Presentation at the 2nd International Congress on Borderline Personality Disorder (ESSPD) in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, on September 28th, 2012.

1. Kris Van den Broeck
Psychologist / Behaviour Therapist / PhD student
kris.vandenbroeck@ppw.kuleuven.be
Autobiographical memory characteristics
in relation to
borderline complaints
2nd BPD Congress In cooperation with Jasmin Reza, Loes Koolen, Prof. Dr. Guido Pieters MD,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
28/09/2012 Prof. Dr. Laurence Claes, and Prof. Dr. Filip Raes

2. Introduction: Observations
Autobiographical Memory Characteristic In MDD/PTSD In BPD
• Overgeneral Memory (OGM)
“Every time I play tennis” vs
Robust Inconsistent
“That one set I broke my racquet in that (e.g., …)
thrilling tiebreak against my brother.”
• Cue Discrepancy Some evidence
Some evidence (e.g., Van den Broeck,
“Happy” (HD) vs “Polite” (LD) (e.g., Crane, Barnhofer, &
Pieters, Claes, & Raes,
Williams, 2007)
2011)
• Vantage Point during Recall (VPR)
Observer perspective vs Field perspective More recently
(e.g., Kuyken & Moulds, No data
2009)

3. Introduction: Research Questions
1. What about …
Overgeneral
Memory
Borderline
Complaints
Hypotheses
r(BPD complaints, %Cat(HD)) > 0

4. Introduction: Research Questions
1. What about …
Borderline
Complaints
Vantage
Perspective
during Recall
Hypotheses
r(BPD complaints, %Cat(HD)) > 0
r(BPD complaints, %Obs(HD)) > 0

5. Introduction: Research Questions
1. What about … • “The ability to inhibit a
Overgeneral dominant response to perform
Memory a subdominant response”
(Rothbart & Bates, 2006)
Borderline Effortful • In general lower EC in
personality disorders (Claes et al.,
Complaints Control 2009)
Vantage 2. What Associated with social skills,
•
about …
conscience development,
Perspective sympathy/empathy (Eisenberg et
al., 1996; Kochanska et al., 1996; Spinrad et
during Recall al., 2007; Valiente et al., 2004).
Hypotheses Exploration
r(BPD complaints, %Cat(HD)) > 0 r(EC, BPD complaints) < 0 ?
r(EC, %Cat(HD)) = ?
r(BPD complaints, %Obs(HD)) > 0
r(EC, %Obs(HD)) = ?

6. Study 1: Set-up
 Participants  Instruments
 Autobiographical Memory Task (Williams & Broadbent, 1986)
 N = 148  Written, minimal instructions
 Community  10 HD cues, 10 LD cues (Dicrep. ~ MDD)
sample
 Borderline Syndrome Index (Vertommen & Van de Wygaert, 1988)
 82 females  52 items, yes/no
 4 factors:
 17-30 years
 Failing Social Skills (FSS)
(M = 21.32;
SD = 3.22)  Difficult Interpersonal Relationships (DIR)
 Negative Self-Concept (NSC)
 76% finished  Anxiety (ANX)
higher
education  Effortful Control scale of Adult Temperament Questionnaire (Hartman & Rothbart, 2001)
 19 items, 8-point Likert scale
 3 factors:
 Attentional Control (ATT): the ability to change / focus attention when desired
 Activation Control (ACT): the ability to perform an action when there is a strong tendency not to / to avoid it
 Inhibitory Control (INH): the ability to suppress inadequate behaviour

7. Study 1: Results
 Results
%catHD %catLD %obs %obsHD %obsLD BSI-tot BSI-FSS BSI-DIR BSI-NSC BSI-ANX
%cat .86** .85** -.05 -.08 -.03 .07 .11 -.03 .01 .10
%catHD .47** -.07 -.11 -.03 .10 .13 .01 .05 .12
%catLD -.01 -.02 -.02 .02 .06 -.06 -.02 .04
%obs .90** .88** .14 .17* .14 .04 .11
%obsHD .60** .16 .20* .19* .06 .10
%obsLD .07 .09 .06 .00 .09
BSI-tot .79** .77** .90** .84**
BSI-FSS .51** .62** .53**
BSI-DIR .64** .49**
BSI-NSC Controlled for depression severity and age
.67**
BSI-ANX  No associations between OGM and BPD complaints!
 VPR following HD cues associated with social BPD complaints!

