Skip to main content

Fear of compassion from others explains the relation between borderline personality disorder symptoms and ineffective conflict resolution strategies among patients with substance use disorders

Abstract

Background

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) pathology is common among patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) and associated with a variety of negative outcomes, including worse SUD outcomes. One particularly relevant outcome with links to substance use problems that is likely to be elevated among SUD patients with BPD symptoms is ineffective conflict resolution strategies in romantic relationships. However, no research to date has examined the relation of BPD pathology to strategies for managing conflict in romantic relationships among patients with SUDs, or the factors that may increase the use of ineffective strategies within this population. Thus, this study examined the relations of BPD symptoms to ineffective responses to romantic relationship conflict surrounding substance use among residential patients with SUDs, as well as the explanatory roles of fear of compassion from and for others in these relations.

Methods

Patients in a community-based correctional SUD residential treatment facility (N = 93) completed questionnaires, including a measure of BPD symptoms, fear of compassion from and for others, and strategies for responding to conflict surrounding substance use in romantic relationships.

Results

Fear of compassion from others accounted for significant variance in the relations of BPD symptoms to the ineffective conflict resolution strategies of reactivity, domination, and submission, whereas fear of compassion for others only accounted for significant variance in the relation between BPD symptoms and the strategy of separation (which is not always ineffective).

Conclusions

Together, findings suggest that it is fear of compassion from others (vs. fear of compassion for others) that explains the relation between BPD symptoms and ineffective responses to romantic relationship conflict surrounding substance use among SUD patients. Findings highlight the potential utility of interventions aimed at reducing fears of compassion and increasing comfort with and tolerance of compassion from both others and oneself among SUD patients with BPD symptoms in order to strengthen relationships and reduce risk for relapse.

Background

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a serious mental health problem characterized by pervasive dysfunction across emotional, behavioral, and interpersonal domains and associated with severe functional impairment, substantial mental and physical disability, and heightened risk for a variety of self-destructive and health-compromising behaviors [1,2,3]. Although BPD is found at rates of 1–6% in the general population [1, 4,5,6], it is far more common among inpatient psychiatric populations (where rates of BPD range from 15 to 20%) [7,8,9], especially substance use disorder (SUD) populations. Indeed, evidence suggests that BPD pathology is particularly common among patients with SUDs, with the rate of BPD among individuals with a SUD estimated to be 22.1% and the rate among inpatients with a SUD estimated to be 26.7% [10].

Notably, the presence of BPD pathology among individuals with a SUD is associated with greater dysfunction and a variety of negative outcomes, including higher rates of suicidal and nonsuicidal self-injurious behaviors [11], higher levels of risky behaviors [12], greater psychiatric severity [13], greater physical health problems [12], poorer psychological health [12], greater substance use severity [12, 14, 15], and poorer SUD treatment outcomes [13, 16]. Although limited research has examined the relation of BPD pathology to interpersonal difficulties in particular within SUD populations, extensive evidence highlighting the centrality of interpersonal dysfunction to BPD [17] suggests that the presence of BPD symptoms among SUD patients is likely to relate to greater interpersonal difficulties within this population as well. Given that interpersonal relationships are theorized to play a key role in substance use outcomes [18,19,20], with supportive relationships protecting against relapse [21,22,23] and interpersonal difficulties and conflict increasing risk for substance use problems and relapse [24,25,26], identifying factors that may increase the risk of interpersonal difficulties among individuals with SUDs has great clinical and public health significance. In particular, given evidence that romantic relationship difficulties may be especially relevant to SUD outcomes (with research finding a unique link between conflict within romantic relationships specifically [vs. conflict with relatives and friends] and substance use problems [26]), research focused on identifying factors associated with romantic relationship difficulties among individuals with SUDs is needed.

