a network analysis approach, data from 227 patients diagnosed with BPD were examined using the Defense Style Questionnaire and Personality Disorder Questionnaire-4+ for assessment.
RESULTS: Intricate connections were observed between personality factors and defense styles. Significant associations were identified between various personality factors and defense styles, with immature defense styles, such as maladaptive and image-distorting being particularly prominent in BPD in the centrality analysis. The maladaptive defense style had the highest expected influence centrality. Furthermore, the schizotypal, dependent, and narcissistic personality factors demonstrated relatively high centrality within the network.
CONCLUSIONS: Network analysis can effectively delineate the complexity of various PDs and defense styles. These findings are expected to facilitate a deeper understanding of why BPD exhibits various levels of organization and presents with heterogeneous characteristics, consistent with the perspectives proposed by the BPO.
METHODS: Using a network analysis approach, data from 227 patients diagnosed with BPD were examined using the Defense Style Questionnaire and Personality Disorder Questionnaire-4+ for assessment.
RESULTS: Intricate connections were observed between personality factors and defense styles. Significant associations were identified between various personality factors and defense styles, with immature defense styles, such as maladaptive and image-distorting being particularly prominent in BPD in the centrality analysis. The maladaptive defense style had the highest expected influence centrality. Furthermore, the schizotypal, dependent, and narcissistic personality factors demonstrated relatively high centrality within the network.
CONCLUSIONS: Network analysis can effectively delineate the complexity of various PDs and defense styles. These findings are expected to facilitate a deeper understanding of why BPD exhibits various levels of organization and presents with heterogeneous characteristics, consistent with the perspectives proposed by the BPO.
摘要：
目的：已知边缘性人格障碍（BPD）与多种人格障碍（PD）具有共同特征，并表现出多种防御机制模式。为了增强我们对BPD的了解，将我们的重点从传统的分类诊断转移到与其他PD共享的维度特征是至关重要的，正如边缘人格组织(BPO)模型所暗示的那样。这种方法照亮了BPD特征的细微光谱，对其复杂性提供更深入的见解。虽然有研究调查了BPD与其他PD的共病，探索各种人格因素与BPD自身防御机制之间关系的研究很少。本研究旨在调查被诊断为BPD的个体中各种人格因素与防御方式之间的复杂相互关系。
方法：使用网络分析方法，使用防御方式问卷和人格障碍问卷-4+对227例诊断为BPD的患者的数据进行评估。
结果：在人格因素和防御方式之间观察到了错综复杂的联系。各种人格因素和防御风格之间存在显着关联，防御风格不成熟，例如，自适应不良和图像失真在中心性分析中在BPD中尤为突出。适应不良的防御方式具有最高的预期影响中心性。此外，分裂型，依赖，自恋人格因素在网络中表现出相对较高的中心性。
结论：网络分析可以有效地描述各种PD和防御方式的复杂性。这些发现预计将有助于更深入地理解为什么BPD表现出不同的组织水平，并呈现出异质特征，与BPO提出的观点一致。
方法：使用网络分析方法，使用防御方式问卷和人格障碍问卷-4+对227例诊断为BPD的患者的数据进行评估。
结果：在人格因素和防御方式之间观察到了错综复杂的联系。各种人格因素和防御风格之间存在显着关联，防御风格不成熟，例如，自适应不良和图像失真在中心性分析中在BPD中尤为突出。适应不良的防御方式具有最高的预期影响中心性。此外，分裂型，依赖，自恋人格因素在网络中表现出相对较高的中心性。
结论：网络分析可以有效地描述各种PD和防御方式的复杂性。这些发现预计将有助于更深入地理解为什么BPD表现出不同的组织水平，并呈现出异质特征，与BPO提出的观点一致。