8. Study 1: Results
 Results (exploration EC)
EC-ATT EC-ACT EC-INH %obsHD BSI-tot BSI-FSS BSI-DIR BSI-NSC BSI-ANX
EC-tot .79** .79** .72** -.18* -.43** -.40** -.34** -.30** -.36**
EC-ATT .53** .39** -.18* -.51** -.47** -.37** -.41** -.44**
EC-ACT .24** -.22** -.38** -.40** -.36** -.25** -.25**
EC-INH -.05 -.19* -.13 -.10 -.16 -.23**
%obsHD -.15 .06 .19* .19* .09
BSI-tot .90** .77** .79** .84**
BSI-FSS .65** .62** .67**
BSI-DIR .51** .49**
BSI-NSC .54**
Controlled for depression severity and age
BSI-ANX
EC negatively associated with BPD symptoms (not INH) = replication
 EC negatively associated with VPR (observer) (not INH)
 Mediation of EC between BPD symptoms and VPR?

9. Study 1: Results
 Results (exploration EC)
 Preacher & Hayes bootstrapping
 5000 resamples
 .0006 < c-c’ < .0049 (90% CI)
 Yes, mediation
Interpersonal c’ = .00 Observer
Borderline + perspective
symptoms
-
-
a = -.05** b = -.04**
Activation
control

10. Study 1: Conclusions
 No associations between BPD complaints and OGM
 Due to set of cues?
 Given the association between BPD symptoms and observer perspective during
retrieval:
 VPR especially associated with interpersonal problems: what is the role of field perspective in interpersonal
relationships? Field perspective necessary to build / maintain stable interpersonal relations?
 Cluster empathy / effortful control / vantage perspective (during recall) / interpersonal difficulties?
 EC mediates relationship between BPD symptoms and VPR
 Therapeutic strategies that enlarge EC and diminish avoidance (MBT / MBCT / ACT / exposure) may work in
BPD patients
 Note: community sample!
Van den Broeck, Reza, Nelis, Claes, Pieters, & Raes (in prep). Effortful Control mediates between
Borderline Symptoms and Vantage Perspective during Autobiographical Memory Retrieval.

11. Study 2: Set-up
 Participants
 N = 120  Instruments
 Community  Autobiographical Memory Task (Williams & Broadbent, 1986)
sample
 Written, minimal instructions
 55 females
 8 HD cues + 8 LD cues (Discrep. ~ BPD)
 17-30 years
(M = 21.19;
SD = 1.60)  Borderline Syndrome Index (Vertommen & Van de Wygaert, 1988)
 Effortful Control scale of Adult Temperament Questionnaire
(Hartman & Rothbart, 2001)

12. Study 2: Results
 Results
%catHD %catLD %obs %obsHD %obsLD BSI-tot BSI-FSS BSI-DIR BSI-NSC BSI-ANX
%cat .84** .88** -.07 -.01 -.12 .01 -.05 .06 .12 -.09
%catHD .48** -.13 -.05 -.17 .12 .02 .18~ .18* -.04
%catLD -.01 .03 -.04 -.08 -.09 -.06 .04 -.11
%obs .87** .88** -.08 -.12 -.05 -.09 .04
%obsHD .54** .01 .11 .03 -.01 .12
%obsLD -.15 -.10 -.10 -.15 -.05
BSI-tot .69** .73** .78** .68**
BSI-FSS .33** .42** .24**
BSI-DIR .66** .30**
Controlled for depression severity
BSI-NSC  OGM following HD cues associated with negative self-concept! .30**
BSI-ANX  No associations between VPR and (social) BPD complaints!
 Again: EC was negatively associated with BPD complaints!