BPD pathology is a particularly relevant factor to examine in this regard, given both its elevated levels among SUD populations and its strong links to interpersonal difficulties, including difficulties in romantic relationships. Indeed, although interpersonal dysfunction is considered a hallmark feature of BPD pathology [17] that can be observed across a variety of relationships (including parent-child relationships, work relationships, and friendships) [27,28,29], it may be most evident in the context of romantic relationships [30], which are often characterized by instability, ineffective communication, and conflict [31,32,33,34,35]. More specifically, in addition to being linked to romantic relationship dissatisfaction, problems, and conflict in general [33, 36, 37], BPD pathology is associated with ineffective communication and conflict resolution strategies in particular [38]. For example, BPD symptoms are associated with greater moment-to-moment dominant behaviors during romantic couples’ conversations in the laboratory [38], and a BPD diagnosis is associated with more ineffective communication behaviors in romantic relationships, both in general [31] and as observed in the laboratory [35, 38, 39].

Notably, how individuals respond to conflict in romantic relationships, particularly conflict surrounding their substance use, may have important implications for recovery or relapse among individuals with a SUD. Specifically, ineffective conflict resolution strategies can erode relationship satisfaction and increase relationship distress [40,41,42,43], increasing the risk for substance use or relapse [19, 44, 45]. Thus, it is imperative to identify factors that may increase use of ineffective strategies for managing romantic relationship conflict among SUD patients with BPD pathology. Such research has the potential to identify promising targets for interventions aimed at improving relationship satisfaction and decreasing risk for relapse among at-risk individuals with a SUD.

In identifying factors that may account for the relation between BPD pathology and ineffective strategies for managing conflict in romantic relationships, the fear of compassion from and for others warrants particular consideration. Theorized to motivate evolutionarily-adaptive cooperative and caring behaviors in the context of relationships [46], compassion may be defined as “a sensitivity to suffering in self and others with a commitment to try to alleviate and prevent it” [47]. Although considered adaptive for interpersonal relationships (as well as one’s relationship to the self) [47, 48], individuals vary in their ability and motivation to develop compassion, with some individuals experiencing fears of compassion both received from others (and directed toward the self) and felt for others [48]. These fears are theorized to be more common among certain clinical populations, with both theoretical and clinical literature linking fears of compassion from and for others to psychopathology and insecure attachment [48, 49]. Of particular relevance to the present study, not only is BPD pathology strongly associated with insecure attachment [50, 51], research has found elevated levels of fears of compassion both from and for others among individuals with BPD pathology (relative to individuals without psychopathology) [52].

Notably, fears of compassion from and for others may be particularly relevant to the strategies individuals use to manage conflict, as such fears may relate to both decreased use of nonjudgmental, affiliative, responsive, and compromise-based strategies that are more likely to mitigate conflict and increased use of avoidance, withdrawal, punitive, aggressive, submissive, or dominant strategies that are more likely to exacerbate conflict [48, 53,54,55,56,57,58,59]. Indeed, although limited research has examined the relation between fears of compassion and specific strategies for managing romantic relationship conflict, fear of compassion for the self has been associated with interpersonal problems [60], and fears of compassion from and for others have been negatively associated with empathy toward others [49]. Conversely, greater compassion for others (which is inversely related to the fear of compassion for others) has been linked to lower conflict [47] and more affiliative goals for interpersonal interactions [53, 61]. Finally, the related construct of mindfulness (which is theorized to be central to self-compassion, as both require nonjudgmental self-awareness and a willingness to experience and embrace potentially painful internal experiences [62, 63]) has been positively associated with effective/constructive strategies for responding to conflict and negatively associated with ineffective/destructive conflict strategies [40, 64].

Given the clinical and public health significance of identifying factors associated with romantic relationship conflict among individuals with SUDs, this study examined the relations of BPD symptoms and fears of compassion from and for others to ineffective responses to romantic relationship conflict surrounding substance use among residential patients with SUDs. Specifically, this study examined the extent to which fears of compassion account for the relations of BPD symptoms to ineffective conflict resolution strategies. We hypothesized that BPD symptoms and fears of compassion from and for others would be positively associated with ineffective strategies for managing romantic relationship conflict surrounding substance use. We also hypothesized that fears of compassion from and for others would account for significant variance in the relations of BPD symptoms to ineffective conflict resolution strategies.

