department of psychology the relationship between …
TRANSCRIPT
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRAIT EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND
BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER FEATURES IN CHILDREN: THE
ROLE OF ATTACHMENT AND EMOTIONAL AVAILABILITY
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DISSERTATION
FILIA-ANNA CHRISTODOULOU
2016
Filia
-Ann
a Chri
stodo
ulou
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRAIT EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND
BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER FEATURES IN CHILDREN: THE
ROLE OF ATTACHMENT AND EMOTIONAL AVAILABILITY
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DISSERTATION
FILIA-ANNA CHRISTODOULOU
A Dissertation Submitted to the University of Cyprus in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
May, 2016
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Doctoral Candidate: Filia-Anna Christodoulou
Doctoral Thesis Title: The relationship between trait emotional intelligence and
borderline personality disorder features in children: The role of attachment and emotional
availability.
The Present Doctoral Dissertation was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the Department of Psychology and was
approved on the 22nd of April, 2016, by the members of the Examination Committee.
Examination Committee:
Research
Supervisor:________________________________________________________
Committee
Member:_________________________________________________________
Committee
Member:_________________________________________________________
Committee
Member:_________________________________________________________
Committee
Member:_________________________________________________________
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
DECLARATION OF DOCTORAL CANDIDATE
The present doctoral dissertation was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of Cyprus. It is a product of
original work of my own, unless otherwise mentioned through references, notes, or any
other statements.
Filia-Anna Christodoulou
…………………………………..
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Table of Contents
Abstract in Greek language………………………………………...…………………….....7
Abstract in an international language……..…………………………...………………........8
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study……………………………………………………......9
Chapter 2: Literature Review…………….………………………………………………..11
Chapter 3: The Present Study……………………………………………………………...37
Chapter 4: Results…………………………………………………………………………45
Chapter 5: Discussion………………………………………………………………….......55
References…………………………………………………………………………………63
Appendix A:……………………………………………………………………………….88
Appendix B:……………………………………………………………………………….92
Appendix C:……………………………………………………………………………….93
Appendix D:……………………………………………………………………………….99
Appendix E:………………………………………………………………………………100
Appendix F:………………………………………………………………………………105
Appendix G:……………………………………………………………………………...107
Appendix H:……………………………………………………………………………...109
Appendix I:………………………………………………………………………………113
Appendix J……………………………………………………………………………….114
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix K………………………………………………………………………………115
Appendix L……………………………………………………………………………….116
Appendix M………………………………………………………………………………117
Appendix N………………………………………………………………………………118
Appendix O………………………………………………………………………………119
Appendix P……………………………………………………………………………….120
Appendix Q………………………………………………………………………………121
Appendix R………………………………………………………………………………122
Appendix S………………………………………………………………………………123
Appendix T………………………………………………………………………………124
Appendix U………………………………………………………………………………125
Appendix V………………………………………………………………………………126
Appendix W……………………………………………………………………………...127
Appendix X………………………………………………………………………………128
Appendix Y………………………………………………………………………………129
Appendix Z………………………………………………………………………………130
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Abstract in Greek Language
Η μεταιχμιακή διαταραχή προσωπικότητας (ΜΔΠ) έχει χαρακτηριστεί ως διαταραχή
συναισθηματικής ρύθμισης και η σύγχρονη βιβλιογραφία υπογραμμίζει την ανάγκη για
έγκαιρο εντοπισμό και προώρη παρέμβαση. Η παρούσα έρευνα διερεύνησε τη σχέση
μεταξύ της συναισθηματική νοημοσύνης ως γνώρισμα και των αναδυόμενων
χαρακτηριστικών ΜΔΠ σε μαθητές Γυμνασίου και Λυκείου, καθώς και την προσκόλληση
και αντιλαμβανόμενη συναισθηματική διαθεσιμότητα ως μεσολαβητή και διαμεσολαβητή
αντίστοιχα. Τα αποτελέσματα υποδεικνύουν πως η συναισθηματική έκφραση προέβλεπε
τα χαρακτηριστικά ΜΔΠ μόνο για τους συμμετέχοντες που φοιτούν σε Λύκεια.
Αναφορικά με διαφορές φύλου, η αντίληψη συναισθημάτων ήταν σημαντικός
προβλεπτικός παράγοντας για τα χαρακτηριστικά ΜΔΠ κορίτσια, ενώ στα αγόρια μόνο η
διεκδικητικότητα προέβλεπε αυτά τα χαρακτηριστικά. Διαφάνηκε επίσης ότι ο αγχώδης-
αμφίθυμος τύπος προσκόλλησης ήταν σημαντικός προβλεπτικός παράγοντας και στα δύο
επίπεδα φοίτησης. Περαιτέρω, διαφάνηκε ότι η αντιλαμβανόμενη συναισθηματική
διαθεσιμότητα για πατέρες προέβλεπε τα χαρακτηριστικά ΜΔΠ αλλά μόνο για μαθητές
Γυμνασίου.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Abstract in an International Language
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) has been labeled a disorder of emotion
dysregulation and contemporary research underscores the need for earlier detection and
intervention. The current study investigated the relationship between trait emotional
intelligence (EI) and emerging borderline personality disorder features in adolescents in
junior high and high school, and the moderating and mediating effect of attachment and
perceived emotional availability, respectively. The results revealed that emotion expression
predicted BPD features only for high school participants. With regards to gender
differences, emotion perception was a significant predictor of BPD features in girls, while
for boys only assertiveness predicted these features. It was also revealed that an anxious
ambivalent attachment style significantly predicted BPD features in both education levels.
Furthermore, the study found that perceived emotional availability of fathers also
significantly predicted BPD features, but only for junior high participants.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study
Background
The debate regarding whether or not persons younger than 18 years old should be
diagnosed with a personality disorder (PD) is well-known and ongoing. However, the more
important question is which features of these disorders evident in children could elevate
the risk of them receiving a later diagnosis? Evidence from research investigating aspects
of Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), indicates that emotion has a central role in the
development of the disorder (Crowell, Beauchaine & Linehan, 2009; Farrell & Shaw,
1994) yet no study to date has looked at the possible link of Trait Emotional Intelligence
(TEI) and BPD in children. Furthermore, research regarding attachment styles in
individuals with BPD, has produced equivocal results, with some studies pointing to an
anxious/ambivalent style and others finding associations with an avoidant attachment style.
Additionally, the concept of emotional availability which involves important aspects of
dyadic relationships, predominantly those concerning parents and children has not been
investigated in relation to BPD, despite its theoretical relevance. Thus, by including the
latter as a possible mediator, this investigation could potentially shed more light on the
development of the disorder and, at the same time, guide future research and early
intervention efforts. The current study aims to bridge the gap in the literature, by
investigating the role of trait Emotional Intelligence (trait EI) in relation to BPD and
whether specific attachment styles can act as a moderator for the presence of BPD features
in children.
BPD is one of the most commonly diagnosed PDs (Leichsenring, Leibing, Kruse,
New & Leweke, 2011), as 30-60% of patients with a PD are diagnosed with BPD (Wenar
& Kerig, 2005). Prevalence rates of BPD in adults in the US have been found to be
between 0.5-5.9 percent in the general population, while in many clinical psychiatric
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
settings BPD is diagnosed in as high as 20% of patients (Kernberg & Michels, 2009). BPD
is also associated with a high degree of suffering for the patients themselves but also their
families and friends. It has been reported that between 60 and 70% of individuals with
BPD attempt suicide at least once in their lifetime, with self-injurious behavior ranking
much higher in frequency (Oldham, 2006). Self-injurious behavior in patients with BPD
has often been attributed to the intense suffering which they report experiencing, as they
indicate such behaviors provide a sense of temporary relief (Perroud, Dieben, Nicastro,
Muscionico & Huguelet, 2012). Moreover, research indicates that for almost a third of
BPD patients who self-harm, onset began prior to the age of 12 (Zanarini, Frankenburg,
Ridolfi, Jager-Hyman, Hennen & Gunderson, 2006).
Diagnoses of PDs have traditionally been given to individuals over the age of 18,
when traits and behaviour patterns are believed to be stable and not falling within the range
of developmental norms (i.e. for adolescence). However, there is growing concern that this
view may not allow for early intervention and treatment efforts. While the DSM-IV (APA,
2000), and more recently the DSM-5 (APA, 2013), allow for the diagnosis of BPD, and
other PDs, prior to age 18, providing there is an enduring pattern of symptoms for at least a
year, there is evidence that clinicians are reluctant to utilize this. In a survey of child and
adolescent psychiatrists (Griffiths, 2011), only 37% of participants indicated that they
believed BPD to be a valid diagnosis for adolescents, and only 23% reported using the
diagnosis on a regular basis within their practice. Evidence such as the latter, also raises
concerns regarding receiving an accurate diagnosis, as well as access to appropriate
treatment, for individuals presenting with symptoms of BPD in adolescence. The need for
diagnosis and timely treatment of adolescents with BPD is also highlighted in research that
indicates that utilization of healthcare, including hospitalizations, psychiatric medication Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
and treatment participation, is similar in adolescents when compared to adult patients
(Cailhol, Jeannot, Rodgers, Guelfi, Perez-Diaz et al. 2013).
Based on the above, the current study aims to investigate the relationship between
TEI and BPD in adolescence, while exploring the possible role of attachment and
emotional availability as a moderator and mediator respectively. The study’s rationale is
grounded in the relevant theory and research which indicates that the construct of trait EI
may be of significant relevance to BPD, despite being largely overlooked in the literature.
Meanwhile, in light of mounting evidence pointing to the need to address emerging
features of BPD in children and adolescents, it is necessary to have a sound theoretical
model which also has practical utility. Identifying children at risk for later diagnosis of
BPD is imperative and further research is needed to inform clinicians, educators and policy
makers on how to accomplish this without the stigma associated with being labeled as
having a PD.
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Borderline Personality Disorder
Within the context of mental health, the term borderline was initially coined by
Adolph Stern in 1938 (Stern, 1938) in order to describe patients who appeared to be on the
‘border’ so to speak, between neurosis and psychosis. While the conceptualization of BPD
has changed dramatically since then, this misleading term remains despite a more accurate
understanding of the complexities of this pervasive disorder. According to the Diagnostic
and Statistical Manual for mental disorders (DSM-IV-TR; APA, 2000), BPD is
characterized by a pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image
and affects and marked impulsivity. The disorder is further defined by marked disturbances
in numerous aspects of functioning such as affect, behavior, cognition, attention and
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
relationship skills. It is considered a cluster B PD, a subgroup associated with dramatic,
erratic and emotional behaviors. In the newest version of the manual (DSM-5; APA, 2013)
criteria include those specified for all PDs in addition to the disorder specific criteria as
follows:
A pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and
affects, and marked impulsivity, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of
contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
1. Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment. (Note: Do not include suicidal or
self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.)
2. A pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating
between extremes of idealization and devaluation.
3. Identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self.
4. Impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex,
substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating). (Note: Do not include suicidal or self-
mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.)
5. Recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior.
6. Affective instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic
dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a
few days).
7. Chronic feelings of emptiness.
8. Inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of
temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights).
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
9. Transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms.
While the DSM-5 (APA, 2013) continues to adopt a categorical view of PDs as part
of the main manual, it also recognizes and presents an alternative model. The latter model,
views PDs as extreme patterns of maladaptive traits, within the continuum of normal
personality. The dimensional viewpoint also argues that both Axis I and Axis II disorders
(APA, 2000) reflect similar mechanisms which contribute to the development of more
transient forms of psychopathology and the more enduring patterns seen in PDs (Krueger
& Tackett, 2003; Tillfors, Furmark, Ekselius & Fredrikson, 2004). More specifically, it has
been suggested in the literature, that adopting a dimensional view of BPD in adolescents
may in fact be more appropriate as it could best reflect the variability and heterogeneity
that is present in this age group (Miller, Muehlenkamp & Jacobson, 2008). Also, a review
of research indicates that dimensional conceptualizations have been favored for certain
disorders regardless of age, and this includes BPD (Haslam, 2003; Rothschild, Cleland,
Haslam & Zimmerman, 2003; Trull, Widiger & Guthrie, 1990). It is worth noting that,
despite the shift to the latest diagnostic manual the core aspects of the disorder remain
unchanged.
Theoretical Models of BPD
While the aetiology of BPD has yet to be fully agreed upon, there are several
models in the literature which attempt to explain the emergence of BPD and are derived
from different types of theoretical orientations within psychology. Despite the latter, the
models appear to include similar factors, albeit described in different terminology in
accordance with their respective theoretical backgrounds. Three models for the
development of BPD are discussed below, as well as the implications for moving towards
early intervention.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
In perhaps the most cited model for the disorder, Linehan (1993a) suggested that
BPD develops from the pairing of emotional vulnerability and an invalidating childhood
environment. According to this biosocial model, the invalidating environment occurs when
those close to the child constantly criticize the child’s expressions of thoughts and
emotions and attribute them to undesirable traits, which in turn, interacts with a biological
tendency for affective instability (heightened emotional sensitivity, high emotional
intensity and slow return to emotional baseline). An important aspect of BPD is a severe
dysfunction regarding affect which has played an important part in the biosocial (Linehan,
1993a) model, and which includes, as one of the six core characteristics, that of emotional
vulnerability. The researcher defines emotional vulnerability as a pattern of pervasive
difficulties in regulating negative emotions, including high sensitivity to negative
emotional stimuli, high emotional intensity, and slow return to emotional baseline, as well
as awareness and experience of emotional vulnerability (as cited in Wenar & Kerig, 2005).
In fact, it was proposed that BPD is primarily a disorder of emotion dysregulation, which
stems, at least in part, from an invalidating childhood environment in which the child is not
able to learn how to understand, label and cope with emotions. In an extension of the 1993
model, emotion continues to play a central role in the conceptualization of BPD, where
emotion dysregulation, along with impulsivity, are thought to contribute significantly to
the emergence of BPD within a developmental psychopathology framework (Crowell,
Beauchaine & Linehan, 2009).
Research has provided some support for Linehan’s (1993a) model, in which
negative affect intensity has been significantly correlated to BPD traits (e.g. Rosenthal,
Cheavens, Lejuez, and Lynch, 2005; Yen, Zlotnick, and Costello, 2002). A range of
articles support several aspects of the emotion dysregulation component of the theory (e.g.
Chapman, Leung & Lynch, 2008; Glen & Klonsky, 2009). In the Chapman et al. (2008)
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
study, results revealed that individuals with a higher number of BPD traits reported a
greater number of difficulties in aspects of emotion dysregulation, such as impulse control
and acceptance of emotions, when under conditions of emotional distress. However, a
discrepancy between laboratory and self-report results emerged in the latter study which
limits the conclusions which can be drawn from the outcomes. A recent study, (Gill &
Warburton, 2014) found partial support for the biosocial theory, where only emotional
dysregulation predicted BPD traits. The study also found that while emotional vulnerability
and invalidating parenting independently predicted emotional dysregulation, there was a
limited interaction between the two. Meanwhile, given that the bulk of research relied on
self-report measures, a recent review article (Cavazzi & Becerra, 2014) examined
psychophysiological research with regards to the biosocial theory. It was discovered that,
in contrast to self-report data and the biosocial theory, individuals with BPD evidenced a
lower baseline arousal (heart-rate, respiratory sinus arrhythmia and blood pressure) than
controls. Furthermore, with regards to skin conduct response, the literature indicates that
the results are mixed, with some studies indicating a higher response in those with BPD
and others failing to find any significant differences between BPD patients and controls.
Mixed results were also found for reactivity to emotionally and non-emotionally valenced
stimuli (see Cavazzi & Becerra, 2014).
Another core model in BPD literature has been suggested by Fonagy et al. (Fonagy,
Target, Gergely, Allen & Bateman, 2003), often referred to as the mentalization-based or
mentalizing model for BPD. In this model the disorder is conceptualized in terms of
impairment of the capacity for stress regulation, attentional control and mentalization
abilities which are believed to have developed within the context of attachment
relationships. Mentalization, or reflective functioning, is defined as the individual’s ability
to understand one’s own and others behavior in mental state terms (Fonagy, 2000).
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Meanwhile, attentional control is closely associated to impulsivity given that it refers to the
ability to inhibit a dominant response in order to perform a subdominant response, thus
modulating impulsivity (Fonagy et al., 2003). Stress regulation, further defined as affect
representation and regulation, is a core feature of BPD and the mentalization-based model
emphasizes the development of these abilities from early infancy through adulthood.
Furthermore, the researchers clarify that these abilities are acquired via the mirroring
processes provided by the attachment figure (Fonagy & Bateman, 2007). The attention
difficulties suggested in the model are also believed to be linked to difficulties in
controlled processing of information, as illustrated by patients’ erratic and impulsive
behavior. It is also suggested that deficits in attention may also contribute to difficulties in
directing attention appropriately to interpersonal and social contexts (Fonagy & Bateman,
2008).
The model suggests that abnormalities in parenting and/or genetic factors, such as
attention deficits, may limit the capacity for mentalization. It is also suggested that a high
reflective capacity in parents may promote secure attachments, while at the same time a
secure attachment style may precede a strong reflective capacity. Moreover, evidence from
research indicates that absence of marked contingent mirroring may be associated with the
later development of a disorganized attachment which is in turn linked to difficulties with
affect regulation (Fonagy & Bateman, 2007). In a more recent presentation of the model
(Fonagy, Luyten & Strathearn, 2011), the researchers suggest that genetics and early
environmental factors such as neglect or trauma, may undermine the development of
mentalized activities, the second order representation of emotional states. This leads to
limitations in the infant’s affect regulation which may undermine the development of
effortful control and understanding of others as motivated by neutral mental states. In
summary, the mentalization-based model for BPD is a transactional model which supports
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
that affect regulation, attentional control, mentalizing and attachment may interact in
multiple and complex ways in the development of BPD. Although the researchers who
developed the model have produced research in support of this model, this is in fact limited
and to the author’s knowledge there have been no attempts by others to test its validity and
reliability. Instead, research available focuses solely on the treatment derived from this
model, namely mentalization-based therapy (for a review see Haskayne, Hirschfield &
Larkin, 2014).
A third theoretical model, conceptualizes the disorder from a psychoanalytic
perspective (Kernberg, 1967; Clarkin, Lenzenweger, Yeomans, Levy & Kernberg, 2007).
According to Kernberg, personality can be understood along two continuous dimensions,
one being personality organization and the other a dimension of extroversion and
introversion. With regards to personality organization, there are three levels; the neurotic
level being the healthiest, as opposed to the psychotic level which reflects severely
disorganized personalities. Borderline Personality Organization (BPO) falls in the middle
of the aforementioned levels, and includes personalities which have, an intact sense of
reality on the one hand, and a fragmented sense of self (and others), on the other hand. The
BPO model claims to include, but go beyond the DSM-IV (2000) based BPD
conceptualization and as mentioned, is a dimensional understanding of this type of
personality, rather than a categorical approach. The BPO model is deeply rooted in object
relations theory which emphasizes the role of internalization of dyadic object relations in
understanding the development of personality (Clarkin et al., 2007). In order to fully
comprehend the proposed model, familiarity with the basic premises of object relations
theory in general is necessary.
Object relations theory proposes that internalization of object relation dyads is
strongly influenced by early mother-infant interactions. Moreover, it claims that there are
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
two positions which can emerge from the above, namely the paranoid-schizoid position
and the depressive position. In early development, it has been proposed that individuals go
through a phase of separation-individuation, during which a differentiation takes place
between good and bad, for both the self, and significant others. Ideally, this phase is
followed by the development of integrated representations of the self and others, thus
acknowledging that the self and others can be both ‘good’ and ‘bad’. With regards to
personality in particular, the theory conceptualizes psychic structure as composed of a
representation of self, a representation of other in relation to self, and an affect linking the
two (Clarkin et al., 2007) which is referred to as an object relation dyad. These object
relation dyads are what organize both motivation and behavior. Individuals with typical
personalities have three characteristics: an integrated concept of self and other, a broad
spectrum of affective experience and the presence of an internalized value system (Clarkin
et al., 2007). Normal identity requires integration of the self and the ability to combine
positive and negative emotions, as opposed to experiencing polarized affect. Meanwhile,
failure to develop the latter, results in, what is referred to as identity diffusion. Normal
personality structure also includes the component of affect regulation, whereby the
individual is able to experience a full range of complex emotions, while retaining impulse
control. Finally, the structure of normal personality within the framework of this model
requires an integrated system of internalized values, one that is influenced by parental
values but not inflexibly so, and can therefore exist independently.
With regards to BPO, and severe PDs in general, the premise is that there is lack of
integration, or identity diffusion (Clarkin et al., 2007). Thus, the symptoms observed in
BPD are believed to be a manifestation of pathology in the very structure of personality.
More specifically, BPO emerges due to a lack of integration between the positive and
negative parts which is rooted in early mother-infant relationships. This lack of integration
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
is believed to be responsible for the clinical presentation of emotional lability, anger,
interpersonal chaos etc. in individuals diagnosed with BPD. Further, it is proposed that
individuals with BPO are more dependent on primitive defense mechanisms, as opposed to
mature ones which allow the individual to interact in a flexible way. The model proposes
the distinction between high and low-level BPO on the basis of four dimensional variables,
comprising of the following: Introversion-Extraversion, Object-Relations, Moral values
and Negative Affect. The Introversion-Extraversion variable essentially refers to
temperament with regards to gravitating towards others or avoiding them. In BPO, Object-
Relations, or relationships with others, are characterized by significant deficits. These
include a lack of empathy in understanding others and inconsistencies in perceptions of
others, whereby individuals with BPO alternate between idealization and devaluation and
rejection. The moral values variable refers to an internalized set of values. According to the
model, this internalized value system differs among individuals with BPD, with some
achieving internalization of some values, and low level borderlines lacking this
internalized system. Finally, borderlines are believed to be dominated by Negative Affect
and difficulties with aggressive affects and behavior.
Some features of the BPO model appear to be supported in the literature (see
Clarkin et al, 2007 for a review). Furthermore, studies utilizing measures for assessing
BPO in adults, such as the Borderline Personality Inventory (Leichsenring, 1999a), have
yielded positive results with regards to construct validity (Leichsenring, 1999b, 1999c;
Leichsenring & Sachsse, 2002) and reliability (e.g. Chabrol et al., 2004). Meanwhile,
examination of core components of the theory through newly developed self-report
measures also show promising results (Goth, Foelsch, Schlüter-Müller, et al., 2012).
Despite this evidence, research on BPO and adolescents is essentially nonexistent,
whereby, to the author’s knowledge, only a single study investigated BPO in terms of
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
comorbidity with psychopathic traits in a non-clinical group of adolescents (Chabrol &
Leichsenring, 2006). Given this lack of research, the utility of this model, at least in terms
of early identification of BPD features in adolescents, is put into question.
Despite marked differences between theories, there are also certain common
threads, yet this is rarely recognized in light of the varying theoretical background from
which these models have been developed. It is important to recognize these and utilize this
common ground to develop theories and models which are comprehensive and non-
redundant but also hold practical significance. The above models appear to share a focus
on impaired emotional functioning and the early origins of this in the context of attachment
relationships. In the mentalizing model (Fonagy et al., 2003), environmental and genetic
factors are believed to contribute to a diminished ability for affect regulation and
subsequently the development of effortful control. Meanwhile, in the psychoanalytic model
of BPO, negative affect is an important variable. In the biosocial model (Crowell,
Beauchaine & Linehan, 2009) emotion is believed to be at the core of the disorder. Based
on the above, it is important for the purpose of this study to use terminology that
recognizes the common ground of the aforementioned models. Thus, the term emotion
dysregulation will be adopted to refer to the difficulties in emotion regulation which have
discussed using slightly different terms in the two of the three models – affect regulation
(Kernberg, 1967), affect representation and regulation (Fonagy et al., 2003). Attachment
and emotional availability in this study are terms believed to encompass the invalidating
environment in the biosocial model (Crowell, Beauchaine & Linehan, 2009), attachment
and mirroring discussed in the mentalization-based model (Fonagy et al., 2003) and
internalization of object relation dyads in the BPO model (Kernberg, 1967). Utilizing the
same terms to refer to concepts with varying theoretical background is not an attempt to
minimize the significance of underlying theories nor is it meant to oversimplify complex
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
processes. Instead, the premise here is that, when it comes to prevention in children and
adolescents, we need to have a common language, which can potentially strengthen efforts
for early detection of risk factors in non-clinical populations.
While it is reasonable to allow for a number of theoretical models for a particular
disorder, given the varying psychological approaches, the practical utility of this with
regards to the research-practice gap can be questioned. Kazdin (1997) has referred to the
lack of plan for progressing from research to effective interventions, particularly when it
comes to children and adolescents. He proposes a model which begins with a
conceptualization of the dysfunction, concurrent correlates, antecedents and causal factors,
in order to understand onset and course of clinical dysfunction (Kazdin, 1997).
Additionally, it is proposed that cross-sectional and longitudinal studies should be used to
test models of clinical dysfunction and developmental pathways or trajectories, in order to
uncover subtypes, moderators and other important factors relating to the risk profile. These
steps will enable a more effective transition to treatment development and research on
treatment processes and effectiveness. Meanwhile, others have also referred to the often
competing spheres of research and treatment and the need to merge the two (Lebow, 2006).
While the above models have given rise to relatively effective treatments for BPD patients,
these have been originally designed to cater to adults (Bateman & Fonagy, 2004; Clarkin,
Yeomans & Kernberg, 2006; Linehan, 1993a; Linehan, 1993b). The treatments in question
have been adapted for adolescents (see Ensink, Biberdzic, Normandin & Clarkin, 2015;
Fonagy, Rossouw, Sharp, Bateman, Allison et al., 2014; Miller, Rathus & Linehan, 2006;
Rathus & Miller, 2014; Normandin, Ensink & Kernberg, 2015; Rossouw, 2013) however,
it appears we have yet to find a model which would allow for identifying individuals at risk
for developing BPD in non-clinical adolescents, a vital step when developing early
intervention programmes. Within this context, the current study has adopted a cross-
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
sectional design to identify risk factors and moderators for the disorder as per Kazdin’s
(1997) suggestions.