13. General Conclusions
 Stable negative correlations between EC-scales and BPD complaints, even when
controlled for depression severity.
 Both studies suggest that discrepancy is an important element, thereby supporting
the idea that high discrepant information leads to a reallocation of resources
towards the self (self-coherence), as is suggested by models on autobiographical
memory organisation.
 Study 1: EC(ACT) mediates between BPD complaints and vantage perspective,
suggesting that BPD complaints will ameliorate from therapeutic strategies as MBCT,
ACT, MBT, and exposure.
 Note: community sample! No data on trauma/medication/…

14. General Conclusions
 But: VPR~BPD (study 1)  OGM~BPD (study 2)!
 Sample differences?
 Different cues?
Study 1 Study 2
Polite (LD), happy (HD), honest (LD), Satisfied (HD), tired (LD),
enjoying (HD), just (LD), optimistic optimistic (LD), stressed
(HD), respectful (LD), energetic (LD), self-assured (HD), sad
(HD), sincere (LD), satisfied (HD), (HD), successful (HD),
intelligent (LD), pleasurable (HD),
neat (LD), self-assured (HD),
sensitive (LD), relaxed (HD), grateful
? clumsy (LD), creative (LD),
dissatisfied (LD), energetic
(LD), unhappy (HD), relaxed
(LD), successful (HD), reliable (LD), (HD), insecure (HD),
and active (HD) enjoying (LD), disappointed
Schoofs et al. (2010) (HD)
 Other suggestions?

15. The End

16. General Conclusions

17. Study 1: Conclusions
1. What about … • “The ability to inhibit a
Overgeneral dominant response to perform
Memory a subdominant response”

(Rothbart & Bates, 2006)
Borderline Effortful • In general lower EC in
personality disorders (Claes et al.,
Complaints Control 2009)
Vantage 2. What Associated with social skills,
•
about …
conscience development,
Perspective sympathy/empathy (Eisenberg et
al., 1996; Kochanska et al., 1996; Spinrad et
during Recall al., 2007; Valiente et al., 2004).
Results
r(BPD complaints, %Cat(HD)) = 0

18. Study 1: Conclusions
1. What about … • “The ability to inhibit a
Overgeneral dominant response to perform
Memory a subdominant response”
 
(Rothbart & Bates, 2006)
Borderline Effortful • In general lower EC in
personality disorders (Claes et al.,
Complaints Control 2009)

Vantage 2. What Associated with social skills,
•
about …
conscience development,
Perspective sympathy/empathy (Eisenberg et
al., 1996; Kochanska et al., 1996; Spinrad et
during Recall al., 2007; Valiente et al., 2004).
Results Results
r(BPD complaints, %Cat(HD)) = 0 r(EC, BPD complaints) < 0
r(social complaints, %Obs(HD)) >
0

19. Study 1: Conclusions
1. What about … • “The ability to inhibit a
Overgeneral dominant response to perform
Memory a subdominant response”
 
(Rothbart & Bates, 2006)
Borderline Effortful • In general lower EC in
personality disorders (Claes et al.,
Complaints Control 2009)
  2. What Associated with social skills,
•
about …
Vantage
Perspective
during Recall
 conscience development,
sympathy/empathy (Eisenberg et
al., 1996; Kochanska et al., 1996; Spinrad et
al., 2007; Valiente et al., 2004).
Results Results
r(BPD complaints, %Cat(HD)) = 0 r(EC, BPD complaints) < 0
r(EC, %Cat(HD)) = 0
r(social complaints, %Obs(HD)) >
r(EC, %Obs(HD)) < 0
0