Methods

Participants

Participants were 93 adult patients (39.8% female; 60.2% male) in a community-based correctional SUD residential treatment facility in Ohio. Patients receiving treatment in this facility are felony offenders referred through the court system and required to complete alcohol and drug testing to ensure abstinence prior to entering the facility. The treatment program is comprised of three stages of SUD treatment focused on increasing independence, facilitating integration into the community, relapse prevention, mental health, and skill development (e.g., coping and social skills, parenting). As the stages of treatment progress, patients are given more autonomy and are eventually allowed to leave the center for employment opportunities and family visits. Inclusion criteria for the current study included (1) 18 years of age or older, (2) fluent English speaker, and (3) currently in a romantic relationship for at least 6 months.

Participants in this study ranged in age from 19 to 57 years (mean age = 32.61 ± 7.76). With regard to racial/ethnic background, 20.4% of participants identified as a member of a racial/ethnic minoritized group, including Black/African-American (12.9%), Latinx (6.4%), Native American (1.1%), and other racial/ethnic minoritized group (1.1%); the remaining 79.6% identified as White. Most participants reported a low annual household income, with 54.4% reporting an annual household income of less than $10,000 and 10% reporting an annual household income of $10,000 to $20,000. With regard to educational attainment, 30.1% reported not completing high school, 53.8% received a high school diploma or GED, 10.8% completed some college or technical school, and 5.4% received a college degree. Most participants were unemployed (87.1%), with 11.8% working full-time and 1.1% working part-time. The mean relationship duration of participants’ current romantic relationship was 59.38 ± 57.00 months (range = 6 to 252 months). The primary substances of choice in the month prior to treatment or involvement with the legal system for participants in this study were methamphetamine (30.1%), heroin (25.8%), alcohol (21.5%), cocaine (20.4%), and other opioids or analgesics (18.3%).

Measures

The McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI-BPD) [65] was used to assess BPD symptoms. The MSI-BPD is a 10-item self-report measure of the presence versus absence of DSM BPD criteria. Participants are asked to indicate if each item (e.g., “Have you been extremely moody?”; “Have any of your closest relationships been troubled by a lot of arguments or repeated breakups?”) applies to them by responding yes (scored as 1) or no (scored as 0). Items are summed to create a continuous BPD symptom variable reflecting the overall number of endorsed BPD symptoms (α = .86 in this sample). The MSI-BPD has been widely used in both community [66] and clinical [67] samples. MSI-BPD scores have been found to demonstrate good reliability and construct and concurrent validity, as well as strong convergent validity with other well-established measures of BPD features [65, 67, 68].

The Fears of Compassion Scale (FOCS) [48] was used to measure participants’ fears of receiving and giving compassion. The FOCS is a 28-item self-report measure assessing fears of compassion across three domains: fear of compassion for self (15 items; e.g., “I worry that if I start to develop compassion for myself I will become dependent on it”), fear of compassion for others (10 items; e.g., “People will take advantage of you if you are too forgiving and compassionate”), and fear of compassion from others (13 items; e.g., “Feelings of kindness from others are somehow frightening”). Participants are asked to respond using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (don’t agree at all) to 4 (completely agree), with higher scores indicating greater fears of compassion. Given the focus of this study on fears of compassion involving others (vs. the self), only the subscales assessing fears of compassion from others and for others were included in the present study (αs = 91 and .88, respectively, in this sample). Support has been provided for the construct validity of the FOCS and its subscales, with scores on the FOCS subscales (including the two subscales used in this study) demonstrating positive associations with psychopathology and self-criticism and negative associations [48, 49, 69] with mindfulness and self-compassion [48, 49]. Moreover, scores on the FOCS have been found to distinguish between therapists and college students and between individuals with BPD and without psychopathology in meaningful and expected directions (i.e., lower scores among therapists and higher scores among individuals with BPD) [48, 52].