BPD Features in Childhood
When diagnoses of PDs are made around the age of 18, maladaptive patterns of
behaviour and cognition are by definition enduring and inflexible. At the same time,
models for the development of PDs focus on the contribution of genetics and the early
environment in establishing these maladaptive patterns. This, however, is done mainly in
retrospective studies with individuals who have been diagnosed with PDs in adulthood.
While it is undoubtedly valuable to do such research, it does not inform us on how the
features of the disorder appear prior to the individual meeting the full criteria of the
personality disorder. Consequently, there is insufficient focus on identifying and defining
features or precursors of PDs in childhood and adolescence, which could potentially lead to
the development of early intervention programmes. PDs are known to be difficult to treat,
with BPD being a particularly strong example of this, thus it is imperative that prevention
and early intervention become prime research targets.
More recently, research has begun to address the above issues. There has been
growing interest in researching trait-related symptoms of PDs in children by creating a
developmental taxonomy of the latter (Clercq, Fruyt, Van Leeuwen & Mervielde, 2006).
Such taxonomies emerged in the last two decades for adults (e.g. Clark, 1986, 1993;
Livesley, 1990) and aimed at providing a comprehensive pool of items that address
maladaptive personality traits. In the last decade this has also been extended to children
(Clercq et al., 2006). Similarly, an important issue to consider in research surrounding
BPD is whether certain features of the disorder are present through childhood and the
stability of these characteristics, in order to identify individuals at risk for later diagnosis.
Important to this endeavour is the concept of clusters of symptoms as a precursor to a PD,
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
with the most pertinent example of this being the relationship between conduct disorder
(CD) and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD). The strong relationship between CD and
ASPD led to the requirement that individuals diagnosed with the latter need to have
exhibited symptoms of conduct disorder prior to the age of 15 (APA, 2000). While it is
clear that not all children diagnosed with CD will go on to receive a diagnosis of ASPD,
the severity of symptoms seems to elevate the risk and this provides the opportunity to
intervene early on, potentially lowering the associated risk. Meanwhile, ADHD has also
been found to significantly increase risk for ASPD (Loeber, Green & Lahey, 2003).
Similarly, clusters of internalizing and externalizing symptoms have been
associated with BPD and researchers have suggested they may lead to an elevated risk for
developing BPD (e.g. Crick, Murray-Close & Woods, 2005). In fact, Borderline Pathology
of Childhood (BPC) is a term that has been coined to describe a certain type of complex
and severe behavioral pathology which is characterized by affective, impulsive, and
cognitive symptoms (see Bemporad & Cicchetti, 1982; Paris, 2000). Research indicates
that children and adolescents with BPC are at a higher risk for future psychopathology
(Zelkowitz, Paris, Guzder, Feldman, et al., 2007), although more research is needed to
further investigate the relationship between BPC and BPD. In line with this viewpoint is
emerging research regarding the possible link between childhood disorders and BPD. A
recent study by Stepp and colleagues (2012) looked at the relationship between
oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and
BPD given the overlap in deficits and other symptomatology in these disorders. The
researchers found that ADHD and ODD at age eight predicted BPD symptoms at age 14,
even after controlling for symptoms of the other two disorders. Similarly, van Dijk and
colleagues (2011) found that all adult patients with BPD in their study had some symptoms
of ADHD in childhood and adulthood, although the specific study included only females in
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
its sample. These findings indicate that children presenting with certain symptoms may be
at risk for developing BPD features either in childhood or early adolescence.
Meanwhile, there is accumulating evidence that BPD features present in a similar
manner as in adults and may predict later diagnosis. In a research review, Miller and
colleagues (Miller et al., 2008) found that the prevalence, reliability and validity of BPD in
adolescence is both adequate and comparable to the disorder in adults. Further, research
shows that PDs in adolescents are not merely extreme, maladaptive traits of normal
personality but instead are best explained by dimensions of abnormal personality (Tromp
& Koot, 2010). Research such as the above further emphasizes the need to recognize that
features of BPD in adolescents are a valid occurrence and at the same time work on
defining and reliably assessing these early symptoms. Furthermore, these features appear
to be stable over time. In a large sample of 6-8 year old girls, impulsivity, negative
affectivity and interpersonal aggression, three of the core features of BPD were found to be
stable over time (Stepp, Pilkonis, Hipwell, Loeber & Stouthamer-Loeber, 2010).
Additional studies also point to the stability of BPD symptoms during adolescence
(Bornovalova, Hicks, Iacono & McGue, 2009; Stepp, Whalen, Scott, Zalewski, Loeber &
Hipwell, 2014); in one study involving female twin sets (Bornovalova, Hicks, Iacono &
McGue, 2013), exploring developmental trends revealed that BPD traits remained
relatively stable from age 14 to age 18. There also appears to be preliminary evidence that
this may be the case in at least one non-Western culture in preadolescence (Kawabada,
Youngblood & Hamaguchi, 2014), where BPD features were found to be relatively stable
in 9-11 year old Japanese children.
Moreover, it has been found that some personality characteristics, some of which
represent symptoms of BPD, are heritable (Torgersen, 2000), while brain scans have also
indicated deviant brain maturation processes in adolescent girls with BPD symptomatology
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
(Houston, Ceballos, Hesselbrock, & Bauer, 2005). A longitudinal study (Belsky et al.,
2012) using a large cohort of twins followed from age five to 12 years, found that 66% of
variance in Borderline Personality Related Characteristics (BPRC) could be accounted for
by genetic factors. Twin studies place the concordance rate between 35-37% (Kendler,
Aggen, Czajkowski, Roysamb, Tambs, et al., 2008; Torgersen, Czajkowski, Jacobson,
Reichborn-Kjennerud, Roysamb, et al. 2008; Reichborn-Kjennerud, Czajkowski,
Roysamb, Orstavik, Neale et al., 2010). Meanwhile, a large genetic study found an
association between a specific allele of a variant in the dopa decarboxylase gene which
catalyzes the synthesis of serotonin and dopamine (Mobascher, Bohus, Dahmen, Dietl,
Giegling et al., 2014), neurotransmitters that are heavily associated with features of BPD
such as mood regulation and impulsivity. Additionally, a study looking at DNA
methylation in BPD patients with severe childhood adversity and participants with major
depressive disorder without adversity, found that a specific site was associated with both
adversity and BPD and may represent a potential epigenetic pathway to the disorder
(Prados, Stenz, Courtet, Prada, Nicastro et al., 2015).
Interestingly, a recent review and meta-analysis of the genetic modulation of BPD
found insufficient evidence to support a direct relationship of the latter and several
neurotransmitter systems (Calati, Gressier, Balestri & Serretti, 2013). An additional review
also confirmed these findings and suggests a conceptual shift where research efforts should
focus on genetic effects on vulnerability to environmental causes, rather the genetic effects
on the disorder itself (Amad, Ramoz, Thomas, Jardri & Gorwood, 2014). However,
positive evidence was uncovered to support single BPD symptoms and neurobiological
systems, a finding which would make sense given the heterogeneity of the disorder (Calati
et al., 2013). Collectively, this growing body of research indicates that the genesis of BPD
is largely influenced by genetics, and more specifically gene and environment interactions
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
and correlations (see Amad et al., 2014, for a review). Thus, it is reasonable to assert that
BPD features are a reality in children, rendering childhood as the critical period for
purposes of intervention and treatment.
Attachment in BPD
As is evident from the discussion of the theoretical models on the development of
BPD, attachment issues are implicated in all three models discussed, and are believed to
play a significant role in the interpersonal difficulties faced by individuals diagnosed with
the disorder. While some research on attachment and BPD has been conducted over the
years, it has produced rather equivocal results and has yet to clarify the relationship
between the two. Thus, it is important to continue to include attachment in research
looking to uncover the pathways which lead to the development of BPD.
The basis for any discussion on this concept however, must refer to the theories of
Bowlby (1969, 1988). Bowlby postulated that through the interactions of mother and child,
the dyad develops an affective bond, namely attachment. He theorized further that the
caregiver’s responses serve as a working model for future relationships that is believed to
endure throughout childhood and into adulthood. Early research using a controlled
experiment to assess attachment styles gave way to the formulation of the following
categories: Secure attachment, Anxious/avoidant attachment and Anxious/resistant
attachment (Ainsworth et al., 1971; Ainsworth et al., 1978). These were later supplemented
with a fourth category (Main & Solomon, 1990) labeled disoriented-disorganized, after it
became apparent that not all attachment behaviours could fit into the aforementioned
categories. Since its conception, a plethora of research has been conducted revealing the
extensive effects of attachment style on a wide range of outcomes. Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
It is widely accepted that attachment style has an important role with regards to
psychological well-being. Insecure attachment styles have been associated with anxiety in
children; with an ambivalent attachment style revealing the strongest relationship between
the two (see Colonessi, Draijer, Stams, Van der Bruggen, Bögels et al., 2011 for a review).
Anxious and avoidant styles of attachment have also been associated with emotion
regulation difficulties such as dysregulation and suppression of emotions (Brenning,
Soenens, Braet & Bosmans, 2012). Insecure attachment with both parents assessed in
infancy also appears to be associated with teacher-rated externalizing behaviour in later
childhood (Kochanska & Kim, 2013). Additionally, secure attachment is associated with
multiple factors of school adjustment (i.e. academic, emotional, social and behavioral),
with children with avoidant and disorganized attachment evidencing the poorest
adjustment (Granot & Mayseless, 2001).
Overall, attachment has figured prominently in wellbeing research where secure
attachments have been linked to higher levels of wellbeing (see Mikulincer & Shaver,
2007). A study investigating the relationship between attachment and wellbeing revealed
that a preoccupied (the equivalent of an anxious-ambivalent style in children) attachment
style in adulthood is related to the most adverse outcome (Karreman & Vingerhoets, 2012),
as it negatively predicted well-being. Overall, the evidence available currently indicates
that an anxious ambivalent (or disorganized) style of attachment is of most concern for
later functioning (Lyons-Ruth, 1996; O’Connor, Bureau, McCartney & Lyons-Ruth, 2011).
Research also indicates that individuals with disorganized attachment styles are at a higher
risk for both externalizing and internalizing disorders (Lecompte & Moss, 2014; Lyons-
Ruth & Jacobvitz, 2008; Zeanah, Keyes & Settles, 2003).
In relation to BPD, relevant literature on attachment most frequently implicates a
preoccupied pattern of attachment with borderline personality features, often referred to as
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
anxious-preoccupied with regards to adults and anxious-ambivalent where children are
concerned. A study conducted by Fonagy et al. (1996) found that the majority of
individuals with borderline features were found to have a preoccupied attachment with
parents, while almost half of patients with BPD based on the DSM criteria were also
fearfully preoccupied with traumatic events. Findings have also suggested that adolescents
with an anxious ambivalent attachment are at a greater risk for a number of affective
disorders, including BPD (Rosenstein & Horrowitz, 1996). Other studies both in
nonclinical and clinical populations have also associated borderline personality features
with attachment anxiety and preoccupied attachment patterns (e.g. Meyer et al., 2004;
Nickell, Waudby & Trull, 2002). Additionally, studies have also associated BPD features
with both preoccupied and fearful attachments (Deborde, Milkjovitch, Roy, Dugré- Le
Bigre, Pham-Scottez, Speranza & Corcos, 2012).
Meanwhile, a study by Aaronson, Bender, Skodol and Gunderson (2006) found that
patients with BPD, in comparison to those with obsessive compulsive personality disorder,
had higher mean total scores for patterns of angry withdrawal and compulsive care-
seeking, indicative of an anxious-ambivalent attachment pattern. This study is consistent
with earlier research revealing similar patterns (e.g. West & Sheldon-Keller, 1992). In a
2004 review of attachment studies regarding BPD, Agrawal and colleagues found that all
studies revealed an association between BPD diagnosis and insecure forms of attachment.
However, there was great variability in the relationships that were targeted, as well as in
the assessment measures (Agrawal et al., 2004). More recent literature, however, reveals a
much more complex pattern of relationships between attachment styles and BPD. In one of
the more recent studies (Barone, Fossati & Guiducci, 2011) the findings indicate that there
may be differences in attachment styles among BPD patients depending on differences in
comorbidity of Axis I disorders. The researchers included four comorbidity groups in the
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
study: anxiety/mood, substance use, alcohol use and eating disorders. The first group was
believed to relate to internalized emotion regulation difficulties, while the other three were
linked to externalization difficulties. It was revealed that a preoccupied attachment style
was found more frequently in adults with a BPD diagnosis who were also diagnosed with
either an anxiety or a mood disorder. Different attachment patterns also emerged based on
the other comorbidity groups. Similarly, in a recent study with a clinical sample of
adolescents with BPD (Ramos, Canta, de Castro & Leal, 2014), researchers found that in
the internalizing subgroup there were higher rates of preoccupied/ambivalent insecure and
avoidant insecure attachment style perceptions, while in the externalizing subgroup secure
attachment style perception was significantly more prevalent. Thus, the relationship
between BPD and attachment may be more complex than previously understood,
especially when there is comorbidity. As is evident from the above, there are some
discrepancies regarding whether or not there is a single insecure attachment style is
consistently associated with BPD. Thus, further research into attachment and BPD is
warranted, while keeping in mind the broad range of difficulties which may be included in
the disorder. It is important to investigate whether there are variations in the attachment
styles associated with BPD features in relation to non-clinical populations of adolescents, a
primary aim of the current study. Establishing this trajectory in adolescents will contribute
to the understanding the more complex relationships between BPD and attachment in
clinical populations of both adolescents and adults with the disorder.
Emotional Availability
Emotional availability is a concept that emerged within the domain of
developmental psychopathology and is rooted in both attachment theory and systemic
approaches to development, with a focus on emotional perspectives (Biringen &
Easterbrooks, 2012). Emotional availability refers to the emotional connection between a
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
dyad and their ability to enjoy a mutually fulfilling and healthy relationship. Although
there have been varying conceptualizations in the literature, emotional availability has
predominantly been associated with the level of parental responsiveness, sensitivity, and
emotional involvement (Biringen & Robinson, 1991; Lee & Gotlib, 1991). While deeply
rooted in attachment theory, Biringen and Robinson (1991) have argued that the emotional
availability describes an interdependent quality of relation between a parent and child. For
instance, EA focuses more on positive emotions (while including negative emotions) when
compared to work on attachment (Biringen & Easterbrooks, 2012). Support for the
construct was initially derived from the development of an observational system to
measure the emotional availability (EA scales) present during caregiver-child interactions
(Biringen, Robinson and Emde, 1990, 1993, 1998; Easterbrooks & Biringen, 2005). EA
includes dimensions of the construct such as parental sensitivity, parental structuring,
parental nonintrusiveness, and parental nonhostility, as well as child responsiveness to the
parent and child involvement of the parent in interaction. Subsequently, a self-report
questionnaire was developed in order to assess perceived EA in older children and includes
the dimensions of parental responsiveness, parental sensitivity and emotional involvement
(Lum, 1999).
Research investigating observed emotional availability reveals that higher levels of
parental emotional availability have been associated with secure infant–parent attachment
(Bretherton, 2000) as well as a higher level of infants’ attention toward their parent
(Volling, McElwain, Notaro, & Herrera, 2002). Moreover, research shows that children of
sensitive mothers are more often securely attached and children of less sensitive mothers
are more often insecurely attached (Sagi, Koren-Karie, Gini, Ziv, & Joels, 2002; Ziv,
Aviezer, Gini, Sagi, & Koren-Karie, 2000). Research with mothers of 4 year olds also
revealed that parental stress was related to less favorable EA scores during their
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
interactions with their children (McMahon & Meins, 2012). Results from a longitudinal
study (Easterbrooks, Bureau & Lyons-Ruth, 2012), revealed that specific aspects of
emotional availability are related to emotional and behavior difficulties in children. More
specifically, externalizing behaviors and total behavior problem scores, as rated by
teachers, were associated with EA insensitivity and passive/withdrawn behavior.
Meanwhile, child depressive symptoms at age eight were associated with maternal
insensitivity and maternal hostility. Results from an additional study also confirm that
more positive perceptions of parental emotional availability are associated with lower
levels of externalizing behaviours (White & Renk, 2012).
Given the theoretical background of BPD, which emphasizes emotional aspects of
the parent-child relationship, such as an emotionally invalidating environment, the
construct of EA seems particularly pertinent. Despite the relevance of EA to theories on
the development of BPD, there appears to be no research investigating the relationship
between perceived parental EA and increased risk for BPD. One small study, however,
looked at maternal BPD with regards to observed EA towards their pre-school aged
children (Macfie, Coens, Fitzpatrick, Frankel, McCollum et al. (2007). The results,
although limited by the sample size, indicate that mothers with BPD are less emotionally
available. It is reasonable to hypothesize that parental difficulties in EA, irrespective of
their cause, may lead to emotion regulation difficulties in their offspring and thus a higher
risk of developing BPD. Research does in fact reveal preliminary support for the
connection between EA and emotion regulation – the core difficulty in BPD. A study
which looked at emotion regulation and reactivity in 12-month olds, indicated that aspects
of EA (i.e. maternal hostility) are related to emotion dysregulation, above and beyond
temperamental factors (Little & Carter, 2005). More importantly, due to possible
interaction effects of temperamental and environmental factors on the development of
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
BPD, looking at perceived EA in older children may offer new insight. As studies
involving perceived parental EA are scarce, further research is needed to investigate its
involvement in psychological wellbeing, particularly regarding emerging BPD features in
late childhood and adolescence.
Emotional intelligence
The roots of emotional intelligence (EI) can be traced to as early as 1920 when
Thorndike conceptualized what he referred to as social intelligence. This work was later
expanded by Gardner (1983, p.8) who spoke of multiple, relatively autonomous
intelligences, which included personal intelligence, comprised of interpersonal and
intrapersonal intelligences. These early theories, however, lacked sufficient empirical
support and adopted a very broad view of EI. In fact, the first definition and model of EI
was not introduced until 1990 (Mayer, Di Paolo & Salovey, 1990) and was later
popularized by Goleman (1995). The researchers defined emotional intelligence as “[..] a
subset of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’
feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them and to use this information to guide
one’s thinking and actions’ (Salovey & Mayer, 1990, p.189). Further, it was suggested that
there are distinct mental processes concerning emotions which include the following: 1.
Appraisal and expression of emotions, 2. Emotion regulation, 3. Utilization of emotions.
Their later revised model (Mayer & Salovey, 1997) placed greater emphasis on thinking
about emotions and asserted that EI should be considered a set of abilities grounded in
cognition. The latest model also resulted in the development of a measure for the cognitive
based EI (Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test, MSCEIT; Mayer, Salovey
& Caruso, 2002). Similarly, Goleman (1995) proposed a model of EI which he defined as
“[…] a meta-ability, determining how well we can use whatever other skills we have,
including raw intellect” (Goleman, 1995, p.36). While he recognizes the influence of traits
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
such as temperament, Goleman emphasizes that skills included within EI can and should
be taught.
A major departure from the traditional view of EI came in the form of Bar-On’s
research which viewed EI as a disposition or affect rather than conceptualizing it from a
cognitive perspective (1997). Instead, EI was defined as “[…] an array of non-cognitive
capabilities, competences and skills that influence one’s ability to succeed in coping with
environmental demands and pressures” (Bar-On, 1997, p.14). Specifically, the model is
believed to reflect the potential for performance or achievement rather than performance
itself (Bar-On, 1997; Bar-On, Brown, Kirkcaldy & Thome, 2000). Meanwhile, the
researcher was also the first to develop what he claimed to be a non-cognitive measure of
EI, namely the Emotional Quotient Inventory (Bar-On, 1997).
Given the growing trend in research involving EI, an increasing number of
measures were developed to assess the construct. However, these attempts largely
overlooked the difference between typical and maximum performance (e.g. Ackerman &
Heggestad, 1997; Hofstee, 2001). As Cronbach first distinguished in 1949, typical
performance, such as personality, is primarily measured through self-report questionnaires,
while maximum performance tests, which claim to measure ability, should include correct
and incorrect responses to items and tasks. In light of this, Petrides and Furnham (2000)
argued for the operationalization of two distinct constructs, trait EI and ability EI on the
basis that measurement is central to the operationalization of a construct (Perez, Petrides &
Furnham, 2005). Consequently, trait EI is a construct measured via self-report and
encompasses self-perceptions regarding facets of emotion, while ability EI, measured via
maximum performance tests assesses emotion-related cognitive abilities (Petrides, 2011).
The distinction between the two has consistently found support in research (e.g.
Freudenthaler & Neubauer, 2007; Martins, Ramalho & Morin, 2010).
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Research investigating EI, both ability and trait, has flourished in recent decades.
Regarding trait EI, there is accumulating evidence that the construct has incremental
validity over personality traits and other factors and it affects a range of domains and
important outcomes (e.g. Petrides & Furnham, 2003; Schutte, et al. 2001; Van der Zee,
Schakel & Thijs, 2002; Wong & Law; 2002). One study (Petrides, Gonzalez-Perez &
Furnham, 2007) found that high trait EI was a predictor of coping styles and the inverse
was significantly related to dysfunctional attitudes. High trait EI has also consistently been
associated with romantic relationship satisfaction (for a review see Malouff, Schutte &
Thorsteinsson, 2014) and academic performance (Perera & DiGiacomo, 2013). Moreover,
low trait EI scores have been associated with higher levels of neuroticism (Dawda & Hart,
2000) and found to be a significant predictor of both internalizing and externalizing
problems (Reker & Parker, 1999). Research also reveals a relationship between ability EI,
mental health and other measures of adjustment (see Brackett, Rivers & Salovey, 2011 for
a review). In a study investigating academic achievement, ability EI scores were positively
associated with academic achievement indices, and added to the incremental variance in
explaining academic success (Lanciano & Curci, 2014). In a study conducted with
university students, lower scores on both trait and ability EI measures were associated with
more binge drinking episodes and alcohol related problems, while interestingly trait EI
mediated the relationship between the level of the latter and ability EI (Schutte, Malouff &
Hine, 2011).
Research investigating EI and BPD specifically is surprisingly sparse, despite
evidence to suggest that the relationship between the two would be meaningful. Emotional
dysregulation has been found to have a central role in most forms of psychopathology (e.g.
Philippot & Feldman, Eds, 2004), and is at the core of BPD (e.g. Crowell, Beauchaine &
Linehan, 2009, Farell & Shaw, 1994). Kuo & Linehan (2009) found that individuals
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
diagnosed with BPD had a higher baseline emotion intensity based on electrophysiological
measurements as well as self-report measures. In addition, individuals suffering from BPD
seem to have poorer emotion perception but also increased sensitivity to emotional stimuli
(e.g. Wolff, Stiglmayr, Bretz, Lammers & Auckenthaler, 2007). Others have suggested that
emotional regulation difficulties, a core aspect of trait EI, may be one pathway through
which traumatic or stressful experiences, increase the risk of developing BPD symptoms
(Fernando, Beblo, Schlosser, Terfehr, Otte et al., 2014).
Given the above, there have been several studies which have looked at BPD and EI
in recent years. A study which utilized the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence
Test (MSCEIT; Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2000), an ability EI measure, found that female
BPD patients scored lower on overall EI, and lower on emotional regulation and
understanding emotional information (Hertel, Schutz & Lammers, 2009). In an
investigation of emotion facets in children, using the affective dysfunction subscale of the
Coolidge Personality and Neuropsychological Inventory for Children (CPNI; Coolidge,
2005) and Emotion Regulation Checklist (ERC; Shields & Cicchetti, 1997), Gratz and
colleagues (2009) found that affective dysfunction and disinhibition were significantly
associated with BPD features in children aged 9-13. Meanwhile, research on trait EI and
BPD features is also limited, with only a handful of studies investigating the relationship
between the two. A study by Sinclair and Feigenbaum (2012) found that trait EI was low in
those with a BPD diagnosis and was the strongest predictor of BPD symptomatology.
Research conducted by Gardner and Qualter (2009) found that in non-clinical adults, BPD
symptoms were associated with trait EI and particularly affective instability and identity
disturbance as measured by the borderline (BOR) Scale of the Personality Assessment
Inventory (PAI-BOR; Morey, 1991), and the DSM-IV (APA, 2000) criterion of emptiness.
Meanwhile, trait EI has also been found to be inversely related to BPD symptoms in a non-
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
clinical sample of college students (Gaher, Hofman, Simons & Hunsaker 2013). While not
directly related to BPD, in a sample of non-clinical adolescents, high trait EI was found to
be negatively associated with self-harm, a relationship mediated by choice of emotional
coping strategies (Mikolajczak, Petrides & Hurry, 2009). Moreover, a study investigating
the relationship between trait EI and symptoms of nine PDs in a nonclinical sample, found
that trait EI was a significant negative predictor of BPD symptomatology (Petrides, Pérez-
Gonzalez & Furnham, 2007). The results of a study by Leible and Snell (2004), which
investigated the link between aspects of EI and PDs, using the Trait Meta-Mood Scale
(TMMS; Salovey, Mayer & Goldman, 1995) found that BPD features in a non-clinical
sample were associated with poor emotional clarity and emotional repair.
Preliminary research available on EI and BPD indicates that further research is
warranted in this area, particularly as it may aid in providing a basis for identifying
individuals at risk. While there is preliminary evidence associating both trait EI and ability
EI and elements of BPD, there is also sufficient evidence to suggest that the former holds
more promise. An earlier review article by Schutte and colleagues (2007) indicates that
trait EI is more strongly associated with mental health than ability EI. Since then, trait EI
has consistently been found to have a more robust relationship with psychopathology than
ability EI (Davis & Humphrey, 2012a; Davis & Humphrey, 2012b; Gardner & Qualter,
2010; Williams, Daley, Burnside & Hammond, 2009). Meanwhile, ability EI and its
measurement have received a fair amount of criticism (see Fiori, Antonietti, Mikolajczak,
Luminet, Hansenne et al., 2014; Siegling, Saklofske & Petrides, 2015). More importantly,
the construct of trait EI is more relevant to an investigation of BPD, as well as PDs in
general, in that the interest lies not in the cognitive abilities related to emotion but the more
enduring self-perceptions. According to Petrides et al (2007) trait EI is a constellation of
emotion-related self-perceptions located at the lower levels of personality hierarchies, and
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
is thus more pertinent to personality psychopathology. As others have suggested (see
Gardner, Qualter & Whiteley, 2011) self-perceptions are likely to be influenced strongly
by temperament, the latter being implicated in theories of the development of BPD (i.e.
emotional vulnerability; Linehan, 1993). Additionally, Gardner et al (2011) found that
temperament characteristics are related to trait but not EI ability. Based on the above
research, this study will investigate the relationship between trait EI and BPD.
