Cognitive errors assessed by observer ratings in bipolar affective disorder: relationship with symptoms and therapeutic alliance

Cognitive heuristics in borderline personality disorder across treatment: A longitudinal non-parametric analysis

OBJECTIVE

The development of a constructive therapeutic alliance may represent an important feature of interpersonal adaptation in clients with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD). The present study explores cognitive heuristics as dynamic features of change in relationship with the therapeutic alliance in the treatment of BPD.

METHOD

In total, N = 60 clients with BPD, are included in the present study. In the context of brief therapy, the therapeutic alliance (WAI) is assessed from the client and the therapist perspectives after each therapy session; cognitive heuristics are assessed three times (CERS). The data analyses are on the basis of non-parametric clusters (kml3d) linked with the therapeutic alliance.

RESULTS

The results showed that clusters of cognitive heuristics trajectories are linked with the client's therapeutic alliance (t(55) = 2.30, p = .03), but they remained unrelated with the evolution of the therapist's alliance.

CONCLUSIONS

These results are discussed with regard to the interpersonal adaptiveness of cognitive heuristics in the context of BPD undergoing treatment.

Biased thinking assessed by external observers in borderline personality disorder

OBJECTIVES

Biased thinking (to some extent overlapping with the concepts of cognitive distortions and cognitive errors) is a key concept in cognitive therapy of borderline personality disorder (BPD). Specific contents and cognitive processes related to BPD functioning are known. However, most studies are based on self-report measures which present a number of important limitations, in particular the difficulty in assessing non-conscious processes infused by affect. So far, no studies were conducted using valid observer-rated methodology addressing the question of biased thinking in BPD as it unfolds spontaneously in session.

DESIGN

This is a controlled interview study comparing two matched groups, BPD patients and healthy controls.

METHODS

A total of N= 25 clinical dynamic interviews with patients presenting with BPD were transcribed and rated using the Cognitive Errors Rating Scale (Drapeau, Perry, & Dunkley, 2008); their cognitive profiles were compared to those of N= 25 healthy controls who underwent the same procedure.

RESULTS

Overall, results indicated that no between-group difference in the frequency of specific biases was found. However, heightened levels of negative cognitive biases, in particular over-generalizing and fortune-telling, were associated with BPD. Furthermore, negative over-generalizing was associated with the number of BPD symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

These results have high levels of ecological validity and are promising for the refinement of cognitive theory of BPD. Clinical implications for assessment and intervention are discussed.

Training Effects with the Observer- Rated Cognitive Errors and the Coping Action Patterns Scales

The use of observer-rated scales requires that raters be trained until they have become reliable in using the scales. However, few studies properly report how training in using a given rating scale is conducted or indeed how it should be conducted. This study examined progress in interrater reliability over 6 months of training with two observer-rated scales, the Cognitive Errors Rating Scale and the Coping Action Patterns Rating Scale. The evolution of the intraclass correlation coefficients was modeled using hierarchical linear modeling. Results showed an overall training effect as well as effects of the basic training phase and of the rater calibration phase, the latter being smaller than the former. The results are discussed in terms of implications for rater training in psychotherapy research.