The Romantic Partner Conflict Scale (RPCS) [43] was used to assess strategies for responding to conflict in romantic relationships. The RPCS asks participants to think of a significant conflict they’ve had with their romantic partner recently and then indicate the extent to which each possible way of responding to conflict applies to them on a 5-point Likert-type scale (0 = strongly disagree with statement, 4 = strongly agree with statement). For the purposes of this study, instructions were modified to ask participants to think about a typical conflict they have with their current romantic partner about substance use in particular. The RPCS has six subscales: compromise (14 items; e.g., “My partner and I negotiate to resolve our disagreements”), avoidance (3 items; e.g., “I avoid disagreements with my partner”), interactional reactivity (6 items; e.g., “When my partner and I disagree, we argue loudly”), separation (5 items; e.g., “When we have a conflict, we separate but expect to deal with it later”), domination (6 items; e.g., “I try to take control when we argue”), and submission (5 items; e.g., “Sometimes I agree with my partner so the conflict will end”). One of these subscales assesses an effective/constructive strategy for responding to conflict (i.e., compromise) and the other five assess ineffective/destructive or potentially ineffective strategies. Specifically, whereas compromise is considered an effective strategy and domination, submission, and reactivity are considered ineffective or maladaptive strategies [43, 70], separation and avoidance have been conceptualized as more or less effective depending on the context (with some researchers considering separation to be adaptive and avoidance to be maladaptive [70] and others considering both strategies to vary in effectiveness depending on the circumstances surrounding their use [43]).

RPCS scores have been found to demonstrate adequate test-retest reliability and construct and criterion validity, including significant associations in expected directions with another measure of ineffective and effective conflict resolution strategies [43]. Likewise, evidence for the convergent and divergent validity of RPCS scores with measures of relationship satisfaction, communication, respect, and adaptive versus maladaptive types of passion has been provided [43, 70]. Given the focus of this study on the factors associated with ineffective strategies for responding to romantic relationship conflict, the current study focused on only the five subscales assessing ineffective or potentially ineffective conflict strategies (αs > .80 in this sample).

A self-report version of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) [71] was used to assess current romantic relationship status (including length of the current relationship), as well as participants’ primary substances of choice in the month prior to treatment or involvement with the legal system. The ASI assesses seven potential problem areas among individuals who use substances, including medical status, employment/support status, alcohol/drugs, legal status, family history, family/social relationships, and psychiatric status. This study used the modules assessing family/social relationships and alcohol/drugs. Items assessing current relationship status and length of the current relationship were used to determine eligibility for inclusion in the current study. The item assessing participants’ primary substances of choice was used to characterize the sample.

Procedure

The university’s Institutional Review Board and the Executive Vice President of Operations and Executive Director of the treatment facility reviewed and approved all study procedures. To be eligible to participate in the larger study from which these data were drawn, participants were required to be ≥18 years of age and speak English. Treatment facility staff identified eligible participants who were then given information about the study by a member of the research team. Following provision of written informed consent, participants completed a series of questionnaires. Participants were compensated for their time.

Analysis plan

After computing descriptive statistics for the primary variables of interest, correlation analyses were conducted to examine interrelations among the primary variables of interest. To identify covariates for primary analyses, associations between relevant demographic and relationship variables (i.e., age, racial/ethnic background, sex assigned at birth, and length of current romantic relationship) and the outcome variables of interest were examined using correlation analyses. Variables found to be significantly correlated with the outcome variables were included as covariates in primary analyses [72]. Finally, the PROCESS (version 3.5) macro for SPSS (Model 4) [73] was used to examine the indirect relations of BPD symptoms to potentially ineffective conflict resolution strategies through fears of compassion from and for others. This model allowed us to examine whether fears of compassion accounted for significant variance in the relations between BPD symptoms and the use of potentially ineffective conflict resolution strategies. Indirect relations were evaluated using bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals based on 5000 bootstrap samples [73].

Results

Preliminary analyses

Descriptive statistics for and correlations among the primary variables of interest are presented in Table 1. BPD symptoms were significantly positively correlated with fears of compassion for and from others, as well as three of the strategies for responding to romantic relationship conflict, including reactivity, domination, and separation. Likewise, fear of compassion for others was significantly positively associated with reactivity, separation, and domination, and fear of compassion from others was significantly positively associated with reactivity, separation, domination, and submission.