Chapter 3: The Present Study
Introduction
Given the role of emotion in BPD and preliminary evidence linking trait EI and
BPD, further research is warranted regarding the relationship between the two. To the
author’s knowledge there are only a couple of studies in which trait EI was investigated
with regards to BPD specifically (Gardner & Qualter, 2009; Leible & Snell, 2004). Both
studies however, utilized trait EI measures that do not fully encompass the trait EI domain
(see Gardner & Qualter, 2009; Petrides & Furnham, 2001). A third study however,
indicates that there is strong preliminary evidence that trait EI may be useful in research
with PDs (Petrides, Pérez-Gonzalez & Furnham, 2007). While all three studies show
encouraging results, none of these have looked into trait EI and BPD features in children or
adolescents. Assessing trait EI in children and adolescents may be an efficient manner in
which to identify difficulties and provide timely intervention without the stigma associated
with other assessments related to psychopathology. Additionally, such investigations may
shed light on the complexities of the emotional deficits encountered in individuals with
BPD. With regards to attachment and BPD, it is clear from the research to date, that the
findings are equivocal (see West & Sheldon-Keller, 1992; Barone, Fossati & Guiducci,
2011). Thus, continuing research into attachment styles and BPD and trying to elucidate
the relationship between the two is an important task which will help inform future risk
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
assessment and intervention efforts. Finally, emotional availability is a concept which
appears to be relevant to difficulties associated with BPD, yet research in this area is
severely limited. Perceived emotional availability of parents seems particularly pertinent
when one considers the DSM-5 (APA, 2013) criterion of ‘Frantic efforts to avoid real or
imagined abandonment’, as well as aspects of the theories for the development of BPD
(Fonagy et al, 2011; Kernberg, 1967; Linehan, 1993). Further investigating the emotional
availability of parents from the perspective of adolescents with regards to BPD features
seems a worthwhile endeavor.
The present study aims to address the above discrepancies and research gaps by
looking into trait EI, attachment and emotional availability in relation to features of BPD in
adolescents. To fully investigate the relationship between trait EI and BPD features the
current study will explore the full domain of the former. This will enable a closer look at
specific facets of trait EI as they relate to BPD features. To the author’s knowledge, this
will also be the first study to research this with a sample of adolescents. Moreover, this
study will add to research looking at attachment patterns and BPD characteristics in
adolescents, while also extending previous research by investigating whether there are any
moderation effects of attachment regarding the potential relationship between trait EI and
BPD features. Furthermore, the relationship between perceived emotional availability of
parents with regards to BPD has yet to be explored and the inclusion of this construct in
the current study may lead to further research in this area. Additionally, the study employs
a cross-sectional design which will enable a closer look at how the relationships between
the constructs mentioned above may present at different points in adolescence.
To this end, the present study will examine several hypotheses which include trait
EI, attachment, perceived emotional availability and BPD features. Hypothesis 1 will look
at the relationship between global trait EI and BPD features. It is hypothesized that low
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
trait EI will be associated with higher scores on BPD features. Further, hypothesis 2, states
that child trait EI indicators (factors) will predict BPD features in both age groups, with the
relationship being stronger for 15 year olds. Additionally, it is hypothesized that low
parental trait EI will be associated with low child trait EI (hypothesis 3). Hypothesis 4 will
investigate specific facets of trait EI in relation to BPD features. It is hypothesized that the
trait EI facets of emotion management, emotion regulation, impulsiveness (low),
relationships and stress management will have a stronger relationship to BPD features.
Hypothesis 5 involves the relationship between attachment and BPD features. It is
hypothesized that BPD features will be higher for insecure attachment styles, with the
strongest relationship between anxious-ambivalent attachment and BPD features.
Hypothesis 6 posits that the relationship between trait EI and BPD features will be
moderated by attachment. Hypothesis 7 will investigate the relationship between perceived
emotional availability and BPD features. It is hypothesized that low perceived emotional
availability will be associated with higher scores for BPD features. Further, hypothesis 8
posits that perceived emotional availability will act as a mediator between trait EI and BPD
features. It is also hypothesized that lower parent trait EI will be associated with lower
child trait EI and lower EA (hypothesis 9).
Method
Procedure
Following approval by the Cyprus Bioethics Committee, permission to approach
schools for pupil participation was obtained by the Ministry of Education. Schools were
selected randomly from major districts in Cyprus, after they had been separated into rural
and urban in order to ensure that the selection was representative with regards to other
factors. Letters describing the study were sent to parents in envelopes given to the children
(Appendix A). Aside from a clear description of the study, the content emphasizes the
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
voluntary nature of participation as well as the right to drop out of the study at any time.
Parents were also assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of the information
provided.
Participants
The current study included a sample of 780 adolescents, 291 in junior high and 489
in high school and their parents (N=266). Mean age and gender for each level of education
can be found in Table 1 (Appendix B). Adolescent participants were recruited from 12
schools in Cyprus, seven junior high schools (two rural) and five high schools. All
adolescent participants were freshman in either junior high or high school. In the complete
case sample, parents of junior high participants (N=90) had a mean age of 42.80 (SD=
6.12), of which 40 were college educated. Parents of high school participants (N=96) had a
mean age of 45.50, and 47 parents reported they received a college education.
Measures
Trait EI. Trait EI in parents was measured using the TEIQue (v.1.50) (Appendix C). The
TEIQue is a self-administered measure which includes a total of 153 items, and assesses
‘emotional self-perceptions located at the lower levels of personality hierarchies’ (Petrides,
Pita & Kokkinaki, 2007). The Likert-type questionnaire takes 25 minutes to complete and
covers a total of 15 trait EI facets (see Table 2, Appendix D). Meanwhile, there are four
trait EI factors: well-being, self-control, emotionality and sociability. When scored, the
TEIQue (v.1.50) yields a single global score, four factor scores on 15 scores – one for each
subscale.
The TEIQue questionnaire (full form), has been used extensively in research over
the past years and has demonstrated good reliability and validity (Petrides, 2006; Petrides,
2009b). In independent research which has been conducted (Mikolajczak, Luminet, Leroy
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
& Roy, 2007), the majority of the instrument’s subscales demonstrated good reliability,
with Cronbach’s a ranging from acceptable to excellent (α = .71 - .91) among both men
and women, while the remainder of the subscales evidenced acceptable to modest internal
consistencies. Internal consistencies for global scores for both males and females (α = .94,
α = .95 respectively) and at the factor levels were found to be excellent. Meanwhile,
evidence of the four factor structure of the instrument, as well as reliability data, has also
been replicated in other countries (Freudenthaler, Neubauer, Gabler, & Sherl, 2008;
Mikolajczak et al., 2007). Research has also confirmed that trait EI is a personality
construct, as opposed to a form of intelligence, and thus is associated with personality and
not measures of intelligence (Petrides & Furhnam, 2001, 2003; Van Rooy, Viswesvaran, &
Pluta, 2005). There is also accumulating evidence of the incremental validity of the
measure (Mikolajczak et al., 2007; Petrides, Pérez-González, & Furnham, 2007; Petrides,
Pita et al., 2007) and its overall predictive utility (see Andrei, Mancini, Baldaro, Trombini
& Agnoli, 2014 for a recent review).
The TEIQue (v.1.50) was also used to measure trait EI in adolescents. While the
researcher has also developed a modified version, with regards to wording and syntactic
complexity, for use with adolescents – the TEIQue-Adolescent Full Form (TEIQue-AFF;
Petrides, 2009a) - the full measure has not yet been translated into the Greek language.
Although the TEIQue Adolescent Short Form is currently available in Greek, it provides
only a global trait EI score which would not be sufficient for the scope of this study.
During communication with the main author of the instrument (Petrides, K.V.), it has been
indicated that simplifying the TEIQue (v.150) for use with adolescents is a straightforward
process. Thus, necessary changes have been made to the adult version for use with the
adolescent participants of the study (Appendix E). Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Permission to use the TEIQue instruments was obtained from the primary author
(Petrides, K.V.). The TEIQue is scored by the London Psychometric Lab at University
College London, after which reports are sent to the researcher.
Attachment. Attachment styles (ATT) were measured using the Attachment Styles
Classification Questionnaire (ASCQ; Finzi et al., 1996) which is an adaptation for children
of the Hebrew version (Mikulincer et al.,1990) of the Attachment Questionnaire for adults
(Hazan & Shaver, 1987). The questionnaire is suitable for use with children 7-14 years old,
but does not however, exclude the use with slightly older children (in this case 15-16 year
olds). The ASCQ is comprised of 15 statements which tap into three attachment patterns:
Secure, Anxious/Ambivalent and Avoidant (see Appendix F). This self-report
questionnaire includes items such as “I make friends with other children easily”,
“Sometimes I am afraid that other kids won’t want to be with me” and responses are
recorded on a five point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (All wrong) to 5 (Very right).
Children are assigned an attachment style based on which category they score the highest
in. The ASCQ takes approximately 5 minutes to complete. The measure was translated and
back-translated by two bilingual individuals (the author and a Clinical Psychology Phd
student) for use in this study.
Data on the psychometric qualities of the instrument have proven thus far to be
satisfactory. The original article, which is in Hebrew, reports some psychometric properties
(taken from the abstract and future articles), including the internal consistency for the
scales which ranged from .69-.81. Furthermore, two-week test-retest reliability was
reported as ranging from .87-.95. Meanwhile, a later study (Al-Yagon & Mikulincer, 2004)
reported internal consistency values ranging from .64-.73 for the three factors.
Emotional availability. To assess the perceived emotional availability (EA) of parents, the
Lum Emotional Availability of Parents (LEAP; Lum, 1999) was administered to
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
adolescents in the study (Appendix G). LEAP is a single-domain, 15-item instrument
which was designed to assess children and adolescents’ perceptions of the emotional
availability of their parents or caregivers. This subjective construct encompasses
perceptions regarding parental responsiveness, sensitivity and emotional involvement. The
instrument is appropriate for use which children and adolescents (4th grade – 12th grade)
and young adults (college students) and was designed to measure the emotional availability
of both parents (LEAPm and LEAPf).
The LEAP is a self-report instrument containing 15 items and takes approximately
2 minutes to complete. Items are scored on a 6 point Likert-type scale ranging from 1
(never) to 6 (always). Available research regarding reliability and validity has produced
positive results. Internal consistency was reported for young adults (n=220; mothers a=.98;
fathers a=.98), a nonclinical sample of children and adolescents (n=635; mothers a=.96;
fathers a=.97), a clinical sample of children and adolescents (n=110; mothers a=.93; fathers
a=.95) (Lum & Phares, 2005). An additional study which aimed to validate the measure in
an Italian sample (Babore, Picconi, Candelori & Trumello, 2014) also report satisfactory
data for the internal consistency of the measure, for both reports on mother (a = .93) and
father reports (a = .95) and all item-correlations. Similar findings are also reported in a
study by White & Renk (2012). The study by Babore et al. (2014) also reports a significant
positive correlation of LEAPm with the Inventory of Peer and Parent Attachment (IPPA)
for mothers (r = .85, p < .001) and LEAPp with IPPA for fathers (r = .82, p <.001),
indicative of the measure’s convergent validity. Short term temporal stability was also
reported for the nonclinical sample (r=.81, p<.001 for reports for mothers and r=.76,
p<.001 for reports for fathers) (Lum & Phares, 2005). Meanwhile, a principal component
analysis (varimax rotation) using data from a sample of older adolescents (n=155) resulted
in a one-factor solution, where reports from mothers and fathers were analyzed separately.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
The one-factor solution accounted for 95% and 94% of the explained variance (Lum &
Phares, 2005). The one factor solution was also supported in the Babore et al study (2014).
Additional iterated principal axis factor analysis was performed with three other samples
which resulted in the same one-factor solution accounting for 96%, 93% and 95% of the
explained variance for the mother’s perceived emotional availability and 97%, 94% and
97% of the explained variance for the father’s emotional availability (Lum & Phares,
2005). Finally, there is evidence of both convergent and divergent validity of the measure
after correlations were found in the predicted direction between LEAP scores and other
instruments measuring both similar and dissimilar constructs.
To date, the LEAP has been translated and validated in a study with an Italian
population (Babore et al., 2014) which pointed to the validity of the instrument. It is a brief
instrument that uses simple language and does not appear to include items which are
heavily influenced by cultural considerations. The instrument has been translated into
Greek and then back-translated for use in this study by two bilingual Clinical Psychology
Phd students.
Borderline personality disorder features. Borderline Personality Disorder Features
(BPDF) were assessed using the Borderline Personality Features Scale for Children
(BPFSC; Crick, Murray-Close & Woods, 2005). The BPFSC is a self-report instrument
that assesses borderline personality features among children and adolescents aged 9 and
older (Crick et al., 2005) and is based on the PAI-BOR (Morey, 1991). The BPFSC
assesses the four domains found in the PAI, specifically affective instability, identity
problems, interpersonal problems and self-harm, using age appropriate terms. It is a 24
item instrument where items are responded to on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not
at all true) to 5 (always true). Children report on their affective instability (six items; e.g.,
‘My feelings are very strong. For instance, when I get mad, I get really, really mad. When I
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
get happy, I get really, really happy’), identity problems (six items; e.g., ‘I feel that there is
something important missing about me, but I don’t know what it is’), negative
relationships (six items; e.g., ‘I’ve picked friends who have treated me badly’), and self-
harm (six items; e.g., ‘I get into trouble because I do things without thinking’). Items are
summed up to yield a global score – i.e. the scales are not recommended for use as stand-
alone constructs, according to the developers of the scale. As the BPFSC is not currently
available in Greek, the measure was translated from English to Greek and then back-
translated by two bilingual Clinical Psychology Phd students, for use in this study
(Appendix H).
Research on the BPFSC supports that the measure has good internal consistency
(Cronbach α > .76) (Crick et al., 2005; Hawes, Helyer, Herlianto & Willing, 2013), as well
as construct validity (Crick et al., 2005). A study by Chang and colleagues (2011) found
similar results, including good overall internal consistency (Cronbach α = .89) as well as
moderate to high levels of internal consistency for the measure’s subscales (Self-Harm α =
.86; Affective Instability α =.72; Negative Relationships α = .65). The BPFSC has also
demonstrated high accuracy in discriminating adolescents with a diagnosis of BPD in an
inpatient population, providing preliminary support for the criterion validity of the measure
(Chang, Sharp & Ha, 2011).
Chapter 4: Results
Preliminary analyses
Missing data
The initial sample consisted of 780 adolescents, 291 in junior high (mean age =
12.65) and 489 in high school (mean age = 15.47). Participants with more than 15%
missing data were deleted from the sample (N=118). Additionally, respondents who had
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
completed the measures in a non-serious manner, such as responding to items randomly i.e.
circling one answer throughout, were also removed from the sample (N=40) . This resulted
in a sample of 622 adolescents. To investigate the type of missing data in the sample,
missing Values Analysis (MVA; SPSS, version 20) was performed on the data, including
Little’s MCAR test (Little, 1988).
Little's MCAR test was performed on the sample (N = 622) and proved to be
significant for all measures: BPFSC, χ2 (364, N=622) = 442.03, p < .01; ASCQ, χ2 (326,
N=622) = 739.33, p < .001; LEAPm, χ2 (137, N= 622) = 239.00, p <.001, and for the
LEAPF, χ2 (233, N=622) = 483.01. Obtaining significant results for Little’s MCAR test,
indicates that the data were not missing completely at random (Little, 1988), and thus
multiple imputation is recommended as a suitable method to replace missing values, while
minimizing bias introduced when using other methods. Multiple imputation was thus
performed on the data via SPSS. This resulted in six datasets; the original dataset and five
imputation sets. Missing data analysis was performed separately for the TEIQue (v.1.50) as
scoring for the measure is performed by the London Psychometric Laboratory at
University College London. Participants with more than 15% missing data were deleted
from the sample prior to scoring. Missing data for the TEIQue (v.1.50) were then replaced
with the median of nearby points. This resulted in a final, complete case, sample of 555
adolescents and 248 parents.
Multivariate normality
Prior to addressing the main hypotheses of the study, data was screened for
multivariate normality. Regarding multivariate normality, an analysis of standard residuals
was carried out, which showed the data contained no outliers (Std. Residual Min = -3.16,
Std. Residual Max = 3.03). Multicollinearity was also not an issue in the sample, indicated
by the VIF values for all of the main variables and the trait EI factors which were all well
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
below 3 (see table 3, Appendix I). Meanwhile, for the TEIQue subscales, multicollinearity
was also not an issue, as all VIF values were found to be well below 3. The data also met
the assumption of independence of errors (Durbin-Watson value = 2.075).
Descriptives
Mean scores, as well as minimum and maximum scores, for the BPFSC, and
LEAPm, LEAPf and global trait EI, for junior high and high school participants, can be
found in Tables 4 and 5 (Appendix J) respectively. Mean scores for the BPFSC were
slightly higher than those reported in prior research, but comparable (see Crick et al, 2005;
Hawes, Helyer, Herlianto & Willing, 2013), particularly since the mean age in this study
was higher than others. Mean scores and standard deviations for the TEIQue subscales for
junior high participants (N = 196) and high school participants (N = 354) can be found in
Table 6 (Appendix K) and Table 7 (Appendix L), respectively. Mean scores and standard
deviations for the TEIQue subscales for parents can be found in Table 8 (Appendix M).
Reliability
Cronbach’s alpha was computed in order to investigate the internal consistency of
the measures. For the BPFSC, reliability for the scale was moderately high, Cronbach’s α =
.80 (N = 622). As previously noted, the researchers (Crick et al., 2005) recommend using
only global scores, despite the fact that the measure is based on the PAI-BOR and its four
subscales: Affective instability, Identity problems, Negative relationships and Self-harm.
Although the researchers have not reported specific reasons for the latter, others have noted
that the subscales have not yet been validated (Chang et al., 2011). Nonetheless,
Cronbach’s alpha was computed for the subscales and found to be low for all four:
Affective instability, α = .45; Identity problems, α = .55; Negative relationships, α = .54;
Self-harm, α = .66.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
For the ASCQ, reliability was low for the subscales Secure, Cronbach’s α = .43 and
Avoidant, α = .36. However, for the subscale Anxious-Ambivalent Cronbach’s alpha was
acceptable, α = .70. Regarding the LEAP measure, Cronbach’s alpha was excellent for
both mothers, α = .95, and fathers, α = .96. For the TEIQue, Cronbach’s alpha for the
complete scale in the sample was excellent, α = .90 and for the subscales Cronbach’s alpha
ranged from .53 - .84 (see table 9, Appendix N).
Factor Analysis
For the purpose of investigating the factor structure of the ASCQ, a principal
component analysis (PCA) was conducted on the 15 items of the measure, with oblique
rotation (direct oblimin). The factor solution (N=622) indicated that there were five factors,
based on Kaiser’s criterion of eigenvalues above 1. Upon examining the correlations
between factors, it was revealed that the highest correlation was .22, well below the
recommended threshold for orthogonal rotation (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Thus, it was
decided to proceed with PCA with orthogonal rotation.
PCA was conducted with orthogonal rotation (varimax). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
measure verified the sampling adequacy for the analysis, KMO = .77 and with the
exception of one item, all KMO values for individual items were above the acceptable
criterion of .5. Bartlett’s test of sphericity, χ2 (105) = 1362.06, p < .001 indicated that
correlations between items were sufficiently large for PCA. Five components had
eigenvalues above Kaiser’s criterion of 1; however, one component only marginally
reached that value. Parallel analysis (Horn, 1965) was performed using SPSS syntax
(O’Connor, 2000) to decide the number of factors to retain. According to the results, only
four factors were retained. Based on the reliability analyses and the PCA results, it was
decided that only one of the factors would be retained for further analyses. Factor loadings
for all items of the ASCQ can be found in Table 10 (Appendix O). The factor was
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
composed of all items identified by the authors (Finzi et al., 1996) as reflecting an anxious
ambivalent attachment style, with the exception of two additional items: item 2, which
prior research on the instrument has indicated that it loads on the factor identified as
avoidant and item 3 which typically loads on the factor identified as secure.
Principal axis factoring (PAF) with Direct Oblimin (oblique) rotation for the 15
items of the LEAPm was conducted on the sample (N=622). An examination of the Kaiser-
Meyer Olkin measure of sampling adequacy suggested that the sample was factorable
(KMO=.96). Factor loadings can be found in Table 11 (Appendix P). The results revealed
a single factor, which explained 55.20% of the variance. For the LEAPf, KMO=.97, the
factor solution also revealed one factor which explained 62.40% of the variance. Prior
research using the LEAP with both PAF and principal components analysis (Lum &
Phares, 2005) has also indicated a one factor solution for the LEAP, for both mothers and
fathers.
PAF with Direct Oblimin (oblique) rotation was also performed on the 24 items of
the BPFSC. The Kaiser-Meyer Olkin measure verified the sampling adequacy for the
analysis (KMO=.86). The results of the PAF revealed a seven factor solution (for factor
loadings see Table 12, Appendix Q). Parallel analysis via SPSS syntax (O’Connor, 2000)
also indicated that seven factors should be retained. Based on the reliability results and the
factor solution in this sample, in addition to the recommendations of the authors (Crick et
al., 2005), it was decided that only global BPFS-C scores would be used in this study.
Correlations
Correlations between the main variables in the study and the four trait EI factors
can be found for junior high participants in Table 13 (Appendix R) and high school
participants in Table 14 (Appendix S).
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Main results
Hypothesis 1
To examine the first hypothesis of the study, that low trait EI would be associated
with higher scores on the BPDF, a Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was
computed to assess the relationship between trait EI global and BPDF scores separately for
each education level. There was a non-significant correlation of r = -.06 (p = n.s.) between
trait EI and BPDF scores in the junior high sample (N=196), and for the high school
participants a non-significant correlation of r = .01 (p=n.s.). Thus, hypothesis 1 was not
supported.
Hypothesis 2
To test the hypothesis that trait EI factors would predict BPD features, standard
multiple regression was performed with BPDF as the criterion variable and the four trait EI
factors as predictors, separately for each education level. For junior high participants, none
of the four trait EI factors were significant predictors of BPDF scores: wellbeing, Β = -.11,
n.s.; self-control, Β = .03, n.s.; emotionality, Β = -.02, n.s. and sociability, Β = .04, n.s. The
overall fit for the model was R2 =.01 (Adjusted R2 = -.01). The same was also true for
high school participants: wellbeing, Β = .05, n.s.; self-control, Β = .05, n.s.; emotionality,
Β = -.10, n.s. and sociability, Β = .02, n.s. The overall fit for the model was R2 = .08
(Adjusted R2 = .01). Therefore, hypothesis 2 was unsupported.
Hypothesis 3
In order to investigate the hypothesis that low parental trait EI will be associated
with low child trait EI, a Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was computed to
assess the relationship between the two. The complete sample of children’s scores matched
with parental scores was utilized (N=193). There was a non-significant correlation of r
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
=.12 (p= n.s.) between parental trait EI global scores and child trait EI global scores for all
participants (regardless of education level). Correlation analyses were also repeated based
on education level. For junior high participants, the correlation was also non-significant, r
= .13 (p= n.s.), N= 93. For high school participants, the correlation was also non-
significant, r = .09 (p=n.s.), N=100. Thus, this hypothesis was not met.
Hypothesis 4
The fourth hypothesis stated that certain trait EI facets, namely those of emotion
management, emotion regulation, impulsiveness (low), relationships and stress
management would be stronger predictors of BPDF scores, than other subscales. To
explore this hypothesis, standard multiple regression was performed with BPDF as the
dependent variable and the TEIQue subscales as predictors, separately for each education
level. The samples were deemed to be sufficient in size based on Tabachnick and Fidell’s
(2007) recommendations for testing individual predictors with multiple regression.
Correlation coefficients for the relationship between TEIQue subscales and BPDF for
junior high and high school participants can be found in Table 15 (Appendix T) and Table
16 (Appendix U). For junior high participants (N=196), none of the subscales were
significant predictors of BPDF (see table 17, Appendix V). For high school participants
(N=359), only emotion expression was a significant predictor of BPDF, where the
regression coefficient was -.1.96 (95% CI = -3.46 - -.46). Regression coefficients for all
subscales can be found in Table 17 (Appendix V) Therefore, although one of the subscales
was a significant predictor of BPDF scores, the results did not support hypothesis 4.
Hypothesis 5
Hypothesis 5 predicted that BPD features would be higher for insecure attachment
styles, with the strongest relationship between anxious-ambivalent attachment and BPD
features. Given the poor reliability of two out of three attachment style scores explored in
the study, as well as the factor analysis results, it was not possible to fully explore this
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
model. However, anxious ambivalent attachment scores were explored in relation to BPDF
in additional analyses that were performed on the sample.
Hypothesis 6
Hypothesis 6, postulated that the relationship between trait EI and BPD features
would be moderated by attachment. Since the relationship between trait EI and BPD was
not supported in the previous models, with the exception of the emotion expression
subscale in high school participants, the possibility of any moderation effects was
excluded. Thus, hypothesis 6 was not explored.
Hypothesis 7
It was hypothesized that low perceived emotional availability would be associated
with higher scores for BPDF – hypothesis 7. In order to investigate this hypothesis, a
Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was computed to assess the relationship
between perceived emotional availability and BPDF scores, based on education level. For
junior high participants (N= 196), there was a non-significant correlation between LEAPM
and BPDF, r = -.12 (p= n.s), however, there was a significant negative correlation between
LEAPF and BPDF, r = -.18, p < .05. For high school participants (N=359), there was a
significant negative correlation between LEAPM and BPDF, r = -.19, p < .05, and a
significant negative correlation between LEAPF and BPDF, r = -.17, p < .05. Thus,
hypothesis 7 was supported for high school participants and partially supported for junior
high participants.
