Abstract

Multiple informant assessment is the norm when evaluating borderline personality pathology (BPP) in adolescence, especially by including reports from both parents and adolescents. However, these reports tend to be discrepant, and it is unclear how to integrate. The current study used a trifactor model to isolate sources of variance in parents’ and adolescents’ reports of BPP due to their shared and unique perspectives in a sample of 652 inpatient adolescents (63% female; M_age = 15.31, SD = 1.45) and their parents (81% mothers). Consensus/agreement was characterized by the externalizing features of BPP whereas idiosyncratic views of adolescent BPP covered the full latent BPP construct, suggesting that simple aggregation of parent and adolescent reports is inappropriate. Measurement invariance suggested that unique perspectives were characterized by slightly different operationalizations of BPP and response biases for specific features of BPP. Attachment security and parents’ interpersonal problems predicted shared and unique perspectives differently for female and male adolescents. Lastly, we found that shared and unique perspectives differentially predicted interview based BPP, length of stay, and adolescent mentalizing. In sum, findings replicate previous evidence of parent-child informant discrepancy in youth psychopathology, broadly, and provide insights specific to BPP. Discussion includes practical recommendations for assessment and interpretation of BPP assessment.

摘要

在评估青春期边缘人格病理学（BPP）时，多线人评估是常态，特别是通过包括父母和青少年的报告。然而，这些报告往往存在差异，并且尚不清楚如何整合。_{当前的研究使用三因素模型来隔离父母和青少年对 BPP 报告的差异来源，因为他们在 652 名住院青少年（63% 为女性；男性年龄}）样本中具有共同和独特的观点。= 15.31，SD = 1.45）及其父母（81% 是母亲）。共识/协议的特点是 BPP 的外化特征，而青少年 BPP 的特殊观点涵盖了完整的潜在 BPP 结构，这表明父母和青少年报告的简单汇总是不合适的。测量不变性表明，独特的观点的特点是 BPP 的操作略有不同，以及 BPP 特定特征的反应偏差。依恋安全感和父母的人际关系问题对女性和男性青少年的共同和独特观点的预测不同。最后，我们发现共同观点和独特观点对基于访谈的 BPP、住院时间和青少年心智化的预测存在差异。总共，研究结果广泛地重复了先前关于青少年精神病理学中亲子知情人差异的证据，并提供了针对 BPP 的见解。讨论包括评估的实用建议和 BPP 评估的解释。