Table 1 Correlations among and Descriptive Statistics for Primary Variables of Interest (N = 93)

Identification of covariates

Results of analyses examining correlations between relevant demographic and relationship characteristics and the outcome variables revealed significant negative associations of age with both domination (r = −.23, p = .028) and submission (r = −.28, p = .007). All other correlations between potential covariates and outcomes variables were not significant (r< |.18|, ps > .085). Thus, age was included as a covariate in primary analyses involving domination and submission.

Primary analyses

Results of analyses examining the indirect relations of BPD symptoms to potentially ineffective conflict resolution strategies through fears of compassion from and for others are presented in Table 2. Given that BPD symptoms and fears of compassion for and from others were not significantly associated with the conflict resolution strategy of avoidance, this strategy was not examined.

Table 2 Models Examining the Explanatory Role of Fears of Compassion For and From Others in the Relations of BPD Symptoms to Conflict Resolution Strategies (N = 93)

Analyses revealed significant indirect relations of BPD symptoms to interactional reactivity, domination, and submission through fear of compassion from others, and to separation through fear of compassion for others.

Discussion

This study sought to examine the relations of BPD symptoms to ineffective responses to romantic relationship conflict surrounding substance use among residential patients with SUDs, as well as the explanatory roles of fear of compassion from and for others in these relations. Given that how individuals respond to conflict in romantic relationships may have important implications for recovery and relapse among individuals with SUDs [40,41,42,43,44,45], identifying factors that may increase the use of ineffective conflict resolution strategies among SUD patients with BPD pathology has the potential to highlight promising targets for interventions aimed at decreasing risk for relapse among this at-risk population. Providing partial support for study hypotheses, at a zero-order level, BPD symptoms were significantly associated with three of the strategies for responding to romantic relationship conflict examined here, including interactional reactivity, domination, and separation. These findings add to the literature on the negative outcomes associated with BPD pathology among individuals with a SUD [11, 12, 16], extending the extant research in this area to negative interpersonal outcomes as well.

Specifically, these findings suggest that BPD symptoms among patients with SUDs are associated with the greater use of two conflict resolution strategies considered to be ineffective and destructive to relationships: reactivity and domination [43, 69, 74]. Given the association between romantic relationship problems and negative substance use outcomes [26, 44, 45], these findings highlight a potential mechanism (i.e., ineffective conflict resolution strategies) that may explain the association between BPD pathology and worse SUD outcomes among SUD patients [13, 16]. Findings of the greater use of reactivity and domination among SUD patients with greater BPD symptoms are consistent with past research highlighting the relation of BPD pathology to both interpersonal reactivity in general and domination in particular in the context of romantic relationships [39, 75]. Results of this study also extend extant research on the conflict resolution strategies associated with BPD by providing support for a relation between BPD symptoms and the strategy of separation. Notably, unlike the strategies of reactivity and domination, separation is not considered to be an inherently problematic conflict resolution strategy, as its effectiveness is thought to vary depending on the context and the nature of the interaction [43, 70]. Thus, these findings suggest that BPD pathology may be related to a variety of conflict resolution strategies that vary in their effectiveness.

Providing partial support for study hypotheses, fear of compassion from others accounted for significant variance in the relations of BPD symptoms to the ineffective conflict resolution strategies of reactivity, domination, and submission (all of which are considered destructive to relationships [43, 70]). Conversely, fear of compassion for others only accounted for significant variance in the relation between BPD symptoms and separation (a strategy that is not always ineffective). Together, these findings suggest that it is fear of compassion from others (vs. fear of compassion for others) that explains the relation between BPD symptoms and ineffective responses to romantic relationship conflict surrounding substance use. Although further research is needed to clarify why this is the case, it is possible that the fear of compassion from others in particular may drive behaviors intended to minimize the likelihood of receiving compassionate responses from one’s romantic partner in an effort to protect oneself from the fears and perceived threats associated with positive evaluations from others or experiences of closeness or affiliative emotions [2, 49, 76, 77]. Indeed, BPD pathology has been linked to both the fear of positive evaluation [2, 77] and the fear of positive emotions [78], both of which may prompt the avoidance of affiliative emotions and related experiences [47, 77,78,79]. Although understandable as a self-protective mechanism, these behaviors are likely to have unintended negative consequences, increasing relationship distress/dissatisfaction and, ultimately, risk for relapse among individuals with substance use problems.