Hypothesis 8
An additional hypothesis stated that perceived emotional availability would act as a
mediator between trait EI and BPD features. As the latter relationship was not supported in
the study, any mediation effects were excluded as possibilities. Thus, it was not possible to
explore this hypothesis.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Hypotheis 9
The final hypothesis of the study predicted that lower parent trait EI would be associated
with lower child trait EI and lower EA. A Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient
was computed to assess the relationships between parental trait EI (global), child trait EI
(global) and perceived EA for mothers and fathers (N=193). Non-significant correlations
were found for the relationship between parental trait EI and child trait EI, r = .12 (p= n.s.),
parental trait EI and LEAPM, r = .08 (p= n.s.) and parental trait EI and LEAPF, r = .04
(p=n.s.). Thus, hypothesis 9 was unsupported.
Secondary analyses
Given that only one of the trait EI subscales was found to be a significant predictor
of BPD features, in one age group, it was decided that the other variables in the study
would be explored as independent predictors - as moderation and mediation relationships
were no longer possibilities. Thus, multiple regression was performed, by education level,
including the following variables: Anxious ambivalent attachment, LEAPm and LEAPf.
For high school participants (N=359), standard multiple regression was performed
with emotion expression, Anxious Ambivalent attachment, LEAPm, and LEAPf as
predictors. Regression coefficients for the above variables can be found in Table 18
(Appendix W). The association between the criterion and explanatory variables was
moderate (Multiple R = 0.55). Only Anxious Ambivalent attachment style was positively
related to BPD features, accounting for 30% of the variation (Adjusted R2). The regression
coefficient for Anxious Ambivalent attachment style was 0.55 (95% CI = 5.15 – 7.25).
For junior high participants (N=196), standard multiple regression was performed
on LEAPm, LEAPf, and Anxious Ambivalent attachment style (Table 18, Appendix W).
The association between the criterion and explanatory variables was moderate (Multiple R
= .43). Anxious Ambivalent attachment style was a significant predictor of BPD features,
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
where the regression coefficient was 0.38 (95% CI = 2.93 – 5.86). LEAPf was also found
to be a significant predictor of BPDF, with a regression coefficient of -.17 (95% CI = -.21 -
-.01). The predictors accounted for 17% of the variation (Adjusted R2).
Given that none of the TEIQue subscales were found to be significant predictors of
BPDF in the two education level groups (with the exception of emotion expression in high
school participants), the relationship between trait EI subscales and BPDF was explored as
a function of gender. Due to restrictions with sample size in each education level, the
samples of girls and boys included participants from both junior high and high school.
Standard multiple regression was performed on girls (N=253) with the trait EI subscales as
the predictors and BPDF as the criterion variable. The results indicated that emotion
perception was a significant predictor of BPDF for female adolescent participants, with a
regression coefficient of 2.82 (95% CI=.42 -5.23), p < .05. For boys (N=215), only
assertiveness was found to be a significant predictor of BPDF, where the regression
coefficient was 2.65 (95% CI = .25 -5.06), p < .05. Unstandardized and standardized
coefficient values for both girls and boys can be found in Table 19 (Appendix X).
Moderation effects were then explored via SPSS PROCESS (Hayes, 2013). Due to
the fact that PROCESS cannot handle imputation files, the analyses were run on only one
of the imputation sets. Attachment did not moderate the relationship between emotion
perception and BPDF for girls (N= 249) where the regression coefficient was 1.14, p > .05
(R2 = .01, F(1, 249) = 1.39, p > .05). The possibility of a moderation effect of attachment
on the relationship between assertiveness and BPDF for boys was also explored and found
to be non-significant, with a regression coefficient of 1.26, p > .05 (R2 = .01, F(1, 208) =
2.76, p > .05).
Given the unexpected results, the possibility of parental scores on the TEIQue
predicting BPDF was also explored further. Standard multiple regression was performed
with the measure’s subscales as predictors and BPDF as the criterion variable, with
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
complete cases of adolescents matched with parental scores (N=193). Correlations between
the subscales and BPDF can be found in Table 20 (Appendix Y). None of the subscales
were found to be significant predictors of BPDF (for regression coefficients see Table 21,
Appendix Z).
Moreover, to investigate potential differences between participants who scored
higher on the BPD measure and those who scored lower, adolescent participants were
divided into high and low BPD groups. Individuals placed in the high BPD group (N=
143), scored 69 or higher on the BPFSC, while adolescents in the low BPD group (N=
413), scored below 69. It should be noted that the value of 69 was selected as a cut-off
point for the two groups as it represented scores in the 75th percentile. Subsequently, a one-
way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted to explore whether there is a
statistically significant difference between high and low BPD group on trait EI (global),
controlling for LEAPm and LEAPf. The results of the ANCOVA revealed no main effects
of BPD group status F(1, 548) = .02, p > .05, ηp2 < .001, and no interaction between high
and low groups and LEAPm, F(1, 548) = .01, p > .05, ηp2 < .001 or LEAPf, F(1, 548) =
.05, p > .05, ηp2 < .001.
Additionally, a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed with
the four trait EI factors as dependent variables and BPD groups (high vs. low) as
independent variables. There was a non-significant difference in trait EI factor scores,
based on which BPD group participants belonged to (high vs. low), F(4, 549) = .77, p >
.05. It should also be noted that Box’s M value of 26.08 was found to be significant, p <
.005, indicating that the covariance matrices between the groups were unequal. Based on
the latter, the results of the MANOVA need to be interpreted with caution.
Chapter 5: Discussion
The present study aimed at investigating trait EI in relation to BPD features in
adolescents and the possible influence of perceived emotional availability and attachment
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
on that relationship. The results of the study found that anxious ambivalent attachment
scores significantly predicted BPDF scores in both junior high and high school
participants. Further, it was revealed that the perceived emotional availability of fathers,
significantly predicted BPDF scores in junior high participants only. Additionally, the
emotion expression subscale of the TEIQue was found to be a significant predictor of
BPDF in high school participants. Moreover, the study revealed significant gender
differences with regards to trait EI and BPD features. Specifically, the trait EI facet of
emotion perception significantly predicted scores on the BPDF measure in girls only, while
in the sample of boys, only assertiveness significantly predicted these features.
Interestingly however, hypotheses relating to child trait EI and BPDF scores were
not supported in this study. Specifically, it was hypothesized that low trait EI (global)
would be related to higher scores on BPD features and that trait EI factors would
significantly predict BPDF scores at both education levels. Moreover, it was hypothesized
that specific trait EI facets (i.e. emotion management, emotion regulation, impulsiveness -
low, relationships and stress management) would also significantly predict features of
BPD. Suprisingly, trait EI (global) was unrelated to BPDF scores in this study. The limited
prior research available, conducted mainly with adults, has linked trait EI to BPD
symptomatology (e.g. Gardner & Qualter, 2009; Sinclair & Feigenbaum, 2012), while
there is also some preliminary evidence that points to an association between BPD related
symptomatology, such as self-harm, and trait EI in adolescents (Mikolajczak et al., 2009).
There could be several explanations as to why the results of the present study are not fully
in line with prior research. Specifically, in the Sinclair and Feigenbaum (2012) study, trait
EI global, assessed via the TEIQue, was the only measure to significantly predict BPD
diagnosis. However, the sample size in the study was severely restricted, as it included just
33 participants in the BPD group and 39 participants in the non-clinical group, thus
limiting the generalization of their results. Additionally, as indicated by others, the use of
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
only global trait EI may obscure the significance of individual EI facets and reduces the
explanatory power (Gardner & Qualter, 2009).
In the Gardner and Qualter (2009) study, negative correlations were found between
trait EI facets, assessed via the Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale (SEIS; Schutte et al.,
1998) and BPD symptomatology, in a sample of 523 non-clinical adults. Specifically,
substantial correlations were found between global trait EI and global BPD (aggregated
scores) and PAI-BOR affective instability, PAI-BOR identity disturbance and the DSM-IV
criterion of emptiness. While the current study utilized a measure based on the PAI-BOR,
the developers of the questionnaire (Crick et al., 2005) caution against using the subscales
as stand-alone constructs, and the reliability of these scores were low in the sample. Thus it
was not possible to investigate whether trait EI was related to specific aspects of BPD
features. Additionally, in the Gardner and Qualter study several measures were used to
assess BPD and scores were aggregated to obtain global BPD scores, which may be
particularly suited to non-clinical samples, and has been said to be a more stable estimator
than using a single measure (Rushton, Brainerd & Pressley, 1983). However, the study
only investigated correlations between variables and thus cannot address whether or not
trait EI facets could predict BPD features.
In contrast to the above research, to the author’s knowledge, this is the only study
to investigate trait EI and BPD features in a sample of adolescents. Based on the latter, it is
possible that alternate constructs are more pertinent to emerging features of BPD during
the developmental period of adolescence. For instance, recent research indicates that
constructs such as somatization symptoms and experiencing peer victimization within the
context of a self-reported reactive temperament significantly predict emerging BPD
features in adolescents (Haltigan & Vaillancourt, 2016). An alternative explanation may be
that since BPD affects an estimated 0.5-5.9 percent of the population, BPD features in this
non-clinical sample of adolescents were not sufficiently prevalent to reveal robust
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
relationships between trait EI and emerging BPD features. Nonetheless, the study did
reveal that specific trait EI facets, when comparing genders, were predictive of BPD
features, namely, assertiveness in boys and emotion perception in girls. Gender differences
in the way BPD presents in adolescence have been a focus of past research. In fact, a
recent study (Michonski, Sharp, Steinberg & Zanarini, 2013) revealed that the predominant
feature of BPD in adolescence was paranoid ideation for boys and identity disturbance in
girls. As much needed research in this area emerges, it will likely shed more light on the
multifaceted presentation of BPD in youth.
Regarding attachment styles and BPD, this study revealed that in line with the
study’s hypothesis, an anxious ambivalent attachment style predicted features of the
disorder in adolescents in junior high and high school. This finding is consistent with the
bulk of the research on attachment and BPD (e.g. Fonagy et al., 1996; Meyer et al., 2004;
Nickell, Waudby & Trull, 2002). However, it must be noted that, due to the low reliability
and the factor structure of the measure utilized in the study, it is not possible to exclude the
possibility of another attachment style (i.e. avoidant) also predicting BPD features in the
current sample.
The current study is likely the first to investigate the construct of perceived
emotional availability and BPD in adolescents. It was hypothesized that lower scores
relating to perceived emotional availability of parents would be associated with higher
BPDF scores. This hypothesis was fully supported for high school participants, while in
junior high participants only perceived emotional availability of fathers was related to
higher BPDF scores. The results of additional analyses also indicated that low perceived
emotional availability in fathers significantly predicted BPD features, but this held true
only for junior high participants. There could be several explanations for the finding
relating to perceived emotional availability of fathers. One possible explanation could be
that during early adolescence, perceiving a father as more emotionally available is of
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
higher importance, in comparison to later years. Meanwhile, the absence of this finding for
mothers may be due to cultural reasons, such as the close familial bonds in Cyprus and the
fact that it has been traditionally viewed as child centered society which may have
influenced the way in which participants view and respond to questions regarding parental
EA and especially maternal EA. Research with regards to perceived emotional availability
may be warranted to further investigate the ways in which it may relate to BPD features,
and this may be particularly worthwhile in other cultures.
It is also necessary to consider the findings of this study within the context of
developing a practical model that will help identify features of BPD in adolescents and aid
early intervention efforts. The prevalent theoretical models for the development of the
disorder focus on specific constructs, such as attachment, emotion dysregulation and
emotional availability, as discussed previously (Crowell et al, 2009; Fonagy, et al., 2003;
Kernberg, 1967). The results of this study, confirm the importance of attachment in
relation to BPD features - a construct which was implicated in all three theoretical models.
Meanwhile, the findings regarding perceived emotional availability are also in alignment
with the equivalent constructs identified within the models. A review article (Keinänen,
Johnson, Richards & Courtney, 2012) has reported that parenting behaviors, and
particularly low parental warmth, are important psychosocial factors which seem to
contribute to the development of BPD. Further research is needed though to replicate and
further elaborate on these findings.
Meanwhile, facets of trait EI, such as emotion regulation, were not found to have a
significant association with the BPD features in the present study. Constructs such as
emotion regulation, and impulsivity have been considered a core part of explanations
pertaining to the development of BPD. Therefore, the findings of this study could have
both theoretical and practical implications to the way in which we conceptualize BPD and
move forward with research and intervention efforts. First, it should be mentioned that
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
prior research has often found mixed results with regards to emotion regulation, which
encompasses both physiological aspects and individuals’ self-perceptions. For instance,
prior research has associated BPD with behavioral disinhibition, even after controlling for
other personality disorder characteristics (Nigg, Silk, & Stavro, 2005). However, other
studies report contradictory findings. A study by Chapman et al. (2008) looked at the
effects of negative emotional states on physiological measures of impulsivity and self-
report aspects of emotion regulation. The researchers found that while high-BPD
individuals made a larger number of impulsive responses than low-BPD individuals,
negative emotions were in fact related to behavioral inhibition – findings which are in
contrast with the biosocial model (Crowell et al., 2009). Recent research has also
contradicted other aspects of the biosocial theory (see Cavazzi & Becerra, 2014). It is
therefore possible, that emotion dysregulation does not operate in the ways previously
thought of when it comes to individuals with BPD. Moreover, it is possible that,
individuals who have BPD features, and particularly adolescents, are not fully cognizant of
their difficulties in perceiving, expressing and regulating their emotions. Further research
needs to explore the aspects of emotion dysregulation more extensively, both in the
laboratory and with respect to the self-perceptions of individuals with BPD. This research
also needs to focus on adolescents, and be longitudinal in design, in order to further
understand the role of emotion dysregulation in the development of the disorder.
Meanwhile, it is important to note that there are several limitations to this study.
First, the study relied entirely on self-report measures which could have inadvertently
introduced bias. Using multiple informants for adolescents’ BPD features and other traits
may have enhanced the validity of the findings or revealed alternative relationships
between the constructs. An additional related limitation concerns the time which was
required to complete the questionnaires, specifically for adolescent participants. The fact
that the study employed the full form of the TEIQue, while useful for investigating the 15
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
facets of the construct, may have been tiresome for some of the participants, particularly
junior high pupils. The latter, also likely led to the sample size reduction in the study due
to missing data. Furthermore, the fact that this study adopted a cross-sectional design,
rather than a longitudinal one also constitutes a limitation, as the latter would be able to
follow specific patterns or clusters of features over time. Finally, the choice to perform
multiple regression on the data of this study, as opposed to multi-level analysis, is also
considered a limitation, as data was nested (i.e. collected from a number of classes within
the same schools).
In closing, the validity of BPD features in adolescence and the need to address
these has become the focus of contemporary research (see Winsper, Lereya, Marwaha,
Thompson, Eyden et al., 2016 for a review). Particular emphasis has been placed on the
validity of the diagnosis of the disorder or its emerging features in adolescents (Winsper,
Marwaha, Lereya, Thompson, Eyden et al., 2015). Studies such as the present one, can aid
in guiding research of BPD in adolescents, while emphasizing that exploring the disorder’s
features in individuals under the age of 18 is not only a valid endeavor but also a necessary
one. The current study is the first to attempt to understand the relationship between BPD
features and facets of trait EI, making an important contribution to current literature. The
need for specificity with regards to risk factors of BPD in adolescence has recently been
pointed out (Sharp & Fonagy, 2015), with regards to guiding universal and selective
prevention efforts. The present study took a step in that direction and attempted to
investigate trait EI as a possible risk factor. Further research in trait EI and BPD may be of
value in clinical populations of adolescents, as this may add to the understanding of the
relationship between the two. At the same time, it is also of paramount importance that
future research investigates the psychosocial risk factors for BPD in prospective research.
The need for this is two-fold. First, future research should focus on aspects of the
prevailing theoretical models in order to ascertain whether there is sufficient evidence to
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
support the respective constructs which have previously been associated with the
development of the disorder. Finally, there is a pressing need to develop a comprehensive
model for the development of BPD which can be utilized not only in treatment efforts but
also early intervention planning.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
References
Aaronson, J.C., Bender, S.D., Skodol, E.A. & Gunderson, G.J. (2006). Comparison of
attachment styles in borderline personality disorder and obsessive-compulsive
personality disorder. Psychiatric Quarterly, 77 (1), 69-80.
Ackerman, P.L. & Heggestad, E.D. (1997). Intelligence, personality and interests:
Evidence of overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 219-245.
Agrawal, R.H., Gunderson, J., Holmes, M.B. & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2004). Attachment
studies with Borderline patients: A review. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 12 (2),
94-104.
Ainsworth, M.D.S. (1967). Infancy in Uganda: Infant care and the growth of love.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Ainsworth, M.D.S. (1982). Attachment: retrospect and prospect. In C. M. Parkes & J.
Stevenson- Hinde (eds.), The place of attachment in human behavior. London:
Tavistock (p. 3-30).
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Bell, S. M., & Stayton, D. (1971). Individual differences in Strange
Situation behavior of one-year-olds. In H. R. Schaffer (Ed.), The origins of human
social relations (17-57). London: Academic Press.
Ainsworth, D.M., Blehar, C.M.., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A
psychological study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Al-Yagon, M. & Mikulincer, M. (2004). Socioemotional and academic adjustment among
children with learning disorders: The mediational role of attachment-based factors.
Journal of Special Education, 38, 111-123. Filia
-Ann
a Chri
stodo
ulou
Ali, F., Amorim, I. S., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2009). Empathy deficits and trait
emotional intelligence in psychopathy and Machiavellianism. Personality and
Individual Differences, 47, 758-762.
Amad, A., Ramoz, N., Thomas, P., Jardri, R. & Gorwood, P. (2014). Genetics of
borderline personality disorder: Systematic review and proposal of an integrative
model. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Review, 40, 6-19.
American Psychological Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (4th ed. text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychological Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Andrei, F., Mancini, G., Baldaro, B., Trombini, E., & Agnoli, S. (2014). A systematic
review on the predictive utility of the trait emotional intelligence questionnaire
(TEIQue). Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata, 271(62), 2-29.
Austin, E. J., Dore, T. C. P., & O’Donovan, K. M. (2008). Associations of personality and
emotional intelligence with display rule perceptions and emotional labour.
Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 679-688.
Babore, A., Picconi, L., Candelori, C & Trumello, C. (2014) The emotional relationship
with parents: A validation study of the LEAP among Italian adolescents, European
Journal of Developmental Psychology, 11(6), 728-739.
Bar-On, R. (1997). Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory: Technical manual. Toronto:
Mutli-Health Systems.
Barone, L., Fossati, A. & Guiducci, V. (2011). Attachment mental states and inferred
pathways of development in borderline personality disorder: A study using the
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Adult Attachment Interview. Attachment and Human Development, 13 (5), 451-
469.
Bateman, A.W., Fonagy, P. (2004). Mentalization-based treatment of BPD. Journal of
personality disorders, 18, 36-51.
Belsky, W.D., Caspi, A., Arseneault, A., Bleidorn, W., Fonagy, P., Goodman, M., et al.
(2012). Etiological features of borderline personality related characteristics in a
birth cohort of 12-year-old children. Development and Psychopathology, 24, 251-
265.
Bemporad, J., & Cicchetti, D. (1982). Borderline syndromes in childhood: Criteria for
diagnosis. American Journal of Psychiatry, 139, 596–601.
Biringen, Z. & Easterbrooks, A.E. (2012) Emotional availability: A developmental
psychopathology perspective. Development & Psychopathology. Vol. 24 (Edited
volume).
Biringen, Z., & Robinson, J. (1991). Emotional availability in mother–child interactions: A
reconceptualization for research. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61, 258–
271.
Biringen, Z., Robinson, J. & Emde, R.N. (1990). The Emotional Availability Scales.
Unpublished manual. Department of Human Development and Family Studies,
Colorado State University, Fort Collins.
Biringen, Z., Robinson, J.L., & Emde, R.N. (1993). The Emotional Availability scales (2nd
ed.). Unpublished manuscript, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center,
Denver. Filia
-Ann
a Chri
stodo
ulou
Biringen, Z., Robinson, J., & Emde, R. N. (1998). The Emotional Availability Scale (3rd
ed.). Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Department of Human
Development and Family Studies.
Bornovalova, A.M., Hicks, M.B., Iacono, G.W. & McGue, M. (2013). Longitudinal Twin
Study of Borderline Personality Disorder Traits and Substance Use in Adolescence:
Developmental Change, Reciprocal Effects, and Genetic and Environmental
Influences. Personality Disorders, 4(1), 23-32.
Bornovalova, A.M., Hicks, M.B., Iacono, G.W. & McGue, M. (2009). Stability, change,
and heritability of borderline personality disorder traits from adolescence to
adulthood: A longitudinal twin study. Development and Psychopathology, 21,
1335-1353.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment. Attachment and Loss, 1 (2nd ed.). New York: Basic
Books.
Bowlby, J. (1988). A Secure Base: Clinical Applications of Attachment Theory. Routledge.
London.
Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., & Salovey, P. (2011). Emotional intelligence: Implications
for personal, social, academic, and workplace success. Social and Personality
Psychology Compass, 5, 88-103
Brenning, K., Soenens, B., Braet, C., & Bosmans, G. (2012). Attachment and depressive
symptoms in middle childhood and early adolescence: Testing the validity of the
emotion regulation model of attachment. Personal Relationships, 19, 445-464.
Bretherton, I. (2000). Emotional availability: An attachment perspective. Attachment and
Human Development, 2 (2), 233-241.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Cailhol, L., Jeannot, M., Rodgers, R., Guelfi, D.J., Perez-Diaz, F., Pham-Scottez, A.,
Corcos, M. & Speranza, M. (2013). Borderline personality disorder and mental
healthcare service use among adolescents. Journal of Personality Disorders, 27(2),
252-259.
Calati, R., Gressier, F., Balestri, M. & Serretti, A. (2013). Genetic modulation of
borderline personality disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of
Psychiatric Research, 47, 1275-1287.
Cavazzi, T. & Becerra, R. (2014). Psychophysiological research of borderline personality
disorder: Review and implications for biosocial theory. Europe's Journal of
Psychology, 10(1), 185–203
Chabrol, H. & Leichsenring, F. (2006). Borderline personality organization and
psychopathic traits in nonclinical adolescents: Relationships of identity diffusion,
primitive defense mechanisms and reality testing with callousness and impulsivity
traits. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 70(2), 160-170.
Chabrol, H., Montovany, A., Ducongé, E., Kallmeyer, A., Mullet, E., & Leichsenring, F.
(2004). Factor structure of the Borderline Personality Inventory. European Journal
of Psychological Assessment, 20, 59–6
Chang, B., Sharp, C. & Ha, C. (2011). The criterion validity of the Borderline Personality
Features Scale for Children in an adolescent inpatient setting. Journal of
Personality Disorders, 25(4), 492-503.
Chapman, A. L., Leung, D. W., & Lynch, T. R. (2008). Impulsivity and emotion
dysregulation in Borderline Personality Disorder. Journal of Personality Disorders,
22(2), 148-164
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Clark, L. A. (1993). Manual for the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality
(SNAP). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Clarkin, J. F., Yeomans, F., Kernberg, O. F. (2006). Psychotherapy for borderline
personality: Focusing on object relations. New York: Wiley.
Clarkin, J.F., Yeomans, F.E., Lenzenweger, M.F., Levy, K.L. & Kernberg, O.F. (2007). An
Object Relations Model of Borderline Pathology. Journal of Personality Disorders,
21(5), 474-499.
Clercq, D.B., Fruyt, D.F., Leeuwen, V.K. & Mervielde, I. (2006). The structure of
maladaptive personality traits in childhood: A step towards an integrative
developmental perspective for DSM-V. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115(4),
639-657.
Colonnesi C., Draijer E. M., Stams G. J. J. M., Van der Bruggen C. O., Bögels S. M.,
Noom M. J. (2011). The relation between attachment and child anxiety: A meta-
analytic review. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 40, 630–645.
Coolidge, F. L., Thede, L. L., Stewart, S. E., & Segal, D. L. (2002). The Coolidge
Personality and Neuropsychological Inventory for Children (CPNI): Preliminary
psychometric characteristics. Behavior Modification, 26, 550–566.
Crick N.R., Murray-Close, D. & Woods, K. (2005). Borderline personality features in
childhood: a short-term longitudinal study. Development and Psychopathology, 17,
1051-1070.
Cronbach, L. J. (1949). Essentials of psychological testing. New York: Harper and Row Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Crowell, E. S., Beauchaine, P.T. & Linehan, M. M. (2009). A Biosocial Developmental
Model of Borderline Personality Disorder: Elaborating and Extending Linehan’s
Model. Psychological Bulletin, 135(3), 495-510.
Davis, S.K. & Humphrey, N. (2012a). Emotional intelligence predicts adolescent mental
health beyond personality and cognitive ability. Personality and Individual
Differences, 52(2), 144–149.
Davis, S.K. & Humphrey, N. (2012b). The influence of emotional intelligence (EI) on
coping and mental health in adolescence: Divergent roles for trait and ability EI.
Journal of Adolescence, 35(5), 1369-1379.
Dawda, D. & Hart, S.D. (2000). Assessing emotional intelligence: Reliability and validity
of the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) in university students.
Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 797-812.
Deborde, SA., Milkjovitch, R., Roy, C., Dugré- Le Bigre, C., Pham-Scottez, A., Speranza,
M. & Corcos, M. (2012). Journal of Personality Disorders, 26(5), 676-688.
Easterbrooks, M.A. & Biringen, Z. (2005). The Emotional Availability Scales:
Methodological refinements of the construct and clinical implications related to
gender and at risk interactions. Infant Mental Health Journal, 26(4), 291-294.
Easterbrooks, M.A., Bureau, F.J. & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2012). Developmental correlates and
predictors of emotional availability in mother-child interaction: A longitudinal
study from infancy to middle childhood. Development and Psychopathology, 24,
65-78. Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Ensink, K., Biberdzic, M., Normandin, L. & Clarkin, J. (2015). A developmental
psychopathology and neurobiological model of borderline personality disorder in
adolescence. Journal of Infant, Child and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 14, 46-69.
