ArticlePsychology and psychotherapy2022
Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Brief Reflective Functioning Interview.
Article in Psychology and psychotherapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07639957 (What Role Does Gender Play in Relationship and Self Experiences of Individuals With Borderline Personality Disorder?), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
What Role Does Gender Play in Relationship and Self Experiences of Individuals With Borderline Personality Disorder?
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reflective functioning in anorexia nervosa: does it differ from healthy controls and what is its relation to psychopathology?Journal of eating disorders · 2025Article
- Minding mentalizing - convergent validity of the Mentalization Breakdown Interview.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo measure mentalization in a feasible manner, various instruments have been designed in recent years. The Brief Reflective Functioning Interview (BRFI) is a short interview that is based on the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). The aim of both studies was to examine the psychometric properties of the German version of the BRFI and to compare them to those of the AAI.
methodsIn Study 1, we examined 60 students using the BRFI and the AAI. In Study 2, the validity of the BRFI was examined using a mixed sample of students and patients (N = 149). Trained coders evaluated the Reflective Functioning Scale (RFS) for the BRFI and the AAI.
resultsWe found a significant positive correlation between the RFS total scores of the BRFI and those of the AAI. In addition, both interviews showed excellent internal consistency. We could also show that persons with mental disorders exhibit lower levels of RF score than mentally stable individuals. Women had higher RF scores in the BRFI than men in both samples. Persons whose mentalization capacity was rated below average in either the BRFI or the AAI also reported significantly lower mentalization ability in the self-assessment (p < .01).
conclusionsOur results revealed that the RFS scores measured by the BRFI are highly comparable to those measured by the AAI. Our findings support the results of previous studies, suggesting that the BRFI is a reliable, valid and easy-to-administer alternative to the AAI. PRACTITIONER POINTS: The German version of the Brief Reflective Functioning Interview (BRFI) proved to be a reliable and valid instrument for the assessment of reflective functioning that is shorter in terms of time to complete and the evaluation process than the measurement via the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). Reflective functioning is negatively associated with psychopathology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.