In the context of BPD pathology in particular, it is possible that the use of ineffective conflict resolution strategies to avoid affiliative emotions and related experiences of vulnerability or closeness is driven (in part) by efforts to protect oneself from the pain associated with the inevitable cessation of positive emotions. For example, affective contrast theory [80] suggests that the impact of an emotional experience is dependent on the extent to which it contrasts with a previous emotional state, with studies finding that negative emotions are perceived as more aversive when preceded by a positive emotion [81]. Given the combination of heightened emotional and interpersonal sensitivity in BPD (including intense emotional suffering and fears of abandonment and rejection) [2, 75], individuals with elevated BPD symptoms may be particularly likely to experience affiliative emotions as threatening due to fears that the negative emotions that will inevitably replace these positive emotions will be experienced as even more aversive. Alternatively, this emotional and interpersonal sensitivity may interfere with the experience of positive emotions to such an extent that these emotions are so foreign that they are perceived as threatening and not able to be trusted [2]. Then again, given the greater overlap between fear of compassion from others (vs. for others) and fear of self-compassion [48, 49], as well as findings of a strong negative association between BPD pathology and self-compassion [82, 83], it may be that the fear of compassion from others (vs. for others) is simply more relevant to BPD pathology in general.

Results must be considered in light of limitations present. First, data were correlational and cross-sectional. Thus, although we were able to examine if fears of compassion from and for others accounted for significant variance in the relations of BPD symptoms to ineffective conflict resolution strategies, we cannot draw any conclusions about the temporal relations among these factors or the extent to which fears of compassion predict the use of ineffective conflict strategies. Indeed, although the proposed model is grounded in theoretical and empirical literature on BPD, fears of compassion, and conflict, the examined relations are likely complex and bidirectional. For example, repeated use of ineffective conflict resolution strategies could increase fears of compassion and/or exacerbate BPD symptoms. In the absence of prospective data, results of this study should be interpreted with caution and require replication in prospective longitudinal and micro-longitudinal (e.g., ecological momentary assessment) studies.

Additionally, our exclusive reliance on self-report measures introduces the potential for recall and social desirability biases. Thus, future studies would benefit from using clinician-administered interviews and behavioral observations of responses to conflict. Likewise, although the measure of conflict resolution strategies used in this study has good psychometric properties, there are limitations associated with assessing aspects of interpersonal relationships and interpersonal interactions among one member of a dyad only. Future studies should therefore include partner reports of conflict resolution strategies as well. In addition, laboratory-based studies of romantic partner dyads that assess responses to conflict in the laboratory would be particularly useful for examining more nuanced associations among BPD pathology, fears of compassion, and responses to romantic relationship conflict, as well as determining the effectiveness of the conflict resolution strategies employed. Finally, our study utilized a sample of patients in a community-based correctional SUD residential treatment facility. Given evidence that patients in residential SUD treatment facilities are characterized by more severe symptom presentations [84], findings from this study may not generalize to outpatient SUD samples or community adults with SUDs. Likewise, given that only one fifth of our sample identified as a member of a racial/ethnic minoritized group, findings may not generalize to individuals from more diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds. Thus, replication of these findings in other SUD samples, including more ethnically and racially diverse samples, is needed.

Conclusions

Despite limitations, the results of this study add to the literature on the negative outcomes associated with BPD pathology among individuals with SUDs, highlighting the relevance of both BPD symptoms and fear of compassion from others to ineffective responses to romantic relationship conflict surrounding substance use among SUD patients. In particular, findings suggest that the fear of compassion from others explains the relation between BPD symptoms and ineffective conflict resolution strategies within this population. These findings highlight the potential utility of interventions aimed at reducing fears of compassion and increasing comfort with and tolerance of compassion from both others and oneself among SUD patients with BPD symptoms in order to strengthen relationships and reduce risk for relapse.