Farrell, J. M., & Shaw, I. A. (1994). Emotional awareness training: A prerequisite to
effective cognitive–behavioral treatment of borderline personality disorder.
Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 1, 71–91.
Fernando, C.S., Beblo, T., Schlosser, N., Terfehr, K., Otte, C., Löwe, B., Bernd, L., Wolf,
T.O., Spitzer, C., Driessen, M. & Wingenfeld, K. (2014). The impact of self-
reported childhood trauma on emotion regulation in borderline personality disorder
and major depression. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation 15, 384-401.
Finzi, R., Har-Even, D., Weizman, A., Tyano S. & Shnit, D. (1996). The adaptation of the
attachment style questionnaire for latency-aged children. [Hebrew]. Psychology, 5,
167– 177.
Finzi, R., Cohen, O., Sapir, Y., Weizman, A. (2000) Attachment styles in maltreated
children: A comparative study. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 31, 113-
128.
Fiori, M., Antonietti J.P., Mikolajczak, M., Luminet, O., Hansenne, M. & Rossier, J.
(2014). What is the ability emotional intelligence test (MSCEIT) good for? An
evaluation using item response theory. PLoS ONE, 9(6), e98827.
Fonagy, P. (2000). Attachment and borderline personality disorder. Journal of the
American Psychoanalytic Association, 48, 1129-1146.
Fonagy, P. & Bateman, W. A. (2007). Mentalizing and borderline personality disorder.
Journal of Mental Health, 16(1), 83-101.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Fonagy, P. & Bateman, W.A. (2008). The development of borderline personality disorder –
a mentalizing model. Journal of Personality Disorders, 22(1), 4–21
Fonagy, P., Leigh, T., Steele, M., Steele, H., Kennedy, R., Mattoon, G., Target, M. &
Gerber, A. (1996). The relation of attachment status, psychiatric classification, and
response to psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64(1),
22-31.
Fonagy, P., Luyten, P. & Strathearn, L. (2011). Borderline personality disorder,
mentalisation and the neurobiology of attachment. Infant Mental Health Journal,
32(1), 47-69.
Fonagy, P., Rossouw, T., Sharp, C., Bateman, A., Allison, L. & Farrar, C. (2014).
Mentalization-based treatment for adolescents with borderline traits. In Sharp, C. &
Tackett, L.J. (Eds). Handbook of borderline personality disorder in children and
adolescents. New York: Springer.
Fonagy, P., Target, M., Gergely, G., Allen, J.G. & Bateman, W.A. (2003). The
developmental roots of borderline personality disorder in early attachment
relationships: A theory and some evidence. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 23, 412-459.
Freudenthaler, H.H. & Neubauer, A. (2007). Measuring emotional management abilities:
Further evidence of the importance to distinguish between typical and maximum
performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1561-1572.
Freudenthaler, H.H., Neubauer, C.A., Gabler, P. & Sherl, G.W. (2008). Testing and
validating the trait emotional intelligence questionnaires (TEIQue) in a German-
speaking sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 673-678. Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Gaher, M.R., Hofman, N.L., Simons, S.J. & Hunsaker, R. (2013). Emotion regulation
deficits as mediators between trauma exposure and borderline symptoms. Cognitive
Therapy and Research, 37, 466-475.
Gardner, H. (1993). Mutliple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, K. & Qualter, P. (2009). Emotional intelligence and borderline personality
disorder. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 94-98.
Gardner, K. & Qualter, P. (2010). Concurrent and incremental validity of three trait
emotional intelligence measures. Australian Journal of Psychology, 62(1), 5-13.
Gill, D. & Warburton, W. (2014). An investigation of the biosocial model of borderline
personality disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 70(9), 866-873.
Glenn, R.C. & Klonsky, E. D. (2009). Emotion dysregulation as a core feature of
borderline personality disorder. Journal of Personality Disorders, 23(1), 20–28.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.
Goth, K., Foelsch, P., Schlüter-Müller, S., Birkhölzer, M., Jung, E., Pick, O. & Schmeck,
K. (2012). Assessment of identity development and identity diffusion in
adolescence - Theoretical basis and psychometric properties of the self-report
questionnaire AIDA. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 6(1), 1-
16.
Granot, D., & Mayseless, O. (2001). Attachment security and adjustment to school in
middle childhood. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25, 530–541.
Gratz, L.K., Tull, T. M., Reynolds, K. E., Bagge, L.C., Latzman, D.R., Daughters, B.S. &
Lejuez, C.W. (2009) Extending extant models of the pathogenesis of borderline
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
personality disorder to childhood borderline personality symptoms: The roles of
affective dysfunction, disinhibition, and self- and emotion-regulation deficits.
Development and Psychopathology 21, 1263–1291.
Griffiths, M. (2011). Validity, utility and acceptability of borderline personality disorder in
childhood and adolescence: Survey of psychiatrists. The Psychiatrist, 25, 19-22.
Haltigan, D.J. & Vaillancourt, T. (2016). Identifying trajectories of borderline personality
features in adolescence: Antecedents and interactive risk factors. The Canadian
Journal of Psychiatry, 61(3), 166-175.
Haskayne, D., Hirschfeld, R. & Larkin, M. (2014). The outcome of psychodynamic
psychotherapies with individuals diagnosed with personality disorders: a systematic
review, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 28(2), 115-138.
Haslam, N. (2003). Categorical vs. dimensional models of mental disorder: the taxometric
evidence. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 37(6), 696-704.
Hawes, J.D., Helyer, R., Herlianto, C.E. & Willing, J. (2013). Borderline personality
features, and implicit shame-prone self-concept in middle childhood and early
adolescence. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 42(3), 302-308.
Hayes, A. F. 2013. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation and Conditional Process
Analysis. New York, New York: Guilford Press.
Hazan, C. & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511-524.
Haltigan, D.J. & Vaillancourt, T. (2016). Identifying trajectories of borderline personality
features in adolescence: Antecedent and interactive risk factors. The Canadian
Journal of Psychiatry, 61(3), 166-175.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Hertel, J., Schütz, A. and Lammers, C.-H. (2009), Emotional intelligence and mental
disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65, 942–954.
Hofstee , W. K. B.( 2001 ). Personality and intelligence: Do they mix? In J.M. Collis & S.
Messick (Eds.), Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and
measurement (pp. 43 – 60). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Houston, R. J., Ceballos, N. A., Hesselbrock, V. M., & Bauer, L. O. (2005). Borderline
personality disorder features in adolescent girls: P300 evidence of altered brain
maturation. Clinical Neurophysiology, 116, 1424−1432.
Jellesma, F.C., Rieffe, C., Meerum Terwogt, M., & Westenberg, P.M. (2011). Children’s
sense of coherence and trait emotional intelligence: A longitudinal study exploring
the development of somatic complaints. Psychology & Health, 26(3), 307-320.
Karreman, A., & Vingerhoets, A. J. J. M. (2012). Attachment and well-being: The
mediating role of emotion regulation and resilience. Personality and Individual
Differences, 53, 821-826.
Kawabada, Y., Youngblood, J. & Hamaguchi, Y. (2014). Preadolescents’ borderline
personality features in a non-Western urban context: Concurrent and longitudinal
associations with physical and relational aggression, friendship exclusivity and peer
victimization. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 219-228.
Kazdin, E.A. (1997). A model for developing effective treatments: Progression and
interplay of theory, research, and practice. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,
26(2), 114-129. Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Keinänen, T.M., Johnson, G.J., Richards, S.E. & Courtney, A.E. (2012). A systematic
review of the evidence-based psychosocial risk factors for understanding of
borderline personality disorder. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 26(1), 65-91.
Kendler, K.S., Aggen, S.H., Czajkowski, N., Roysamb, E., Tambs, K., Torgersen, S.,
Neale,M.C. & Reichborn-Kjennerud, T., (2008). The structure of genetic and
environmentalrisk factors for DSM-IV personality disorders: a multivariate twin
study. Archives of General Psychiatry, 65, 1438–1446.
Kernberg, O. (1967). Borderline personality organization. Journal of American
Psychoanalytic Association, 15, 641-685.
Kernberg, F.O. & Michels, R. (2009). Borderline Personality Disorder. American Journal
of Psychiatry, 166, 505-508.
Krueger, R. F., & Tackett, J. L. (2003). Personality and psychopathology: Working toward
the bigger picture. Journal of Personality Disorders, 17, 109–128.
Kochanska, G. & Kim, S. (2013). Early attachment organization with both parents and
future behavior problems: From infancy to middle childhood. Child Development,
84(1), 283-296.
Kuo, R.J. & Linehan, M.M. (2009) Disentangling emotion processes in borderline
personality disorder: Physiological and self-reported assessment of biological
vulnerability, baseline intensity and reactivity to emotionally evocative stimuli.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118(3), 531-544.
Lanciano, T. & Curci, A. (2014). Incremental validity of emotional intelligence ability in
predicting academic achievement. American Journal of Psychology, 127(4), 447-
461.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Lebow, J. (2006). Research for the psychotherapist: From science to practice. NY:
Routledge.
Lee, C. M., & Gotlib, I. H. (1991). Family disruption, parental availability and child
adjustment. Advances in Behavioral Assessment of Children and Families, 5, 171–
199.
Leible, T. L., & Snell, W. E., Jr. (2004). Borderline personality disorder and multiple
aspects of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 393–
404.
Leichsenring, F. (1999a). Development and first results of the Borderline Personality
Inventory: a self-report instrument for assessing borderline personality
organization. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73(1), 45-63.
Leichsenring, F. (1999b). Splitting: An empirical study. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic,
63, 520–537.
Leichsenring, F. (1999c). Primitive defense mechanisms in schizophrenics and borderline
patients. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 187, 229–236
Leichsenring, F., Leibing, E., Kruse, J, New, S.A. & Leweke, F. (2011). Borderline
Personality Disorder. The Lancet, 377, 74-84.
Leichsenring, F., & Sachsse, U. (2002). Emotions as wishes and beliefs. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 79, 257–273
Linehan, M.M. (1993a). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of borderline personality
disorder. New York: The Guildford Press. Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Linehan, M.M. (1993b). Skills training manual for treating Borderline Personality
disorder. New York: The Guilford Press.
Little, C. & Carter, S. A. (2005). Negative emotional reactivity and regulation in 12-
month-olds following emotional challenge: Contributions of maternal-infant
emotional availability in a low-income sample. Infant Mental Health Journal,
26(4), 354-368.
Livesley, W. J. (1986). Traits and behavioral prototypes of personality disorder. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 143, 728–732.
Livesley, W. J. (1990). Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology—Basic
Questionnaire. Unpublished manuscript, University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Loeber, R., Green, S.M. & Lahey, B.B. (2003) Risk factors for antisocial personality. In:
Farrington D.P. & Coid, J.W. (Eds). Early Prevention of Adult Antisocial
Behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 79–108.
Lum, J.J. (1999). Assessing the emotional availability of parents: Child, adolescent, and
parent perceptions. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60, (3-B).
Lum, J.J. & Phares, V. (2005). Assessing the emotional availability of parents. Journal of
Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. 27(3), 211-226.
Lyons-Ruth, K., Jacobvitz, D. (2008). Disorganized attachment: Genetic factors, parenting
contexts, and developmental transformation from infancy to adulthood. In: Cassidy,
J. & Shaver, P. (Eds). Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical
applications. 2nd Edition. New York: Guilford, 666-697. Filia
-Ann
a Chri
stodo
ulou
Macfie, J., Coens, L., Fitzpatrick, K., Frankel, M., McCollum, K., Trupe, R. & Watkins, C.
D. (2007, April). Effects of maternal borderline personality disorder on emotional
availability in mother-child interactions. Presented at the biennial meeting of the
Society for Research in Child Development.
Mayer, J.D., DiPaolo, M.T. & Salovey, P. (1990). Perceiving affective content in
ambiguous visual stimuli: A component of emotional intelligence. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 54, 772-781.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P. & Caruso, D.R. (2002). The Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional
Intelligence Test (MSCEIT): User’s manual. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems.
McMahon, A.C. & Meins, E. (2012). Mind-mindedness, parenting stress, and emotional
availability in mothers of preschoolers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27,
245-252.
Main, M., & Solomon, J. (1990). Procedures for identifying infants as
disorganized/disoriented during the Ainsworth Strange Situation. In M.T.
Greenberg, D. Cicchetti & E.M. Cummings, Attachment during the preschool
years: Theory, research and intervention. 121–160. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Malouff, M.J., Schutte, S.N. & Thorsteinsson, B.E. (2014). Trait emotional intelligence
and romantic relationship satisfaction: A meta-analysis. The American Journal of
Family Therapy, 42, 53-66.
Martins, A., Ramalho, N., & Morin, E. (2010). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the
relationship between emotional intelligence and health. Personality and Individual
Differences, 49, 554-564.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Mavroveli, S. Petrides. K. V., Rieffe, C., & Bakker, F. (2007). Trait emotional intelligence,
psychological well-being, and peer-rated social competence in adolescence. British
Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25, 263-275.
Mayer, D.J., Salovey, P. & Caruso, R.D. (2000). The Mayer, Salovey, and Caruso
Emotional Intelligence Test: Technical manual. Toronto: MHS.
Meyer, B., Pilkonis, A.P. & Beevers, G.C. (2004). What’s in a (neutral) face? Personality
disorders, attachment styles and the appraisal of ambiguous social cues. Journal of
Personality Disorders, 18 (4), 320-336.
Michonski, J.D., Sharp, C., Steinberg, L., & Zanarini, M. (2013). Borderline personality
disorder criteria in a population-based sample of 11 to 12-year-old children: An
item-level analysis. Houston, TX: University of Houston.
Mikolajczak, M., Luminet, O., Leroy, C., & Roy, E. (2007). Psychometric properties of the
trait emotional intelligence questionnaire: Factor structure, reliability, construct,
and incremental validity in a French-speaking population. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 88, 338–353.
Mikolajczak, M., Petrides, K. V., & Hurry, J. (2009). Adolescents choosing self-harm as
an emotion regulation strategy: The protective role of trait emotional intelligence.
British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 48, 181-193.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Boosting attachment security to promote mental
health, prosocial values, and inter-group tolerance. Psychological Inquiry, 18, 139-
156. Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Miller, L.A., Muehlenkamp, J.J., Jacobson, M.C. (2008). Fact or fiction: Diagnosing
borderline personality disorder in adolescents. Clinical Psychology Review, 28,
969-981.
Miller, L.A., Rathus, H.J. & Linehan, M.M. (2006). Dialectical Behavior Therapy with
suicidal adolescents. NY: Guilford Press.
Mobascher, A., Bohus, M., Dahmen, N., Dietl, L., Giegling I., Jungkunz M.,…Lieb, K
(2014). Association between dopa decarboxylase gene variants and borderline
personality disorder. Psychiatry Research. 219(3), 693-695.
Morey, L.C. (1991). Personality Assessment Inventory - Professional Manual. Florida,
USA: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Nickell, A. D., Waudby. C. J. & Trull, T. J. (2002). Attachment, parental bonding and
borderline personality disorder features in young adults. Journal of Personality
Disorders, 16, 148-159.
Nigg, J. T., Silk, K. R., & Stavro, G. (2005). Disinhibition and borderline personality
disorder. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 1129-1149.
Normandin, L., Ensink, K. & Kernberg, F.O. (2015). Transference-focused psychotherapy
for borderline adolescents: A neurobiologically informed psychodynamic
psychotherapy. Journal of Infant, Child and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 14, 98-110.
O’Connor, E., Bureau, F.J., McCartney, K. & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2011). Risks and outcomes
associated with disorganized/controlling patterns of attachment at age three years in
the national institute of child health and human development study of early child
care and youth development. Infant Mental Health Journal, 32(4), 450-472. Filia
-Ann
a Chri
stodo
ulou
Oldham, M.J. (2006). Borderline personality disorder and suicidality. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 163, 20-26.
Paris, J. (2000). Childhood precursors of borderline personality disorder. The Psychiatric
Clinics of North America, 23, 77–88.
Pérez, J. C., Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2005). Measuring trait emotional intelligence.
In R. Schulze & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), International handbook of emotional
intelligence. Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe & Huber.
Perera, N.H. & DiGiacomo, M. (2013). The relationship of trait emotional intelligence
with academic performance: A meta-analytic review. Learning and Individual
Differences, 28, 20-33.
Perroud, N., Dieben, K., Nicastro, R., Muscionico, M.& Huguelet, P. (2012). Functions
and time-scale of self-cutting in participants suffering from borderline personality
disorder. Journal of Personality Disorders, 26(2), 267-279.
Petrides, K. V. (2001). A psychometric investigation into the construct of emotional
intelligence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University College London.
Petrides, K. V. (Spring, 2006). Internal consistency data for the TEIQue and TEIQue-SF
(v. 1.50). http://www.ioe.ac.uk/schools/phd/kpetrides/teique1.htm, Retrieved
23/6/2013.
Petrides, K.V. (2009a). TEIQue:AF: Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire:
Adolescent Form (1st Ed., 4th print) [Self-Report Measurement]. London, England:
Psychometric Lab. Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Petrides, K. V. (2009b). Psychometric properties of the Trait Emotional Intelligence
Questionnaire. In C. Stough, D. H. Saklofske, and J. D. Parker, Advances in the
assessment of emotional intelligence. New York: Springer.
Petrides, K. V. (2011). Ability and trait emotional intelligence. In Chamorro-Premuzic, T.,
Furnham, A., & von Stumm, S. (Eds.), The Blackwell-Wiley Handbook of
Individual Differences. New York: Wiley.
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence. Psychometric
investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of
Personality, 15, 425–448.
Petrides, K.V. & Furnham, A. (2003). Trait emotional intelligence: Behavioural validation
in two studies of emotion recognition and reactivity to mood induction. European
Journal of Personality, 17, 39-57.
Petrides, K.V., Pérez-Gonzalez, J.C. & Furnham, A. (2007). On the criterion and
incremental validity of trait emotional intelligence. Cognition and Emotion, 21, 26-
55.
Petrides, K. V., Pita, R., & Kokkinaki, F. (2007). The location of trait emotional
intelligence in personality factor space. British Journal of Psychology, 98, 273–
289.
Philippot, P. & Feldman, R.S. (2004) (Eds.). The regulation of emotion. New York:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Prados, J., Stenz, L., Courtet, P., Prada, P., Nicastro, R., Adouan, W., Guillaume, S., Olié,
E., Aubry, J.M., Dayer, A. & Perroud, N. (2015). Borderline personality disorder Filia
-Ann
a Chri
stodo
ulou
and childhood maltreatment: a genome-wide methylation analysis. Genes, Brain &
Behavior, 14, 177-188.
Ramos, V., Canta, G., de Castro, F. & Leal, I. (2014). Discrete subgroups of adolescents
diagnosed with borderline personality disorder: A latent class analysis of
personality features. Journal of Personality Disorders, 28(4), 463-482.
Rathus, H.J. & Miller, L.A. (2014). DBT skills manual for adolescents. NY: Guilford
Press.
Reichborn-Kjennerud, T., Czajkowski, N., Røysamb, E., Ørstavik, R.E., Neale,
M.C.,Torgersen, S. & Kendler, K.S. (2010). Major depression and dimensional
representations of DSM-IV personality disorders: a population-based twin study.
Psychological Medicine, 40, 1475–1484.
Reker, D. & Parker, J.D. (1999). Relationships between emotional intelligence, mood, and
problem behaviors in children and adolescence. Poster presented at the annual
meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston, MA.
Rosenstein, D. S., & Horowitz, H. A. (1996). Adolescent attachment and psychopathology.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64(2), 244.
Rosenthal, M. Z., Cheavens, J. S., Lejuez, C. W., & Lynch, T. R. (2005). Thought
suppression mediates the relationship between negative affect and borderline
personality disorder symptoms. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 43, 1173-1185.
Rossouw, T. (2013). Mentalization-Based Treatment: Can It be translated into practice in
clinical settings and teams? Journal of the American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry, 52(3), 220-222. Filia
-Ann
a Chri
stodo
ulou
Rushton, J.P., Brainerd, J.C. & Pressley, M. (1983). Behavioral development and construct
validity: The principle of aggregation. Psychological Bulletin, 94(1), 18-38.
Sagi, A., Koren-Karie, N., Gini, M., Ziv, Y., & Joels, T. (2002). Shedding further light on
the effects of various types and quality of early child care on infant–mother
attachment relationship: The Haifa study of early child care. Child Development,
73, 1166– 1186.
Salovey, P. & Mayer, J.D. (1990). Emotional Intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and
Personality, 9, 185-211.
Salovey, P., Mayer, J. D., Goldman, S. L., Turvey, C., & Palfai, T. P. (1995). Emotional
attention, clarity, and repair: Exploring emotional intelligence using the trait meta-
mood scale. In J. W. Pennebaker (Ed.), Emotion, disclosure, and health (125–154).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Schutte, N.S., Malouff, J.M., Bobik, C., Coston, T.D., Greeson, C., K., Jedlicka, C. et al.
(2001). Emotional intelligence and interpersonal relations. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 141, 523-536.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., et
al. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence.
Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 167–177
Schutte, N.S., Malouff, J.M. & Hine, W.D. (2011). The association of ability and trait
emotional intelligence with alcohol problems. Addiction Research and Theory,
19(3), 260-265. Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Schutte, N.S., Malouff, J.M., Thorsteinsson, B.E., Bhullar, N. & Rooke, E.S. (2007). A
meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between emotional intelligence and
health. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(6), 921-933.
Sharp, C. & Fonagy, P. (2015). Practitioner review: Borderline personality disorder in
adolescence – recent conceptualization, intervention, and implications for clinical
practice. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 56(12), 1266-1288.
Shields, A. M., & Cicchetti, D. (1997). Emotion regulation in school-age children: The
development of a new criterion Q-sort scale. Developmental Psychology, 33, 906–
916.
Siegling, B.A., Saklofske, H.D. & Petrides, K.V. (2015). Measures of ability and trait
emotional intelligence. In Boyle, J.B., Saklofske, H.D. & Matthews, G. (Eds),
Measures of personality and social psychological constructs. MA: Academic Press.
Sinclair, H. & Feigenbaum, J. (2012). Trait Emotional Intelligence and Borderline
Personality Disorder. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(6), 674-679
Spearman, C. (1904). General Intelligence, Objectively Determined and Measured. The
American Journal of Psychology, 15(2), 201–292.
Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man. NY: Macmillan.
Stepp, D.S., Burke, D.J., Hipwell, E.A. & Loeber, R. (2012). Trajectories of Attention
Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Oppositional Defiant Disorder symptoms as
precursors of Borderline Personality Disorder symptoms in adolescent girls.
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 40, 7-20. Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Stepp, D.S., Pilkonis, A.P., Hipwell, E.A., Loeber, R. & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (2010).
Stability of borderline personality disorder features in girls. Journal of Personality
Disorders, 24(4), 460-472.
Stepp, D.S., Whalen, J.D., Scott, N.L., Zalewski, M., Loeber, R. & Hipwell, E.A. (2014).
Reciprocal effects of parenting and borderline personality disorder symptoms in
adolescent girls. Development and Psychopathology, 26, 361-378.
Stern, A. (1938). Psychoanalytic investigation of and therapy in the border line group of
neuroses. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 7, 467-489.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston:
Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
Tillfors, M., Furmark, T., Ekselius, L., & Fredrikson, M. (2004). Social phobia and
avoidant personality disorder: One spectrum disorder? Nordic Journal of
Psychiatry, 58, 147–152.
Torgersen, S. (2000). Genetics of patients with borderline personality disorder. Psychiatric
Clinics of North America, 23, 1−9.
Torgersen, S., Czajkowski, N., Jacobson, K., Reichborn-Kjennerud, T., Roysamb, E.,
Neale, M.C. & Kendler, K.S., (2008). Dimensional representations of DSM-IV
cluster B personality disorders in a population-based sample of Norwegian twins: a
multivariate study. Psychological Medicine, 38, 1617–1625.
Tromp, B. N. & Koot, M. H. (2010). Dimensions of Normal and Abnormal Personality:
Elucidating DSM-IV Personality Disorder Symptoms in Adolescents. Journal of
Personality, 78(3), 839-864. Filia
-Ann
a Chri
stodo
ulou
Van der Zee, K., Schakel, M. & Thijs, L. (2002). The relationship of emotional intelligence
with academic intelligence and the Big Five. European Journal of Personality, 16
(2), 103–125.
van Dijk, F., Lappenschaar, M., Cornelis, K., Verkes, J.R. & Buitelaar, J. (2011). Lifespan
attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and borderline personality disorder
symptoms in female patients: A latent class approach. Psychiatry Research, 190,
327-334.
Van Rooy, D. L., Viswesvaran, C., & Pluta, P. (2005). A meta-analytic evaluation of
construct validity: What is this thing called emotional intelligence? Human
Performance, 18, 445-462
Volling, B. L., McElwain, N. L., Notaro, P. C., & Herrera, C. (2002). Parents’ emotional
availability and infant emotional competence: Predictors of parent–infant
attachment and emerging self-regulation. Journal of Family Psychology, 16, 447–
465.
Wenar, C. & Kerig, P. (2005). Developmental Psychopathology: From Infancy to
Adolescence. NY: McGraw and Hill.
West, M., Sheldon-Keller, A. (1992). The assessment of dimensions relevant to adult
reciprocal attachment. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 37, 600–606.
White, R. & Renk, K. (2012). Externalizing behavior problems in adolescence: An
ecological perspective. Journal of Child and Family studies, 21, 158-171.
Williams, C., Daley, D., Burnside, E., & Hammond-Rowley, S. (2010). Can trait
Emotional Intelligence and objective measures of emotional ability predict Filia
-Ann
a Chri
stodo
ulou
psychopathology across the transition to secondary school? Personality and
Individual Differences, 48, 161-165.
Winsper, C., Marwaha, S., Lereya, T.S., Thompson, A., Eyden et al. & Singh, P.S. (2015).
Clinical and psychosocial outcomes of borderline personality disorder in childhood
and adolescence: a systematic review. Psychological Medicine, 45, 2237-2251.
Winsper, C., Lereya, T.S., Marwaha, S., Thompson, A., Eyden, J. & Singh, P.S. (2016).
