Enhancing Psychotherapy Outcomes by Encouraging Patients to Regularly Self-Monitor, Reflect on, and Share Their Affective Responses Toward Their Therapist: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

The Brief Version of the Mentalization Scale (MentS-12): Evidence-Based Assessment of Mentalizing Capacity

Recognizing the need for a concise self-report measure of mentalizing capacity, we developed a 12-item iteration of the well-established Mentalization Scale (MentS). Using college student and community samples of Serbian adults (N = 566), we performed a precise selection of items and then examined the psychometric attributes of the shortened scale (MentS-12). The new scale maintains the original three-dimensional structure: self-related mentalization, other-related mentalization, and motivation to mentalize. MentS-12 proves to be both reliable and structurally consistent. To improve its utility in therapeutic contexts, we determined clinical change thresholds for both the complete and abbreviated forms. We hope that its feasibility stimulates the integration of the MentS-12 in longitudinal research projects and real-world clinical settings.

Development and validation of an 8-item version of the Real Relationship Inventory-Client form

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a very brief version of the 24-item Real Relationship Inventory-Client (RRI-C) form.

METHOD

Two independent samples of individual psychotherapy patients (Nsample1 = 700, Nsample2 = 434) completed the RRI-C along with other measures. Psychometric scale shortening involved exploratory factor analysis, item response theory analysis, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and multigroup CFA. Reliability and convergent and discriminant validity of the scale and subscales were also assessed.

RESULTS

The 8-item RRI-C (RRI-C-SF) preserves the two-factor structure: Genuineness (k = 4, α = .86) and Realism (k = 4, α = .87), which were correlated at r = .74. CFA provided the following fit indices for the bifactor model: X2/df = 2.16, CFI = .99, TLI = .96, RMSEA = .07, and SRMR = .03. Multigroup CFA showed that the RRI-C-SF was invariant across in-person and remote session formats. The RRI-C-SF demonstrated high reliability (α = .91); high correlation with the full-length scale (r = .96); and excellent convergent and discriminant validity with measures of other elements of the therapeutic relationship, personality characteristics, current mental health state, and demographic-clinical variables. Clinical change benchmarks were calculated to serve as valuable tools for both research and clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The RRI-C-SF is a reliable measure that can be used for both research and clinical purposes. It enables a nuanced assessment of the genuineness and the realism dimensions of the real relationship.