Availability of data and materials

The dataset of the current study is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

ASI:

Addiction Severity Index

BPD:

Borderline personality disorder

FOCS:

Fear of Compassion Scale

MSI-BPD:

McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder

RPCS:

Romantic Partner Conflict Scale

SUD:

Substance use disorder

References

  1. Grant BF, Chou SP, Goldstein RB, Huang B, Stinson FS, Saha TD, et al. Prevalence, correlates, disability, and comorbidity of DSM-IV borderline personality disorder: results from the wave 2 National Epidemiologic Survey on alcohol and related conditions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;69:533–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Linehan MM. Cognitive-behavioral treatment of borderline personality disorder. New York: Guilford Press; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Skodol AE, Gunderson JG, Pfohl B, Widiger TA, Livesley WJ, Siever LJ. The borderline diagnosis I: psychopathology, comorbidity, and personality structure. Biol Psychiatry. 2002;51:936–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lenzenweger MF, Lane MC, Loranger AW, Kessler RC. DSM-IV personality disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;62:553–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tomko RL, Trull TJ, Wood PK, Sher KJ. Characteristics of borderline personality disorder in a community sample: comorbidity, treatment utilization, and general functioning. J Personal Disord. 2014;28:734–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Torgersen S, Kringlen E, Cramer V. The prevalence of personality disorders in a community sample. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001;58:590–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Widiger TA, Weissman MM. Epidemiology of borderline personality disorder. Hosp Comm Psychiatry. 1991;42:1015–21.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Zimmerman M, Rothschild L, Chelminski I. The prevalence of DSM-IV personality disorders in psychiatric outpatients. Am J Psychiatry. 2005;162:1911–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Trull TJ, Freeman LK, Vebares TJ, Choate AM, Helle AC, Wycoff AM. Borderline personality disorder and substance use disorders: an updated review. Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2018;5:15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. McMain S, Ellery M. Screening and assessment of personality disorders in addiction treatment settings. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2008;6:20–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Darke S, Ross J, Williamson A, Teesson M. The impact of borderline personality disorder on 12-month outcomes for the treatment of heroin dependence. Addiction. 2005;100:1121–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kosten TA, Kosten TR, Rounsaville BJ. Personality disorders in opiate addicts show prognostic specificity. J Subst Abus Treat. 1989;6:163–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Darke S, Ross J, Williamson A, Mills KL, Havard A, Teesson M. Borderline personality disorder and persistently elevated levels of risk in 36-month outcomes for the treatment of heroin dependence. Addiction. 2007;102:1140–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Morgenstern J, Langenbucher J, Labouvie E, Miller KJ. The comorbidity of alcoholism and personality disorders in a clinical population: prevalence rates and relation to alcohol typology variables. J Abnorm Psychol. 1997;106:74–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Tull MT, Gratz KL. The impact of borderline personality disorder on residential substance abuse treatment dropout among men. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2012;121:97–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jeung H, Herpertz SC. Impairments of interpersonal functioning: empathy and intimacy in borderline personality disorder. Psychopathol. 2014;47:220–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hunter-Reel D, McCrady B, Hildebrandt T. Emphasizing interpersonal factors: an extension of the Witkiewitz and Marlatt relapse model. Addiction. 2009;104:1281–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Leach D, Kranzler HR. An interpersonal model of addiction relapse. Addict Disord Their Treat. 2013;12:183–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Stanton M. Relapse prevention needs more emphasis on interpersonal factors. Am Psychol. 2005;60:340–1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ellis B, Bernichon T, Yu P, Roberts T, Herrell JM. Effect of social support on substance abuse relapse in a residential treatment setting for women. Eval Prog Plann. 2004;27:213–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Havassy BE, Hall SM, Wasserman DA. Social support and relapse: commonalities among alcoholics, opiate users, and cigarette smokers. Addict Behav. 