The aetiological and psychopathological validity of borderline personality disorder
in youth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 44,
13-24.
Wolff, S., Stiglmayr, C., Bretz, H., Lammers, C. & Auckenthaler, A. (2007) Emotion
identification and tension in female patients with borderline personality disorder.
British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 36(3), 347-360.
Wong, C.S. & Law, K.S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence
on performance and attitudes: An exploratory study. Leadership Quarterly, 13,
243-274.
Yen, S., Zlotnick, C., & Costello, E. (2002). Affect regulation in women with borderline
personality disorder traits. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 190, 693–696.
Zanarini, C.M., Frankenburg, R.F., Ridolfi, E.M., Jager-Hyman, S., Hennen, J. &
Gunderson, G.J. (2006). Reported childhood onset of self-mutilation among
borderline patients. Journal of Personality Disorders, 20(1), 9-15.
Zeanah, C.H., Keyes, A., and Settles, L. (2003). Attachment relationship experiences and
childhood psychopathology. In J.A. King, C.F. Ferris, and I.I. Lederhendler (Eds.)
Roots of mental illness in children. NY: New York Academy of Sciences.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Zelkowitz, P., Paris, J., Guzder, J., Feldman, R., Roy, C. & Rosval, L. (2007). A five year
follow-up of patients with borderline pathology of childhood. Journal of
Personality Disorders, 21(6), 664-674.
Ziv, U., Aviezer, O., Sagi, A., & Koren-Karie, N. (2000). Emotional availability in the
mother–child dyad as related to the quality of infant–mother attachment
relationship. Attachment and Human Development, 2, 149–169.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix A
ΕΝΤΥΠΑ ΣΥΓΚΑΤΑΘΕΣΗΣ
για συμμετοχή σε πρόγραμμα έρευνας
(Τα έντυπα αποτελούνται συνολικά από 4 σελίδες)
Αγαπητοί γονείς/κηδεμόνες,
Καλείστε να συμμετάσχετε σε ένα ερευνητικό πρόγραμμα του Τμήματος Ψυχολογίας,
του Πανεπιστημίου Κύπρου. Πιο κάτω (βλ. «Πληροφορίες για Εθελοντές») θα σας δοθούν
εξηγήσεις σε απλή γλώσσα σχετικά με το τι θα ζητηθεί από εσάς και το παιδί σας εάν
συμφωνήσετε να συμμετάσχετε στο πρόγραμμα. Θα σας περιγραφούν οποιοιδήποτε
κίνδυνοι μπορεί να υπάρξουν ή ταλαιπωρία που τυχόν θα υποστείτε από τη δική σας
συμμετοχή και αυτή του παιδιού σας στο πρόγραμμα. Θα σας επεξηγηθεί με κάθε
λεπτομέρεια τι θα ζητηθεί από εσάς και ποιος ή ποιοι θα έχουν πρόσβαση στις πληροφορίες
ή/και άλλο υλικό που εθελοντικά θα δώσετε για το πρόγραμμα. Θα σας δοθεί η χρονική
περίοδος για την οποία οι υπεύθυνοι του προγράμματος θα έχουν πρόσβαση στις
πληροφορίες που θα δώσετε. Θα σας επεξηγηθεί τι ελπίζουμε να μάθουμε από το
πρόγραμμα σαν αποτέλεσμα και της δικής σας συμμετοχής. Επίσης, θα σας δοθεί μία
εκτίμηση για το όφελος που μπορεί να υπάρξει για τους ερευνητές ή/και χρηματοδότες αυτού
του προγράμματος. Δεν πρέπει να συμμετάσχετε, εάν δεν επιθυμείτε ή εάν έχετε
οποιουσδήποτε ενδοιασμούς που αφορούν την συμμετοχή σας στο πρόγραμμα. Εάν
αποφασίσετε να συμμετάσχετε, πρέπει να αναφέρετε εάν είχατε συμμετάσχει σε οποιοδήποτε
άλλο πρόγραμμα έρευνας μέσα στους τελευταίους 12 μήνες. Είστε ελεύθεροι να αποσύρετε
οποιαδήποτε στιγμή εσείς επιθυμείτε την συγκατάθεση για την συμμετοχή σας στο
πρόγραμμα. Έχετε το δικαίωμα να υποβάλετε τυχόν παράπονα ή καταγγελίες, που αφορούν
το πρόγραμμα στο οποίο συμμετέχετε, προς την Επιτροπή Βιοηθικής που ενέκρινε το
πρόγραμμα ή ακόμη και στην Εθνική Επιτροπή Βιοηθικής Κύπρου.
Πρέπει όλες οι σελίδες των εντύπων συγκατάθεσης να φέρουν το ονοματεπώνυμο και
την υπογραφή σας.
Σύντομος Τίτλος του Προγράμματος στο οποίο καλείστε να συμμετάσχετε
Κατανόηση και Ρύθμιση Συναισθημάτων
Υπεύθυνος του Προγράμματος στο οποίο καλείστε να συμμετάσχετε
Δρ. Ειρήνη-Άννα Διακίδου, Αναπληρώτρια Καθηγήτρια, Τμήμα Ψυχολογίας,
Πανεπιστήμιο Κύπρου
Φίλια-Άννα Χριστοδούλου, Διδακτορική Φοιτήτρια Κλινικής Ψυχολογίας, Τμήμα
Ψυχολογίας, Πανεπιστήμιο Κύπρου
Επίθετο
Μητέρας:
……………………………………………….……….
Όνομα: ………………………………………..
Υπογραφή: ……………………………………………….………
Ημερομηνία:
.......................................
Επίθετο
Πατέρα:
……………………………………………….……… Όνομα:
……………………………………….
Υπογραφή: Ημερομηνία:
Επίθετο
Κηδεμόνα:
……………………………………………….……….
Όνομα:
………………………………………..
Υπογραφή:
……………………………………………….……….
Ημερομηνία: ………………………………………..
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
ΕΝΤΥΠΑ ΣΥΓΚΑΤΑΘΕΣΗΣ
για συμμετοχή σε πρόγραμμα έρευνας
(Τα έντυπα αποτελούνται συνολικά από 4 σελίδες)
Σύντομος Τίτλος του Προγράμματος στο οποίο καλείστε να συμμετάσχετε
Κατανόηση και Ρύθμιση Συναισθημάτων
Δίδετε συγκατάθεση για τον εαυτό σας ή/και για κάποιο άλλο
άτομο;
Εάν πιο πάνω απαντήσατε για κάποιον άλλο, τότε δώσετε λεπτομέρειες και το όνομα του.
Ερώτηση ΝΑΙ ή
ΟΧΙ
Συμπληρώσατε τα έντυπα συγκατάθεσης εσείς προσωπικά;
Τους τελευταίους 12 μήνες έχετε συμμετάσχει σε οποιοδήποτε άλλο ερευνητικό
πρόγραμμα;
Διαβάσατε και καταλάβατε τις πληροφορίες για ασθενείς ή/και εθελοντές;
Είχατε την ευκαιρία να ρωτήσετε ερωτήσεις και να συζητήσετε το Πρόγραμμα;
Δόθηκαν ικανοποιητικές απαντήσεις και εξηγήσεις στα τυχόν ερωτήματά σας;
Καταλαβαίνετε ότι μπορείτε να αποσυρθείτε από το πρόγραμμα, όποτε θέλετε;
Καταλαβαίνετε ότι, εάν αποσυρθείτε, δεν είναι αναγκαίο να δώσετε
οποιεσδήποτε εξηγήσεις για την απόφαση που πήρατε;
Συμφωνείτε να συμμετάσχετε στην έρευνα;
Συμφωνείτε να συμμετάσχει το παιδί σας στην έρευνα;
Με ποιόν υπεύθυνο μιλήσατε;
Επίθετο
Μητέρας:
……………………………………………….……….
Όνομα: ………………………………………..
Υπογραφή: ……………………………………………….………
Ημερομηνία:
.......................................
Επίθετο
Πατέρα:
……………………………………………….……… Όνομα:
……………………………………….
Υπογραφή: Ημερομηνία:
Επίθετο
Κηδεμόνα:
……………………………………………….……….
Όνομα:
………………………………………..
Υπογραφή:
……………………………………………….……….
Ημερομηνία: ………………………………………..
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
ΕΝΤΥΠΑ ΣΥΓΚΑΤΑΘΕΣΗΣ
για συμμετοχή σε πρόγραμμα έρευνας
(Τα έντυπα αποτελούνται συνολικά από 4 σελίδες)
Σύντομος Τίτλος του Προγράμματος στο οποίο καλείστε να συμμετάσχετε
Κατανόηση και Ρύθμιση Συναισθημάτων
Πληροφορίες για Εθελοντές:
Αγαπητέ γονέα/κηδεμόνα,
Η παρούσα έρευνα, η οποία πραγματοποιείται στα πλαίσια διδακτορικής διατριβής στο
Τμήμα Ψυχολογίας του Πανεπιστημίου Κύπρου, πρόκειται να μελετήσει ψυχοκοινωνικούς
παράγοντες που εμπλέκονται στην κατανόηση και ρύθμιση των συναισθημάτων σε έφηβους.
Η αντίληψη και ρύθμιση των συναισθημάτων είναι σημαντικό μέρος της ψυχολογικής υγείας
και έχει προστατευτικό ρόλο όσον αφορά εύρος δυσκολιών που αντιμετωπίζουν τόσο οι
έφηβοι όσο και οι ενήλικες. Ως εκ τούτου, είναι ιδιαίτερα σημαντικό να μελετήσουμε
περαιτέρω τέτοιους παράγοντες ώστε να αναπτυχθούν τα αναγκαία προγράμματα πρόληψης
και θεραπείας.
Η έρευνα αυτή θα διεξαχθεί σε 10 σχολεία από διάφορες επαρχίες της Κύπρου και το
σχολείο του παιδιού σας επιλέχθηκε με τυχαίο τρόπο από μια ολοκληρωμένη λίστα όλων των
σχολείων Μέση Εκπαίδευσης τα οποία λειτουργούν στην Κύπρο.
Η παρούσα έρευνα περιλαμβάνει τη συμπλήρωση ερωτηματολογίων από εσάς τους
γονείς/κηδεμόνες και το παιδί σας. Το ερωτηματολόγιο που θα σας ζητηθεί να
συμπληρώσετε θα δοθεί στο παιδί σας στο σχολείο, το οποίο θα το παραδώσει με τη σειρά
του σε εσάς. Το ερωτηματολόγιο αυτό περιέχει ερωτήσεις για την κατανόηση και ρύθμιση
συναισθημάτων. Παράλληλα, τα παιδιά που θα συμμετέχουν στην έρευνα θα συμπληρώσουν
ερωτηματολόγια που θα τους δοθούν από κάποιον από τους ερευνητές στην τάξη τους. Τα
ερωτηματολόγια διερευνούν την κατανόηση και ρύθμιση συναισθημάτων και τις σχέσεις
τους με τους φίλους και την οικογένεια τους. Όλα τα ερωτηματολόγια περιέχουν ερωτήσεις
που είναι κατάλληλες για την συγκεκριμένη ηλικία και στάδιο ανάπτυξης, τόσο όσον αφορά
το λεξιλόγιο που χρησιμοποιείται αλλά και γενικώς το περιεχόμενο. Δεν υπάρχουν ερωτήσεις
οι οποίες είναι ακατάλληλες ή θα μπορούσαν να βλάψουν το παιδί σας. Ο χρόνος
συμπλήρωσης των ερωτηματολογίων εκτιμάται ότι θα είναι 60 λεπτά για τα παιδιά και 25
λεπτά για εσάς τους γονείς/κηδεμόνες.
Επίθετο
Μητέρας:
……………………………………………….……….
Όνομα: ………………………………………..
Υπογραφή: ……………………………………………….………
Ημερομηνία:
.......................................
Επίθετο
Πατέρα:
……………………………………………….……… Όνομα:
……………………………………….
Υπογραφή: Ημερομηνία:
Επίθετο
Κηδεμόνα:
……………………………………………….……….
Όνομα:
………………………………………..
Υπογραφή:
……………………………………………….………. Ημερομηνία:
………………………………………..
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Τα ερωτηματολόγια θα δοθούν σε σφραγισμένο φάκελο σε κάποιον από τους ερευνητές και
για καταχώρηση των πληροφοριών. Τα συμπληρωμένα ερωτηματολόγια θα κωδικοποιηθούν,
συνεπώς δεν θα αναγράφονται οι προσωπικές πληροφορίες των συμμετεχόντων. Οι
πληροφορίες που θα δοθούν από τους συμμετέχοντες θα αξιοποιηθούν για άντληση
πληροφοριών για το σύνολο των συμμετεχόντων και όχι μεμονωμένα ή σε ατομικό επίπεδο.
Τα ερωτηματολόγια και όλα τα στοιχεία από την έρευνα θα φυλάσσονται σε χώρο στον
οποίο θα έχουν πρόσβαση μόνο οι ερευνητές και θα χρησιμοποιηθούν αποκλειστικά για την
παρούσα έρευνα. Τα στοιχεία θα καταστραφούν μετά την πάροδο 5 ετών από έναν εκ των
ερευνητών.
Τόσο η δική σας συμμετοχή όσο και του παιδιού σας είναι εθελοντική και είστε ελεύθερος/-ή
να αποφασίσετε κατά πόσο θα θέλατε να λάβετε μέρος στην έρευνα. Εάν σε οποιαδήποτε
στιγμή θελήσετε να διακόψετε τη συμμετοχή σας ή αυτή του παιδιού σας, είστε ελεύθεροι να
το κάνετε χωρίς να δώσετε οποιεσδήποτε εξηγήσεις για την απόφαση σας. Όλες οι
πληροφορίες που θα μας παρέχετε είναι εντελώς εμπιστευτικές και δεν θα αποκαλυφθούν σε
κανένα.
Σας ευχαριστούμε εκ των προτέρων για την πολύτιμη συμβολή σας στην έρευνα αυτή, τα
ευρήματα της οποίας ελπίζουμε πως θα είναι σημαντικά για την ψυχική υγεία των εφήβων
και την ποιότητα των σχέσεων μεταξύ γονέων/κηδεμόνων και παιδιών.
Σε περίπτωση που υπάρχουν απορίες ή διευκρινήσεις οι ερευνητές είναι στη διάθεση σας
(κα. Φίλια-Άννα Χριστοδούλου και Δρ. Ειρήνη-Άννα Διακίδου, ερευνητικός επόπτης). Για
οποιαδήποτε παράπονα παρακαλώ επικοινωνήστε με τον Δρ. Γρηγόρη Μακρίδη (Διευθυντή
Έρευνας, Διεθνών Σχέσεων και Δημοσίων Σχέσεων του Πανεπιστημίου Κύπρου) στο
τηλέφωνο 22894287. Σε περίπτωση που επιθυμείτε να λάβετε τα γενικά αποτελέσματα για
την έρευνα παρακαλώ σημειώστε με √ στο κουτάκι στο τέλος της σελίδας και καταγράψετε
την ηλεκτρονική σας διεύθυνση.
Επίθετο
Μητέρας:
……………………………………………….……….
Όνομα: ………………………………………..
Υπογραφή: ……………………………………………….………
Ημερομηνία:
.......................................
Επίθετο
Πατέρα:
……………………………………………….……… Όνομα:
……………………………………….
Υπογραφή: Ημερομηνία:
Επίθετο
Κηδεμόνα:
……………………………………………….……….
Όνομα:
………………………………………..
Υπογραφή:
……………………………………………….……….
Ημερομηνία: ………………………………………..
ΕΠΙΘΥΜΩ ΝΑ ΛΑΒΩ ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗ ΤΩΝ ΓΕΝΙΚΩΝ ΑΠΟΤΕΛΕΣΜΑΤΩΝ ΤΗΣ
ΕΡΕΥΝΑΣ
Ηλεκτρονική διεύθυνση: ……………………………………………………
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix B
Table 1. Age and gender by education level
___________________________________________________________________________
Education level
_______________________________________
Junior High High school
___________________________________________________________________________
N 196 359
Age 12.70 (.47) 15.49 (.43)
Male 72 143
Female 91 162
___________________________________________________________________________
Note. Gender information was missing for 88 participants.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix C
Oδηγίες: Σας παρακαλούμε να σημειώσετε με ένα κύκλο τον αριθμό που αντανακλά καλύτερα το βαθμό
συμφωνίας ή διαφωνίας σας με κάθε μια από τις προτάσεις που ακολουθούν. Όσο πιο πολύ διαφωνείτε με μια
πρόταση, τόσο η απάντηση σας θα πλησιάζει το «1». Αντίθετα, όσο πιο πολύ συμφωνείτε, τόσο η απάντηση
σας θα πλησιάζει το «7». Μη σκέφτεστε πολύ ώρα για την ακριβή σημασία των προτάσεων. Δουλέψτε γρήγορα
και προσπαθήστε να απαντήσετε όσο το δυνατόν με μεγαλύτερη ακρίβεια. Σας υπενθυμίζουμε ότι δεν
υπάρχουν σωστές ή λάθος απαντήσεις.
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
1. Συνήθως μπορώ να ελέγχω αρκετά καλά τα συναισθήματα των άλλων ανθρώπων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Συχνά δυσκολεύομαι να κατανοήσω τα συναισθήματα των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Όταν μαθαίνω καλά νέα, δυσκολεύομαι να ηρεμήσω γρήγορα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. Έχω τη τάση να βλέπω δυσκολίες σε κάθε ευκαιρία παρά ευκαιρίες σε κάθε δυσκολία. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. Γενικά είμαι απαισιόδοξος άνθρωπος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. Δεν έχω πολλές χαρούμενες αναμνήσεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. Δεν είναι πρόβλημα για μένα το να κατανοώ τις ανάγκες και τις επιθυμίες των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. Πιστεύω ότι γενικά τα πράγματα θα εξελιχθούν καλά στη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. Συχνά δυσκολεύομαι να καταλάβω ποιο ακριβώς συναίσθημα νιώθω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. Είμαι «κοινωνικά αδέξιος». 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. Ακόμα και αν το θέλω πολύ, δυσκολεύομαι να πω στους άλλους ότι τους αγαπώ. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. Οι άλλοι με θαυμάζουν γιατί είμαι «άνετος». 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. Σπάνια σκέφτομαι παλιούς φίλους από το παρελθόν. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. Όταν το θέλω, μου είναι εύκολο να πω στους άλλους πόσο πραγματικά σημαντικοί μου
είναι. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. Γενικά για να δουλέψω σκληρά πρέπει να βρίσκομαι υπό πίεση. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. Συχνά ανακατεύομαι σε καταστάσεις και αργότερα το μετανιώνω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. Μπορώ να «διαβάζω» τα συναισθήματα των περισσότερων ανθρώπων σαν ανοιχτό
βιβλίο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. Συνήθως μπορώ να επηρεάσω τα συναισθήματα των άλλων ανθρώπων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
19. Μου είναι δύσκολο να ηρεμήσω κάποιον όταν είναι θυμωμένος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. Υπάρχουν πολλές οικογενειακές καταστάσεις που δυσκολεύομαι να ελέγξω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. Γενικά ελπίζω για το καλύτερο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
22. Οι άλλοι μου λένε ότι με θαυμαζουν για την ακεραιότητα και την τιμιότητά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. Δε μου αρέσει καθόλου ν’ ακούω τα προβλήματα των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24. Συνήθως μπορώ να «μπω στη θέση του άλλου» και να καταλάβω τα συναισθήματά
του. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
25. Νομίζω πως είμαι γεμάτος από προσωπικές αδυναμίες. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
26. Μου είναι δύσκολο να αλλάξω τις συνήθειές μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
27. Όταν θέλω πάντα βρίσκω τρόπους για να εκφράσω στοργή και τρυφερότητα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
28. Πιστεύω πως έχω πολλά χαρίσματα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
29. Συχνά κάνω πράγματα χωρίς τον παραμικρό σχεδιασμό. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
30. Δυσκολεύομαι να μιλήσω για τα ενδόμυχα συναισθήματά μου ακόμη και στους πιο
κοντινούς μου φίλους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
31. Οι περισσότεροι άνθρωποι τα καταφέρνουν καλύτερα από μένα στη ζωή τους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
32. Ποτέ δεν είμαι πραγματικά σίγουρος για τα συναισθήματά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
33. Συνήθως είμαι ικανός να εκφράζω τα συναισθήματά μου όταν το θέλω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
34. Όταν διαφωνώ με κάποιον, συνήθως μου είναι εύκολο να το εκφράσω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
35. Δεν έχω αρκετά κίνητρα στη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
36. Ξέρω πως να ελέγξω αρνητικές σκέψεις και συναισθήματα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
37. Γενικά δυσκολεύομαι να περιγράψω τα συναισθήματά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
38. Μου είναι δύσκολο να μη στενοχωρηθώ όταν κάποιος μου αναφέρει κάτι δυσάρεστο
που του συνέβη. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
39. Όταν κάτι με ξαφνιάσει, δεν μπορώ να το βγάλω εύκολα από το μυαλό μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
40. Συχνά, σταματώ αυτό που κάνω και συγκεντρώνομαι σε αυτό που νιώθω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
41. Τείνω να βλέπω το ποτήρι μισο-άδειο παρά μισο-γεμάτο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
42. Συχνά το βρίσκω δύσκολο να δω τα πράγματα από την οπτική γωνία των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
43. Γενικά προτιμώ να ακολουθώ άλλους παρά να τους καθοδηγώ. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
44. Οι κοντινοί μου άνθρωποι παραπονιούνται ότι δεν τους συμπεριφέρομαι σωστά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
45. Πολλές φορές δεν μπορώ να κατανοήσω τι συναισθήματα νιώθω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
46. Δε θα μπορούσα να επηρεάσω τα συναισθήματα των άλλων ακόμη και αν το ήθελα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
47. Όταν ζηλεύω κάποιον μου είναι δύσκολο να μην του συμπεριφερθώ άσχημα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
48. Συχνά αγχώνομαι από καταστάσεις στις οποίες οι άλλοι νιώθουν άνετα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
49. Μου είναι δύσκολο να νιώσω συμπόνοια για τα προβλήματα των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
50. Kάποιες φορές στο παρελθόν πιστώθηκα λαθραία τις επιτυχίες άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
51. Γενικά είμαι καλός στο να αντιμετωπίζω αλλαγές στη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
52. Πιστεύω πως δεν έχω καθόλου επιρροή στα συναισθήματα των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
53. Πάντα έχω λόγους να επιμένω σ’ αυτό που κάνω και να μην τα παρατάω εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
54. Μου αρέσει να προσπαθώ ακόμη και για πράγματα που δεν είναι πραγματικά
σημαντικά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
55. Όταν κάνω κάτι λάθος, πάντα αναλαμβάνω τις ευθύνες μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
56. Έχω την τάση να αλλάζω γνώμη συχνά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
57. Όταν διαφωνώ με κάποιον, μπορώ να δω μόνο τη δική μου άποψη. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
58. Στο τέλος τα πράγματα παίρνουν το σωστό δρόμο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
59. Όταν διαφωνώ έντονα με κάποιον, προτιμώ να παραμένω σιωπηλός παρά να κάνω
σκηνή. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
60. Εάν το ήθελα, θα μου ήταν εύκολο να κάνω κάποιον να αισθανθεί άσχημα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
61. Θα περιέγραφα τον εαυτό μου ως ήρεμο άτομο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
62. Συχνά δυσκολεύομαι να δείχνω στοργή στους κοντινούς μου ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
63. Υπάρχουν πολλοί λόγοι που με κάνουν να περιμένω το χειρότερο στη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
64. Συνήθως το βρίσκω δύσκολο να εκφράσω τις σκέψεις μου ξεκάθαρα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
65. Δεν με πειράζει να αλλάζω συχνά την καθημερινή μου ρουτίνα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
66. Οι περισσότεροι άνθρωποι είναι πιο συμπαθητικοί από μένα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
67. Οι κοντινοί μου άνθρωποι σπάνια παραπονιούνται για το πώς τους συμπεριφέρομαι. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
68. Συνήθως δυσκολεύομαι να εκφράσω τα συναισθήματά μου με τον τρόπο που θα ήθελα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
69. Γενικά, μπορώ να προσαρμόζομαι σε καινούρια περιβάλλοντα και καταστάσεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
70. Συνήθως δυσκολεύομαι να προσαρμόζω τη ζωή μου ανάλογα με τις περιστάσεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
71. Θα περιέγραφα τον εαυτό μου ως καλό διαπραγματευτή. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
72. Μπορώ να χειριστώ αποτελεσματικά τους άλλους ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
73. Γενικά είμαι ένα ιδιαίτερα δραστήριο άτομο με στόχους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
74. Όταν ήμουνα μικρό παιδί, έκλεψα πράγματα που ανήκαν σε άλλους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
75. Σε γενικές γραμμές, είμαι ευχαριστημένος από τη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
76. Δυσκολεύομαι να ελέγξω τον εαυτό μου όταν είμαι υπερβολικά χαρούμενος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
77. Κάποιες φορές νιώθω πως παράγω πολύ καλή δουλειά χωρίς καθόλου προσπάθεια. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
78. Όταν αποφασίζω κάτι, είμαι πάντα σίγουρος ότι η απόφασή μου είναι σωστή. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
79. Εάν έβγαινα ραντεβού στα τυφλά, το άλλο άτομο θα απογοητευόταν από την εμφάνισή
μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
80. Συνήθως δυσκολεύομαι να προσαρμόσω τη συμπεριφορά μου ανάλογα με τους
ανθρώπους τριγύρω μου . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
81. Μου είναι εύκολο να ταυτιστώ με κάποιον άλλο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
82. Προσπαθώ να ρυθμίζω το πρόγραμμα μου προκειμένου να ελέγχω το άγχος μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
83. Δε νομίζω πως είμαι άχρηστος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
84. Συνήθως μου είναι δύσκολο να ελέγξω τα συναισθήματά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
85. Αντιμετωπίζω τις δυσκολίες στη ζωή μου με ηρεμία και ψυχραιμία. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
86. Εάν ήθελα, θα μου ήταν εύκολο να κάνω κάποιον να θυμώσει. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
87. Σε γενικές γραμμές, ο εαυτός μου μ’αρέσει. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
88. Πιστεύω πως έχω πολλά προτερήματα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
89. Γενικά δε βρίσκω τη ζωή διασκεδαστική. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
90. Όταν κάποιος με εξοργίσει, συνήθως μπορώ να ηρεμήσω γρήγορα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
91. Μπορώ να παραμείνω ήρεμος ακόμη και όταν νιώθω υπερβολικά χαρούμενος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
92. Γενικά, δεν είμαι καλός στο να παρηγορώ τους άλλους όταν νιώθουν άσχημα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
93. Συνήθως μπορώ να επιλύω διαφορές και αντιδικίες. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
94. Πάντα βάζω πρώτα τη δουλειά και μετά τη διασκέδασή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
95. Δε δυσκολεύομαι καθόλου να φανταστώ τον εαυτό μου στη θέση κάποιου άλλου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
96. Χρειάζομαι ιδιαίτερο αυτοέλεγχο για να μένω μακριά από μπλεξίματα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
97. Μου είναι εύκολο να βρίσκω τις κατάλληλες λέξεις για να περιγράφω τα
συναισθήματά που νιώθω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
98. Προσδοκώ πως, στο μεγαλύτερο μέρος της, η ζωή μου θα είναι απολαυστική. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
99. Είμαι ένας συνηθισμένος άνθρωπος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
100. Έχω την τάση να παρασύρομαι εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
101. Συνήθως προσπαθώ να αντιστέκομαι σε δυσάρεστες σκέψεις και να σκέφτομαι θετικές
εναλλακτικές λύσεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
102. Δεν μου αρέσει να κάνω σχέδια για το μέλλον. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
103. Μόνο και μόνο κοιτώντας κάποιον μπορώ να καταλάβω πώς αισθάνεται. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
104. Η ζωή είναι ωραία. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
105. Συνήθως το βρίσκω εύκολο να ηρεμήσω αφού τρομάξω από κάτι. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
106. Θέλω πάντα να ελέγχω τα πράγματα και τις εξελίξεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
107. Συνήθως δυσκολεύομαι να αλλάζω τη γνώμη των άλλων ανθρώπων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
108. Είμαι γενικά καλός στιv κοινωνική κουβεντούλα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
109. Δε μου είναι μεγάλο πρόβλημα να ελέγξω τον παρορμητισμό μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
110. Η εμφάνισή μου δεν μου αρέσει καθόλου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
111. Μιλώ με τρόπο σωστό και ξεκάθαρο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
112. Σε γενικές γραμμές δεν είμαι ικανοποιημένος από το πώς αντιμετωπίζω το άγχος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
113. Συνήθως, τα συναισθήματα που νιώθω μου είναι ξεκάθαρα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
114. Δυσκολεύομαι να ηρεμήσω μετά από κάτι που μου προκάλεσε μεγάλη έκπληξη. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
115. Σε γενικές γραμμές, θα περιέγραφα τον εαυτό μου ως δυναμικό άτομο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
116. Γενικά δεν είμαι χαρούμενο άτομο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
117. Όταν κάποιος με προσβάλλει, συνήθως παραμένω ήρεμος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
118. Τα περισσότερα πράγματα που καταφέρνω να κάνω καλά απαιτούν μεγάλη
προσπάθεια εκ μέρους μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
119. Ποτέ μου δεν έχω πει ψέματα για να αποφύγω να πληγώσω κάποιον. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
120. Δυσκολεύομαι να δεθώ πολύ ακόμη και με όσους βρίσκονται πολύ κοντά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
121. Πριν πάρω μια απόφαση σκέφτομαι προσεκτικά όλα τα πλεονεκτήματα και τα
μειονεκτήματα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
122. Δεν ξέρω πώς να κάνω τους άλλους να νιώσουν καλύτερα όταν το έχουν ανάγκη. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
123. Συνήθως μου είναι δύσκολο να αλλάξω τις απόψεις μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
124. Οι άλλοι μου λένε ότι σπάνια μιλάω για τα συναισθήματά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
125. Γενικά, είμαι ικανοποιημένος από τις στενές μου σχέσεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
126. Μπορώ να αναγνωρίσω ένα συναίσθημα από τη στιγμή που αναπτύσσεται μέσα μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
127. Μου αρέσει να βάζω τα συμφέροντα των άλλων πάνω από τα δικά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
128. Τις περισσότερες μέρες αισθάνομαι υπέροχα που είμαι ζωντανός. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
129. Ευχαριστιέμαι πάρα πολύ όταν κάνω κάτι καλά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
130. Είναι πολύ σημαντικό για εμένα να τα πηγαίνω καλά με τους στενούς φίλους μου και
την οικογένεια μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
131. Kάνω ευχάριστες σκέψεις συχνά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
132. Έχω πολύ έντονους καυγάδες με τους κοντινούς μου ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
133. Δε δυσκολεύομαι καθόλου να εκφράσω τα συναισθήματά μου με λόγια. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
134. Μου είναι δύσκολο να ευχαριστηθώ τη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
135. Συνήθως έχω την ικανότητα να επηρεάζω τους άλλους ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
136. Συχνά όταν είμαι αγχωμένος χάνω την ψυχραιμία μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
137. Συνήθως μου είναι δύσκολο να αλλάξω τη συμπεριφορά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
138. Οι άλλοι με έχουν ως πρότυπο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
139. Οι άλλοι μου λένε πως αγχώνομαι πολύ εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
140. Συνήθως μπορώ να βρω τρόπους να ελέγξω τα συναισθήματά μου όταν το θέλω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
141. Θεωρώ πως θα γινόμουν καλός πωλητής. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
142. Χάνω πολύ εύκολα το ενδιαφέρον μου για πράγματα που μπορώ να κάνω εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
143. Έχω πολλές συνήθειες και ρουτίνες. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
144. Πάντα θα υπεράσπιζα τις απόψεις μου ακόμη και εάν αυτό σήμαινε το να μαλώσω με
σημαντικούς ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
145. Πιστεύω πως προσαρμόζομαι εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
146. Γενικά, χρειάζομαι πολλά κίνητρα για να προσπαθήσω να δώσω τον καλύτερο εαυτό
μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
147. Ακόμη και όταν αντιπαρατίθεμαι με κάποιον, συνήθως είμαι σε θέση να καταλάβω τη
δική του οπτική γωνία. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
148. Γενικά, είμαι ικανός να αντιμετωπίσω το άγχος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
149. Προσπαθώ να αποφεύγω τους ανθρώπους που με αγχώνουν. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
150. Συχνά κάνω πράγματα χωρίς να σκεφτώ καλά τις συνέπειες τους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
151. Έχω την τάση να υποχωρώ ακόμη και όταν γνωρίζω πως έχω δίκιο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
152. Υπάρχουν πολλές καταστάσεις στη δουλειά που δυσκολεύομαι να ελέγξω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
153. Κάποιες απαντήσεις που έδωσα στο παραπάνω ερωτηματολόγιο δεν είναι 100%
ειλικρινείς. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Οδηγίες: Σας παρακαλούμε απαντήστε στις παρακάτω ερωτήσεις, οι οποίες έχουν συμπεριληφθεί
στο ερωτηματολόγιο προκειμένου να διευκολύνουν τη στατιστική επεξεργασία των δεδομένων. Σας
θυμίζουμε ότι οι απαντήσεις σας είναι εντελώς ανώνυμες. Εάν σας είναι πολύ δύσκολο να
απαντήσετε κάποια ερώτηση, παρακαλούμε αφήστε την κενή.
1. ΦΥΛΟ (σημειώστε το κατάλληλο κουτάκι) ΑΝΔΡΑΣ ΓΥΝΑΙΚΑ
2. ΕΤΟΣ ΓΕΝΝΗΣΗΣ __________
3. ΕΧΕΤΕ ΠΤΥΧΙΟ; ΝΑΙ ΟΧΙ
ΕΑΝ ΝΑΙ, ΤΙ ΠΤΥΧΙΟ ΕΧΕΤΕ; ΑΕΙ ΤΕΙ
4. ΣΗΜΕΙΩΣΤΕ ΤΗΝ ΚΑΤΗΓΟΡΙΑ ΠΟΥ ΑΝΤΙΣΤΟΙΧΕΙ ΣΤΟ ΕΤΗΣΙΟ ΚΑΘΑΡΟ ΟΙΚΟΓΕΝΕΙΑΚΟ
ΣΑΣ ΕΙΣΟΔΗΜΑ.
500 – 1.000 € 1.000 – 3.000 € 3.000 – 5.000 €
5.000 – 10.000 € 10.000 – 20.000 € 20.000 – 30.000 € 30.000 + €
5. ΑΠΟ ΠΟΣΑ ΜΕΛΗ ΑΠΟΤΕΛΕΙΤΑΙ Η ΟΙΚΟΓΕΝΕΙΑ ΣΑΣ;
1 2 3 4 5 6 7+
6. ΠΟΙΑ ΕΙΝΑΙ Η ΟΙΚΟΓΕΝΕΙΑΚΗ ΣΑΣ ΚΑΤΑΣΤΑΣΗ;
ΑΓΑΜΟΣ ΠΑΝΤΡΕΜΕΝΟΣ ΧΗΡΟΣ
ΔΙΑΖΕΥΓΜΕΝΟΣ ΣΥΖΩ ΜΕ ΚΑΠΟΙΟΝ
7. ΠΟΣΑ ΠΑΙΔΙΑ ΕΧΕΤΕ;
0 1 2 3 4 5 6+
8 . ΠΟΣΑ ΑΔΕΛΦΙΑ ΕΧΕΤΕ (ΑΔΕΛΦΟΥΣ ΚΑΙ ΑΔΕΛΦΕΣ);
0 1 2 3 4 5 6+
9. ΠΟΣΟ ΘΡΗΣΚΟΣ ΕΙΣΤΕ; (βάλτε κύκλο γύρω από τον κατάλληλο αριθμό)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
ΚΑΘΟΛΟΥ ΠΑΡΑ ΠΟΛΥ
10. ΟΙ ΠΟΛΙΤΙΚΕΣ ΣΑΣ ΠΕΠΟΙΘΗΣΕΙΣ ΤΕΙΝΟΥΝ ΓΕΝΙΚΩΣ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΗΝ:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
ΑΡΙΣΤΕΡΑ ΔΕΞΙΑ
Σας ευχαριστούμε πολύ για τη συμμετοχή σας.
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix D
Table 2. Sampling domain of trait EI
Facets High scorers perceive themselves as…
Adaptability Flexible and willing to adapt to new
conditions
Assertiveness Forthright, frank, and willing to stand up for
their rights
Emotion expression Capable of communicating their feelings to
others
Emotion management (others) Capable of influencing other people’s
feelings
Emotion perception (self and others) Clear about their own and other people’s
feelings
Emotion regulation Capable of controlling their emotions
Impulsiveness (low) Reflective and less likely to give in to their
urges
Relationships Capable of having fulfilling personal
relationships
Self-esteem Successful and self-confident
Self-motivation Driven and unlikely to give up in the face of
adversity
Social awareness Accomplished networkers with excellent
social skills
Stress management Capable of withstanding pressure and
regulating stress
Trait empathy Capable of taking someone else’s
perspective
Trait happiness Cheerful and satisfied with their lives
Trait optimism Confident and likely to ‘look on the bright
side’ of life
Reproduced from Petrides (2011) Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix E
Oδηγίες: Σας παρακαλούμε να σημειώσετε με ένα κύκλο τον αριθμό που αντανακλά καλύτερα το βαθμό
συμφωνίας ή διαφωνίας σας με κάθε μια από τις προτάσεις που ακολουθούν. Όσο πιο πολύ διαφωνείτε με μια
πρόταση, τόσο η απάντηση σας θα πλησιάζει το «1». Αντίθετα, όσο πιο πολύ συμφωνείτε, τόσο η απάντηση
σας θα πλησιάζει το «7». Μη σκέφτεστε πολύ ώρα για την ακριβή σημασία των προτάσεων. Δουλέψτε γρήγορα
και προσπαθήστε να απαντήσετε όσο το δυνατόν με μεγαλύτερη ακρίβεια. Σας υπενθυμίζουμε ότι δεν
υπάρχουν σωστές ή λάθος απαντήσεις.
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
1. Συνήθως μπορώ να ελέγχω αρκετά καλά τα συναισθήματα των άλλων ανθρώπων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. Συχνά δυσκολεύομαι να κατανοήσω τα συναισθήματα των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Όταν μαθαίνω καλά νέα, δυσκολεύομαι να ηρεμήσω γρήγορα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. Τείνω να βλέπω δυσκολίες στα πάντα 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. Γενικά έχω αρνητική εικόνα για τα περισσότερα πράγματα 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
6. Δεν έχω πολλές χαρούμενες αναμνήσεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7. Δεν είναι πρόβλημα για μένα το να κατανοώ τις ανάγκες και τις επιθυμίες των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8. Πιστεύω ότι γενικά τα πράγματα θα εξελιχθούν καλά στη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9. Συχνά δυσκολεύομαι να καταλάβω ποιο ακριβώς συναίσθημα νιώθω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10. Δεν έχω κοινωνικές δεξιότητες 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
11. Ακόμα και αν το θέλω πολύ, δυσκολεύομαι να πω στους άλλους ότι τους αγαπώ. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
12. Οι άλλοι με θαυμάζουν γιατί είμαι «άνετος». 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. Σπάνια σκέφτομαι παλιούς φίλους από το παρελθόν. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. Όταν το θέλω, μου είναι εύκολο να πω στους άλλους πόσο πραγματικά σημαντικοί μου
είναι. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
15. Γενικά για να δουλέψω σκληρά πρέπει να βρίσκομαι υπό πίεση. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
16. Συχνά ανακατεύομαι σε καταστάσεις και αργότερα το μετανιώνω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
17. Μπορώ να «διαβάζω» τα συναισθήματα των περισσότερων ανθρώπων σαν ανοιχτό
βιβλίο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
18. Συνήθως μπορώ να επηρεάσω τα συναισθήματα των άλλων ανθρώπων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
19. Μου είναι δύσκολο να ηρεμήσω κάποιον όταν είναι θυμωμένος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20. Υπάρχουν πολλές οικογενειακές καταστάσεις που δυσκολεύομαι να ελέγξω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
21. Γενικά ελπίζω για το καλύτερο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
22. Οι άλλοι μου λένε ότι με θαυμάζουν για την ειλικρίνεια μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
23. Δε μου αρέσει καθόλου ν’ ακούω τα προβλήματα των φίλων μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
24. Συνήθως μπορώ να «μπω στη θέση του άλλου» και να καταλάβω τα συναισθήματά
του. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
25. Νομίζω πως είμαι γεμάτος από προσωπικές αδυναμίες. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
26. Μου είναι δύσκολο να αλλάξω τα πράγματα που έχω συνηθίσει και μου αρέσουν. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
27. Όταν θέλω πάντα βρίσκω τρόπους για να εκφράσω στοργή και τρυφερότητα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
28. Πιστεύω πως έχω θετικά στοιχεία. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
29. Συχνά κάνω πράγματα βιαστικά χωρίς τον παραμικρό σχεδιασμό. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
30. Δυσκολεύομαι να μιλήσω για τα προσωπικά συναισθήματά μου ακόμη και στους πιο
κοντινούς μου φίλους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
31. Δεν μπορώ να κάνω πράγματα όσο καλά μπορούν άλλοι. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
32. Ποτέ δεν είμαι πραγματικά σίγουρος για τα συναισθήματά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
33. Συνήθως είμαι ικανός να εκφράζω τα συναισθήματά μου όταν το θέλω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
34. Όταν διαφωνώ με κάποιον, συνήθως μου είναι εύκολο να το εκφράσω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
35. Συνήθως το βρίσκω δύσκολο να κρατήσω τον εαυτό μου κινητοποιημένο 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
36. Ξέρω πως να ελέγξω την αρνητική μου διάθεση 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
37. Γενικά δυσκολεύομαι να περιγράψω τα συναισθήματά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
38. Μου είναι δύσκολο να μη στενοχωρηθώ όταν κάποιος μου αναφέρει κάτι δυσάρεστο
που του συνέβη. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
39. Όταν κάτι με ξαφνιάσει, δεν μπορώ να το βγάλω εύκολα από το μυαλό μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
40. Συχνά, σταματώ αυτό που κάνω και συγκεντρώνομαι σε αυτό που νιώθω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
41. Τείνω να βλέπω το ποτήρι μισο-άδειο παρά μισο-γεμάτο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
42. Συχνά το βρίσκω δύσκολο να δω τα πράγματα από την πλευρά των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
43. Γενικά προτιμώ να ακολουθώ άλλους παρά να τους καθοδηγώ. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
44. Οι κοντινοί μου άνθρωποι παραπονιούνται ότι δεν τους συμπεριφέρομαι σωστά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
45. Πολλές φορές δεν μπορώ να κατανοήσω τι συναισθήματα νιώθω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
46. Δε θα μπορούσα να επηρεάσω τα συναισθήματα των άλλων ακόμη και αν το ήθελα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
47. Όταν ζηλεύω κάποιον μου είναι δύσκολο να μην του συμπεριφερθώ άσχημα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
48. Συχνά αγχώνομαι από καταστάσεις στις οποίες οι άλλοι νιώθουν άνετα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
49. Μου είναι δύσκολο να νιώσω συμπόνοια για τα προβλήματα των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
50. Kάποιες φορές στο παρελθόν, έχω αποδεχθεί την επιβράβευση για τις ιδέες άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
51. Γενικά είμαι καλός στο να αντιμετωπίζω αλλαγές στη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
52. Πιστεύω πως δεν μπορώ να επηρεάσω καθόλου τα συναισθήματα των άλλων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
53. Πάντα έχω λόγους να επιμένω σ’ αυτό που κάνω και να μην τα παρατάω εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
54. Μου αρέσει να προσπαθώ ακόμη και για πράγματα που δεν είναι πραγματικά
σημαντικά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
55. Όταν κάνω κάτι λάθος, πάντα αναλαμβάνω τις ευθύνες μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
56. Έχω την τάση να αλλάζω γνώμη συχνά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
57. Όταν διαφωνώ με κάποιον, μπορώ να δω μόνο τη δική μου άποψη. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
58. Στο τέλος τα πράγματα παίρνουν το σωστό δρόμο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
59. Όταν διαφωνώ έντονα με κάποιον, προτιμώ να παραμένω σιωπηλός παρά να κάνω
σκηνή. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
60. Εάν το ήθελα, θα μου ήταν εύκολο να κάνω κάποιον να αισθανθεί άσχημα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
61. Θα περιέγραφα τον εαυτό μου ως ήρεμο άτομο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
62. Συχνά δυσκολεύομαι να δείχνω στοργή στους κοντινούς μου ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
63. Υπάρχουν πολλοί λόγοι που με κάνουν να περιμένω το χειρότερο στη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
64. Συνήθως το βρίσκω δύσκολο να εκφράσω τις σκέψεις μου ξεκάθαρα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
65. Δεν με πειράζει να αλλάζω συχνά την καθημερινή μου ρουτίνα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
66. Οι περισσότεροι άνθρωποι είναι πιο συμπαθητικοί από μένα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
67. Οι κοντινοί μου άνθρωποι σπάνια παραπονιούνται για το πώς τους συμπεριφέρομαι. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
68. Συνήθως δυσκολεύομαι να εκφράσω τα συναισθήματά μου με τον τρόπο που θα ήθελα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
69. Γενικά, μπορώ να προσαρμόζομαι σε καινούρια περιβάλλοντα και καταστάσεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
70. Συνήθως δυσκολεύομαι να προσαρμόζω τη ζωή μου ανάλογα με το τι συμβαίνει. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
71. Θα περιέγραφα τον εαυτό μου ως καλό διαπραγματευτή. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
72. Μπορώ να χειριστώ αποτελεσματικά τους άλλους ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
73. Γενικά είμαι ένα άτομο με δυνατά κίνητρα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
74. Στο παρελθόν, έχω κλέψει πράγματα που ανήκαν σε άλλους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
75. Σε γενικές γραμμές, είμαι ευχαριστημένος από τη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
76. Δυσκολεύομαι να ελέγξω τον εαυτό μου όταν είμαι υπερβολικά χαρούμενος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
77. Κάποιες φορές νιώθω πως παράγω πολύ καλή δουλειά χωρίς καθόλου προσπάθεια. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
78. Όταν αποφασίζω κάτι, είμαι πάντα σίγουρος ότι η απόφασή μου είναι σωστή. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
79. Εάν έβγαινα ραντεβού στα τυφλά, το άλλο άτομο θα απογοητευόταν από την εμφάνισή
μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
80. Συνήθως δυσκολεύομαι να προσαρμόσω τη συμπεριφορά μου ανάλογα με τους
ανθρώπους τριγύρω μου . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
81. Μου είναι εύκολο να ταυτιστώ με κάποιον άλλο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
82. Προσπαθώ να ελέγχω τα επίπεδα του άγχους μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
83. Δε νομίζω πως είμαι άχρηστος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
84. Συνήθως μου είναι δύσκολο να ισορροπήσω τα συναισθήματά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
85. Αντιμετωπίζω τις δυσκολίες στη ζωή μου με ηρεμία και ψυχραιμία. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
86. Εάν ήθελα, θα μου ήταν εύκολο να κάνω κάποιον να θυμώσει. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
87. Σε γενικές γραμμές, ο εαυτός μου μ’αρέσει. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
88. Πιστεύω πως έχω πολλά προτερήματα/δυνατότητες. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
89. Γενικά δε βρίσκω τη ζωή διασκεδαστική. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
90. Όταν κάποιος με θυμώσει, συνήθως μπορώ να ηρεμήσω γρήγορα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
91. Μπορώ να παραμείνω ήρεμος ακόμη και όταν νιώθω υπερβολικά χαρούμενος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
92. Γενικά, δεν είμαι καλός στο να παρηγορώ τους άλλους όταν νιώθουν άσχημα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
93. Συνήθως μπορώ να επιλύω διαφορές και διαφωνίες. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
94. Πάντα βάζω πρώτα τη δουλειά και μετά τη διασκέδασή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
95. Δε δυσκολεύομαι καθόλου να φανταστώ τον εαυτό μου στη θέση κάποιου άλλου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
96. Χρειάζομαι ιδιαίτερο αυτοέλεγχο για να μένω μακριά από μπελάδες. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
97. Μου είναι εύκολο να βρίσκω τις κατάλληλες λέξεις για να περιγράφω τα
συναισθήματά που νιώθω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
98. Αναμένω πως, στο μεγαλύτερο μέρος της, η ζωή μου θα είναι απολαυστική. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
99. Είμαι ένας συνηθισμένος άνθρωπος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
100. Έχω την τάση να παρασύρομαι εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
101. Συνήθως προσπαθώ να αντιστέκομαι σε αρνητικές σκέψεις και να σκέφτομαι θετικές
εναλλακτικές λύσεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
102. Δεν μου αρέσει να κάνω σχέδια για το μέλλον. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
103. Μόνο και μόνο κοιτώντας κάποιον μπορώ να καταλάβω πώς αισθάνεται. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
104. Η ζωή είναι ωραία. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
105. Συνήθως το βρίσκω εύκολο να ηρεμήσω αφού τρομάξω από κάτι. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
106. Θέλω πάντα να ελέγχω τα πράγματα και τις εξελίξεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
107. Συνήθως δυσκολεύομαι να αλλάζω τη γνώμη των άλλων ανθρώπων. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
108. Είμαι γενικά καλός στηv κοινωνική κουβεντούλα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
109. Δε μου είναι μεγάλο πρόβλημα να ελέγξω τον εαυτό/παρορμητισμό μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
110. Η εμφάνισή μου δεν μου αρέσει καθόλου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
111. Μιλώ με τρόπο σωστό και ξεκάθαρο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
112. Σε γενικές γραμμές δεν είμαι ικανοποιημένος από το πώς αντιμετωπίζω το άγχος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
113. Συνήθως, ξέρω ακριβώς γιατί αισθάνομαι έτσι όπως αισθάνομαι. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
114. Δυσκολεύομαι να ηρεμήσω μετά από κάτι που μου προκάλεσε μεγάλη έκπληξη. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
115. Σε γενικές γραμμές, θα περιέγραφα τον εαυτό μου ως δυναμικό άτομο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
116. Γενικά δεν είμαι χαρούμενο άτομο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
117. Όταν κάποιος με προσβάλλει, συνήθως παραμένω ήρεμος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
118. Τα περισσότερα πράγματα που καταφέρνω να κάνω καλά απαιτούν μεγάλη
προσπάθεια εκ μέρους μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
119. Ποτέ μου δεν έχω πει ψέματα για να αποφύγω να πληγώσω κάποιον. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
120. Δυσκολεύομαι να δεθώ πολύ ακόμη και με όσους βρίσκονται πολύ κοντά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
121. Πριν πάρω μια απόφαση σκέφτομαι προσεκτικά όλα τα πλεονεκτήματα (υπέρ) και τα
μειονεκτήματα (κατά). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
122. Δεν ξέρω πώς να κάνω τους άλλους να νιώσουν καλύτερα όταν το έχουν ανάγκη. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
123. Συνήθως μου είναι δύσκολο να αλλάξω τη στάση και τις απόψεις μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
124. Οι άλλοι μου λένε ότι σπάνια μιλάω για τα συναισθήματά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
125. Γενικά, είμαι ικανοποιημένος από τις στενές μου σχέσεις. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
126. Μπορώ να αναγνωρίσω ένα συναίσθημα από τη στιγμή που αναπτύσσεται μέσα μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
127. Μου αρέσει να βάζω τα συμφέροντα των άλλων πάνω από τα δικά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
128. Τις περισσότερες μέρες αισθάνομαι υπέροχα που είμαι ζωντανός. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
129. Ευχαριστιέμαι πάρα πολύ όταν κάνω κάτι καλά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
130. Είναι πολύ σημαντικό για εμένα να τα πηγαίνω καλά με τους στενούς φίλους μου και
την οικογένεια μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
131. Kάνω ευχάριστες σκέψεις συχνά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
132. Έχω πολύ έντονους καυγάδες με τους κοντινούς μου ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
133. Δε δυσκολεύομαι καθόλου να εκφράσω τα συναισθήματά μου με λόγια. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
134. Μου είναι δύσκολο να ευχαριστηθώ τη ζωή μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
135. Συνήθως έχω την ικανότητα να επηρεάζω τους άλλους ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
136. Συχνά όταν είμαι αγχωμένος χάνω την ψυχραιμία μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
137. Συνήθως μου είναι δύσκολο να αλλάξω τη συμπεριφορά μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
138. Οι άλλοι με έχουν ως πρότυπο (με θαυμάζουν). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
139. Οι άλλοι μου λένε πως αγχώνομαι πολύ εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
140. Συνήθως μπορώ να βρω τρόπους να ελέγξω τα συναισθήματά μου όταν το θέλω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
141. Θεωρώ πως θα γινόμουν καλός πωλητής. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Διαφωνώ Απόλυτα 1. . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . 7 Συμφωνώ Απόλυτα
142. Χάνω πολύ εύκολα το ενδιαφέρον μου για πράγματα που μπορώ να κάνω εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
143. Έχω πολλές συνήθειες και ρουτίνες. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
144. Πάντα θα υπεράσπιζα τις απόψεις μου ακόμη και εάν αυτό σήμαινε το να μαλώσω με
σημαντικούς ανθρώπους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
145. Πιστεύω πως προσαρμόζομαι εύκολα. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
146. Γενικά, χρειάζομαι αρκετή ενθάρρυνση για να προσπαθήσω να δώσω τον καλύτερο
εαυτό μου. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
147. Ακόμη και όταν καυγαδίζω με κάποιον, συνήθως είμαι σε θέση να καταλάβω τη δική
του πλευρά. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
148. Γενικά, είμαι ικανός να αντιμετωπίσω το άγχος. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
149. Προσπαθώ να αποφεύγω τους ανθρώπους που με αγχώνουν. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
150. Συχνά κάνω πράγματα χωρίς να σκεφτώ καλά τις συνέπειες τους. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
151. Έχω την τάση να υποχωρώ ακόμη και όταν γνωρίζω πως έχω δίκιο. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
152. Υπάρχουν πολλές καταστάσεις στο σχολείο που δυσκολεύομαι να ελέγξω. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
153. Κάποιες απαντήσεις που έδωσα σε αυτό το ερωτηματολόγιο δεν είναι 100%
ειλικρινείς. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix F
Πιο κάτω βρίσκονται 15 προτάσεις. Πόσο αληθεύει η κάθε πρόταση για σένα; Ο καθένας έχει την δική του απάντηση. Προσπάθησε να
απαντήσεις τι νιώθεις. Αυτό δεν είναι τεστ και δεν υπάρχουν σωστές ή λάθος απαντήσεις. Διάβασε την κάθε πρόταση προσεκτικά. Μετέπειτα,
διάλεξε μία από τις 5 απαντήσεις στο κουτί πιο κάτω. Η κάθε απάντηση έχει ένα αριθμό. Κύκλωσε τον αριθμό της απάντησης που σε
περιγράφει καλύτερα.
1 2 3 4 5
εντελώς λανθασμένο λανθασμένο μερικώς λανθασμένο/μερικώς σωστό σωστό πολύ σωστό
1. Κάνω εύκολα φιλίες με άλλα παιδιά 1 2 3 4 5
2. Δεν νιώθω άνετα προσπαθώντας να κάνω φίλους 1 2 3 4 5
3. Εύκολα εξαρτώμαι από τους άλλους, εάν μου είναι καλοί φίλοι 1 2 3 4 5
4. Κάποιες φορές οι άλλοι είναι υπερβολικά φιλικοί και κοντά σε εμένα 1 2 3 4 5
5. Κάποιες φορές φοβάμαι ότι τα άλλα παιδιά δεν θα θέλουν να είναι μαζί μου 1 2 3 4 5
6. Θα ήθελα να είμαι πραγματικά κοντά σε κάποια παιδιά και να είμαι συνεχώς μαζί τους 1 2 3 4 5
7. Είναι εντάξει μαζί μου εάν καλοί φίλοι με εμπιστεύονται και εξαρτώνται από μένα 1 2 3 4 5
8. Είναι δύσκολο για μένα να εμπιστευτώ τους άλλους εντελώς 1 2 3 4 5
9. Κάποιες φορές νιώθω ότι οι άλλοι δεν θέλουν να είναι καλοί φίλοι μαζί μου όσο εγώ μαζί τους 1 2 3 4 5
10. Συνήθως πιστεύω ότι τα άτομα που είναι κοντά σε εμένα δεν θα με αφήσουν 1 2 3 4 5
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
11. Κάποιες φορές φοβάμαι ότι κανένας δεν με αγαπά πραγματικά 1 2 3 4 5
12. Το βρίσκω άβολο και ενοχλούμαι όταν κάποιος προσπαθεί να έρθει πολύ κοντά μου 1 2 3 4 5
13. Μου είναι δύσκολο να εμπιστευτώ πραγματικά τους άλλους, ακόμα και όταν μου είναι καλοί φίλοι 1 2 3 4 5
14. Κάποιες φορές τα άλλα παιδιά με αποφεύγουν όταν θέλω να έρθω κοντά τους
και να είμαι καλός/ή τους φίλος/η 1 2 3 4 5
15. Συνήθως, όταν κάποιος προσπαθεί να έρθει πολύ κοντά μου δεν με ενοχλεί 1 2 3 4 5
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix G
Οδηγίες:
Σε αυτό το ερωτηματολόγιο θα διαβάσεις ερωτήσεις οι οποίες σχετίζονται με τους γονείς σου. Θα σου ζητηθεί να βαθμολογήσεις τη
συμπεριφορά της ΜΗΤΕΡΑΣ και του ΠΑΤΕΡΑ σου. Για κάθε ερώτηση κύκλωσε τη δήλωση που αντιστοιχεί στο πώς ο γονέας σου
συμπεριφέρεται απέναντι σου. Αν αυτή τη στιγμή δε διαμένεις με τους βιολογικούς σου γονείς, παρακαλώ βαθμολόγησε τη συμπεριφορά του
ατόμου που θεωρείς εσύ ότι είναι η μητέρα ή ο πατέρας σου (π.χ. θετός γονέας, μητρυιά, πατριός).
Ποτέ Σπάνια Μερικές Φορές Συχνά Πολύ Συχνά Πάντα
1 2 3 4 5 6
Παρακαλώ βαθμολόγησε τη συμπεριφορά της ΜΗΤΕΡΑΣ και του ΠΑΤΕΡΑ σου κυκλώνοντας την απάντηση σου.
Η ΜΗΤΕΡΑ ΜΟΥ Ο ΠΑΤΕΡΑΣ ΜΟΥ
1. Με στηρίζει 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
2. Με παρηγορεί όταν είμαι αναστατωμένος/η (παράδειγμα, μου δίνει σημασία και δείχνει ενδιαφέρον για μένα)
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
3. Μου δείχνει ότι νοιάζεται για μένα 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
4. Δείχνει γνήσιο ενδιαφέρον σε εμένα (παράδειγμα: μου δίνει σημασία και δείχνει να ενδιαφέρεται για μένα)
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Η ΜΗΤΕΡΑ ΜΟΥ Ο ΠΑΤΕΡΑΣ ΜΟΥ
5. Θυμάται πράγματα τα οποία είναι σημαντικά για μένα 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
6. Είναι διαθέσιμος/η για να μιλήσει σε οποιαδήποτε στιγμή 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
7. Ρωτά ερωτήσεις με τρόπο που δείχνει ότι νοιάζεται 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
8. Περνά επιπλέον χρόνο μαζί μου απλά γιατί θέλει να γνωρίσει τα ενδιαφέροντα μου
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
9. Είναι πρόθυμος/η να συζητήσει τα προβλήματα μου ` 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
10. Επιδιώκει να συζητήσει τα ενδιαφέροντα μου (παράδειγμα: προσπαθεί να μου μιλήσει για πράγματα που μου αρέσουν)
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
11. Εκτιμά τις απόψεις μου (παράδειγμα: νοιάζεται για τις ιδέες μου) 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
12. Συναισθηματικά είναι διαθέσιμη όταν τον/την χρειαστώ 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
13. Με κάνει να νιώθω επιθυμητός/ή 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
14. Με παινεύει (παράδειγμα: μου λέει θετικά πράγματα για μένα) 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
15. Είναι κατανοητικός/η 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix H
Πως αισθάνομαι για τον Εαυτό μου και για Άλλους
Οδηγίες: Πιο κάτω υπάρχουν κάποιες δηλώσεις για το πώς αισθάνεσαι για τον εαυτό σου και
για άλλους ανθρώπους. Σημείωσε με Χ στο κουτί που λέει πόσο αλήθεια είναι η κάθε
δήλωση για σένα.
1. Είμαι αρκετά χαρούμενος άνθρωπος
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
2. Νιώθω πολλή μοναξιά.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
3. Αναστατώνομαι όταν οι γονείς μου ή οι φίλοι μου φεύγουν εκτός πόλης για λίγες μέρες.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
4. Κάνω πράγματα που οι άλλοι θεωρούν τρελά ή εκτός ελέγχου.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
5. Αισθάνομαι ένα περίπου το ίδιο συνέχεια. Τα αισθήματα μου δεν αλλάζουν πολύ συχνά.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
6. Θέλω να ξέρουν κάποιοι άνθρωποι πόσο με έχουν πληγώσει.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
7. Κάνω πράγματα χωρίς να σκέφτομαι.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
8. Τα συναισθήματα μου είναι πολύ έντονα. Για παράδειγμα, όταν θυμώνω, θυμώνω πάρα
πάρα πολύ, και όταν χαίρομαι, χαίρομαι πάρα πάρα πολύ.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
9. Αισθάνομαι πως υπάρχει κάτι σημαντικό που λείπει σε μένα αλλά δεν ξέρω τι είναι.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
10. Έχω διαλέξει φίλους/φίλες που μου έχουν συμπεριφερθεί άσχημα.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
11. . Είμαι απερίσκεπτος/η με πράγματα που είναι σημαντικά για μένα.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
12. . Αλλάζω γνώμη σχεδόν κάθε μέρα για το τι να κάνω όταν μεγαλώσω.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
13. Άνθρωποι που ήταν κοντά μου με έχουν απογοητεύσει.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
14. Πηγαίνω μπρος και πίσω μεταξύ διάφορων συναισθημάτων, όπως το να είμαι
θυμωμένος/η ή λυπημένος/η ή χαρούμενος/η.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
15. Μπλέκω σε μπελάδες επειδή κάνω πράγματα χωρίς να σκέφτομαι.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
16. Ανησυχώ ότι οι άνθρωποι για τους οποίους νοιάζομαι θα φύγουν και δεν θα ξανάρθουν.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
17. . Όταν θυμώνω δεν μπορώ να ελέγξω τι κάνω.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
18. Το πως αισθάνομαι για τον εαυτό μου αλλάζει πολύ.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
19. . Όταν αναστατώνομαι, κάνω πράγματα που δεν είναι καλά για μένα.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
20. Πολλές φορές, οι φίλοι μου και εγώ είμαστε πολύ κακοί μεταξύ μας.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
21. Θυμώνω τόσο πολύ που δεν μπορώ να αφήσω όλο μου το θυμό να βγει.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
22. Βαριέμαι πολύ εύκολα.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
23. . Προσέχω πολύ τα πράγματα που είναι δικά μου.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
24. Όταν κάποιος γίνει φίλος/η μου, μένουμε φίλοι.
Καθόλου
Αλήθεια
Σχεδόν Καθόλου
Αλήθεια (Σπάνια
Αλήθεια)
Κάποτε
Αλήθεια
Συχνά Αλήθεια
Πάντα Αλήθεια
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix I
Table 3. Multicollinearity statistics for the main variables
Tolerance VIF
LEAPm .674 1.483
LEAPf .674 1.484
Anxious/Ambivalent .998 1.002
Trati EI (Global) .993 1.007
Self-control .756 1.323
Emotionality .518 1.931
Sociability .607 1.646
Wellbeing .608 1.645
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix J
Table 4. Means and standard deviations on main measures for junior high participants
Min Max Mode Mean SD
BPFSC 28 96 59 61.36 10.93
LEAPm 15 90 90 80.20 12.45
LEAPf 15 90 90 74.94 16.41
Trait EI
(global)
3.25 6.16 3.25 4.61 .53
Table 5. Means and standard deviations on main measures for high school participants
Min Max Mode Mean SD
BPFSC 32 90 63 60.90 11.30
LEAPm 22 90 90 81.15 11.09
LEAPf 15 90 90 78.23 13.75
Trait EI
(global)
2.82 6.34 2.82 4.74 .57
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix K
Table 6. Mean scores and standard deviations for the TEIQue subscales for junior high
participants
___________________________________________________________________________
Variable Mean SD
___________________________________________________________________________
Self esteem 4.80 .83
Emotion expression 4.53 .93
Self motivation 4.68 .69
Emotion regulation 4.10 .78
Happiness 5.42 1.04
Empathy 4.70 .79
Social awareness 4.62 .82
Impulsivity (low) 4.42 .94
Emotion perception 4.48 .82
Stress management 4.16 .82
Emotion management 4.41 .85
Optimism 5.26 .87
Relationships 5.02 .88
Adaptability 4.02 .70
Assertiveness 4.51 .80
___________________________________________________________________________
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix L
Table 7. Mean scores and standard deviations for the TEIQue subscales for high school
participants
___________________________________________________________________________
Variable Mean SD
___________________________________________________________________________
Self esteem 4.90 .94
Emotion expression 4.50 1.04
Self motivation 4.73 .69
Emotion regulation 4.15 .87
Happiness 5.49 1.15
Empathy 4.90 .82
Social awareness 4.78 .81
Impulsivity (low) 4.64 .92
Emotion perception 4.58 .79
Stress management 4.20 .97
Emotion management 4.73 .89
Optimism 5.29 .97
Relationships 5.33 .89
Adaptability 4.08 .80
Assertiveness 4.79 .86
___________________________________________________________________________
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix M
Table 8. Mean scores and standard deviations for the TEIQue subscales for parents
___________________________________________________________________________
Variable Mean SD
___________________________________________________________________________
Self esteem 4.93 .81
Emotion expression 4.96 1.00
Self motivation 5.04 .81
Emotion regulation 4.49 .80
Happiness 5.55 1.03
Empathy 5.08 .75
Social awareness 4.98 .83
Impulsivity (low) 4.91 .91
Emotion perception 5.01 .84
Stress management 4.28 .90
Emotion management 4.57 .84
Optimism 5.27 .97
Relationships 5.40 .77
Adaptability 4.39 .86
Assertiveness 4.64 .77
___________________________________________________________________________
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix N
Table 9. Reliability values for the 15 subscales and four factors of the TEIQue
Cronbach’s alpha
Self-esteem .73
Emotion expression .74
Self-motivation .53
Emotion regulation .69
Happiness .81
Empathy .58
Social awareness .72
Impulsivity (low) .68
Emotion perception .64
Stress management .66
Emotion management .63
Optimism .73
Relationships .64
Adaptability .57
Assertiveness .56
Well-being .84
Self-control .70
Emotionality .76
Sociability .77
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix O
Table 10. Factor loadings for the 15 items of the ASCQ
___________________________________________________________________________
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4
___________________________________________________________________________
Item 1 .62
Item 2 .46 -.43
Item 3 .59
Item 4 .68
Item 5 .73
Item 6 .37 .53
Item 7 .58
Item 8 .80
Item 9 .65
Item 10 .60
Item 11 .62
Item 12 -.69
Item 13 .71
Item 14 .69
Item 15 .70
___________________________________________________________________________
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix P
Table 11. Factor matrix for the LEAPm and LEAPf
LEAPm LEAPf
Supports me .69 .79
Consoles me .78 .83
Shows she cares .74 .81
Genuine interest .75 .84
Remembers things .73 .78
Available to talk .75 .79
Asks questions .79 .83
Spends extra time .66 .70
Wants to talk about my troubles .77 .82
Wants to talk about my interests .69 .77
Values my input .78 .81
Emotionally available .80 .83
Makes me feel wanted .76 .80
Praises me .70 .76
Is understanding .74 .78
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix Q
Table 12. Factor loadings for the BPFS-C
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6 Factor 7
1. ‘I’m a pretty happy person’ .38
2. ‘I feel very lonely’ -.51
3. ‘I get upset when people leave town for a few days’ .59
4. ‘I do things that are wild’ .61
5. ‘I feel the same way all the time’
6. ‘I want people to know they’ve hurt me’ .43
7. ‘I do things without thinking’ .65
8. ‘My feelings are very strong’ -.58
9. ‘I feel there’s something missing in me’
10. ‘I’ve picked friends who’ve treated me badly’ -.35
11. ‘I’m careless about things that are important to me’ .31
12. ‘I change my mind about what I should do when I grow up’ -.37
13. ‘People who were close to me have let me down’
14. ‘I go back forth between different feelings’ -.40
15. ‘I get into trouble for doing things without thinking’ .54
16. ‘I worry that people will leave and not come back’ .32
17. ‘When I’m mad I can’t control what I do’ -.72
18. ‘How I feel about myself changes a lot’ -.72
19. ‘When I get upset, I do things that aren’t good for me’ -.38
20. ‘Lots of times, my friends and I, are mean to each other’ -.55
21. ‘I get so mad, I can’t let all my anger out’ -.37
22. ‘I get bored very easily’ -.45
23. ‘I take good care of things that are mine’ .37
24. ‘Once someone is my friend, we stay friends .47
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix R
Table 13. Correlations between main variables and the trait EI factors for junior high participants
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. BPFSC __
2. LEAPm -.12 __
3. LEAPf -.18** .50** __
4. Anxious/Ambivalent .38** .01 .01 __
5. Global trait EI -.06 -.08 -.02 .08 __
6. Well-being -.09 -.01 .04 .08 .85** __
7. Self-control -.01 -.15* -.03 .10 .71** .44** __
8. Emotionality -.06 -.08 -.04 .03 .90** .73** .54** __
9. Sociability -.03 -.01 -.00 .05 .77** .60** .36** .62** __
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
Appendix S
Table 14. Correlations between main variables and the trait EI factors for high school participants
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. BPFSC __
2. LEAPm -.19** __
3. LEAPf -.17** .62** __
4. Anxious/Ambivalent .53** -.09 -.08 __
5. Global trait EI .01 -.01 .06 .00 __
6. Well-being .02 -.02 .01 .02 .83** __
7. Self-control .03 .03 .09 .03 .70** .46** __
8. Emotionality -.04 -.02 .04 -.05 .85** .59** .47** __
9. Sociability .00 -.01 .08 .01 .76** .54** .31** .62** __
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
120
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRAIT EI AND BPD FEATURES
Appendix T
Table 15. Correlations between BPDF and TEIQue subscales (Junior High)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
1. Self-esteem _
2. Emotion
expression
.51** _
3. Self-motivation .39** .39** __
4. Emotion
regulation
.26** .35** .19** __
5. Happiness .52** .37** .47** .17* __
6. Empathy .27** .40** .38** 20** .36** __
7. Social
awareness
.51** .50** .41** .36** ..52** 42** __
8. Impulsivity
(low)
.32** .37** .31** .45** .27** .31** .29** __
9. Emotion
perception
.53** .51** .36** .34** .44** .31** .57** .36** __
10. Stress
management
.35**
.
.41** .23** .43** .17* .06 .24** .32** .35** __
11. Emotion
management
.39** .31** .35** .11 .28** .32** .57** .17* .46** .21** __
12. Optimism .58** .53** .44** .37** .61** .40** .55** .48** .47** .23** .28** __
13. Relationships .40** .37** .46** .28** .65** .49** .47** .43** .40** .20** .25** .54** __
14. Adaptability .24** .39** .25** .44** .18* .15* .30** .37** .43** . 41** .12 .30* .22** __
15. Assertiveness .50** .37** .24** .15* .32** .18** .46** .28** .40** .23** .42** .38** .28** .16*
__
16. BPDF -.02 -.02 -.04 -.05 -.09 .00 -.04 .04 -.05 -.03 -.06 -.09 -.10 -.04 .03 __
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
121
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRAIT EI AND BPD FEATURES
Appendix U
Table 16. Correlations between BPDF and TEIQue subscales (High School)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
1. Self-esteem _
2. Emotion
expression
.47** _
3. Self-motivation .56** .44** _
4. Emotion
regulation
.16** .17** .23** _
5. Happiness .61** .47** .54** .27** _
6. Empathy .14** .28** .37** .18** .21** __
7. Social
awareness
.59** .54** .50** .28** .50** .42** __
8. Impulsivity
(low)
.35** .31** .44** .46** .43** .29** .43** __
9. Emotion
perception
.47** .55** .48** .32** .38** .34** .60** .38** __
10. Stress
management
.29** .25** .36** .60** .30** .21** .28** .32** .28** __
11. Emotion
management
.34** .24** .31** .05 .19** .30** .57** .12* .45** .10** __
12. Optimism .59** .41** .55** .29** .74** .20** .45** .42** .40** .35** .13* __
13. Relationships .39** .42** .53** .22** .55** .48** .48** .48** .37** .27** .16*
*
.45** __
14. Adaptability .30** .21** .32** .41** .28** .17** .30** .30** .25** .40** .13* .33* .26** __
15. Assertiveness .58** .44** .50** .15** .46** .20** .62** .32** .51** .19** .48*
*
.42** .37** .17** __
16. BPDF -.01 -.08 .03 -.02 -.01 -.03 -.02 .04 .04 .06 -.01 .06 -.02 .02 .03 __
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
122
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRAIT EI AND BPD FEATURES
Appendix V
Table 17. Regression coefficients for the 15 trait EI facets, junior high and high school
participants
Junior High High School
Variable B SE B B SE B
Self-esteem .63 .05 -.37 -.03
Emotion expression .15 .01 -1.94 -.18
Self-motivation .33 .02 .10 .01
Emotion regulation -.94 -.07 -1.88 -.15
Happiness -.38 -.04 -.52 -.05
Empathy 1.05 .08 -.42 -.03
Social awareness .87 .07 -.56 -.04
Impulsivity (low) 1.80 .15 .82 .07
Emotion perception -.26 -.02 2.15 .15
Stress management -.18 -.01 1.40 .12
Emotion
management
-1.37 -.11 -.49 -.04
Optimism -1.74 -.14 1.30 .11
Relationships -1.63 -.13 -.49 -.04
Adaptability -.51 -.03 .26 .02
Assertiveness 1.12 .08 .83 .06
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
123
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRAIT EI AND BPD FEATURES
Appendix W
Table 18. Regression coefficients for the main variables as predictors of BPDF
Junior High High School
Variable B SE B B SE B
LEAPm -.02 -.03 -.11 -.11
LEAPf -.12 -.17 -.06 -.07
Anxious/Ambivalent 4.36 .38 6.14 .51
Emotion expression -.50 -.05
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
124
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRAIT EI AND BPD FEATURES
Appendix X
Table 19. Regression coefficients for the trait EI subscales as predictors of BPDF as a
function of gender
Girls Boys
Variable B SE B B SE B
Self-esteem -.19 -.02 -.64 -.05
Emotion expression -1.40 -.13 -1.58 -.13
Self-motivation .30 .02 1.92 .12
Emotion regulation -1.16 -.09 -2.26 -.16
Happiness .45 .04 -1.19 -.12
Empathy -.30 -.02 1.31 .09
Social awareness -1.24 -.09 .13 .01
Impulsivity (low) .50 .04 1.60 .13
Emotion perception 2.82 .20 -.66 -.05
Stress management .20 .02 2.23 .18
Emotion
management
.05 .00 -1.34 -.10
Optimism -.90 -.07 1.90 .16
Relationships .18 .02 -2.64 -.21
Adaptability 1.62 .11 -1.17 -.08
Assertiveness -.05 -.00 2.66 .19
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
125
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRAIT EI AND BPD FEATURES
Appendix Y
Table 20. Correlations between parental and child trait EI subscales and BPDF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
1. Self-esteem __
2. Emotion
expression
.55** __
3. Self-
motivation
.59** .57** __
4. Emotion
regulation
.40** .38** .50** __
5. Happiness .67** .52** .63** .45** __
6. Empathy .43** .47** .41** .35** .43** __
7. Social
awareness
.62** .67**
.60** .40** .53** .50** __
8. Impulsivity
(low)
.46** .38** .61** .45** .46** .33** .46** __
9. Emotion
perception
.54** .64** .45 .34** .46** .46** .63** .27** __
10. Stress
management
.51** .46** .46** .51** .52** .29** .46** .39** .36** __
11. Emotion
management
.56** .54** .48** .32** .41** .47** .61** .30** .59** .40** __
12. Optimism .59** .46** .54** .44** .70** .34** .45** .40** .38** .50** .37** __
13.
Relationships
.55** .48** .50** .30** .62** .45** .51** .53** .51** .35** .42** .48** __
14.
Adaptability
.30** .37** .37 .37** .34** .20** .33** .22** .17 .41** .29** .32** .22** __
15.
Assertiveness
.48** .43** .48** .26** .29** .29** .57** .39** .38** .39** .47** .31** .40** .27** __
16. BPDF -.00 -.07 -.06 .05 -.01 -.02 -.07 -.01 -.08 .06 -.12 .02 .02 .02 -.01 __
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u
126
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRAIT EI AND BPD FEATURES
Appendix Z
Table 21. Regression coefficients for parental trait EI subscales and adolescent BPDF scores
Variable B SE B
Self-esteem 1.23 .09
Emotion expression -.71 -.06
Self-motivation -1.46 -.10
Emotion regulation .96 .07
Happiness -.86 -.08
Empathy .54 .04
Social awareness -.97 -.07
Impulsivity (low) -.43 -.04
Emotion perception -.46 -.03
Stress management .99 .08
Emotion management -2.35 -.18
Optimism .44 .04
Relationships 1.81 .12
Adaptability 1.80 .14
Assertiveness .61 .04
Filia-A
nna C
hristo
doulo
u