1991;16:235–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Spohr SA, Livingston MD, Taxman FS, Walters ST. What’s the influence of social interactions on substance use and treatment initiation? A prospective analysis among substance-using probationers. Addict Behav. 2019;89:143–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hassel A, Nordfjærn T, Hagen R. Psychological and interpersonal distress among patients with substance use disorders: are these factors associated with continued drug use and do they change during treatment? J Subst Use. 2013;18:363–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lowman C, Allen J, Stout RL, Group TR. Replication and extension of Marlatt's taxonomy of relapse precipitants: overview of procedures and results. Addiction. 1996;91:51–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Whisman MA, Sheldon CT, Goering P. Psychiatric disorders and dissatisfaction with social relationships: does type of relationship matter? J Abnorm Psychol. 2000;109:803–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hessels CJ, van den Berg T, Lucassen SA, Laceulle OM, van Aken MA. Borderline personality disorder in young people: associations with support and negative interactions in relationships with mothers and a best friend. Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2022;9:2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Howard KP, Lazarus SA, Cheavens JS. A longitudinal examination of the reciprocal relationship between borderline personality features and interpersonal relationship quality. Personal Disord. 2022;13:3–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Napolitano SC, Lane SP, Hepp J, McDonald A, Trumbower C, Trull TJ. The roles of personality traits and close social contact in the expression of momentary borderline personality disorder symptoms in daily life. Personal Disord. 2021;13(5):494–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Navarro-Gómez S, Frías Á, Palma C. Romantic relationships of people with borderline personality: a narrative review. Psychopathol. 2017;50:175–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Bouchard S, Sabourin S, Lussier Y, Villeneuve E. Relationship quality and stability in couples when one partner suffers from borderline personality disorder. J Marital Fam Ther. 2009;35:446–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Chen H, Cohen P, Johnson JG, Kasen S, Sneed JR, Crawford TN. Adolescent personality disorders and conflict with romantic partners during the transition to adulthood. J Personal Disord. 2004;18:507–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Daley SE, Burge D, Hammen C. Borderline personality disorder symptoms as predictors of 4-year romantic relationship dysfunction in young women: addressing issues of specificity. J Abnorm Psychol. 2000;109:451–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lazarus SA, Choukas-Bradley S, Beeney JE, Byrd AL, Vine V, Stepp SD. Too much too soon?: borderline personality disorder symptoms and romantic relationships in adolescent girls. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2019;47:1995–2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Miano A, Grosselli L, Roepke S, Dziobek I. Emotional dysregulation in borderline personality disorder and its influence on communication behavior and feelings in romantic relationships. Behav Res Ther. 2017;95:148–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lavner JA, Lamkin J, Miller JD. Borderline personality disorder symptoms and newlyweds’ observed communication, partner characteristics, and longitudinal marital outcomes. J Abnorm Psychol. 2015;124:975–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Whisman MA, Schonbrun YC. Social consequences of borderline personality disorder symptoms in a population-based survey: marital distress, marital violence, and marital disruption. J Personal Disord. 2009;23:410–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Beeney JE, Hallquist MN, Scott LN, Ringwald WR, Stepp SD, Lazarus SA, et al. The emotional bank account and the four horsemen of the apocalypse in romantic relationships of people with borderline personality disorder: a dyadic observational study. Clin Psychol Sci. 2019;7:1063–77.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Assaad L, Lane S, Hopwood CJ, Durbin CE, Thomas KM. Personality pathology and spouses' moment-to-moment interpersonal behaviors. J Personal Disord. 2020;34:519–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Harvey J, Crowley J, Woszidlo A. Mindfulness, conflict strategy use, and relational satisfaction: a dyadic investigation. Mindfulness. 2019;10:749–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Perrone-McGovern KM, Oliveira-Silva P, Simon-Dack S, Lefdahl-Davis E, Adams D, McConnell J, et al. Effects of empathy and conflict resolution strategies on psychophysiological arousal and satisfaction in romantic relationships. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. 2014;39:19–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Schneewind KA, Gerhard AK. Relationship personality, conflict resolution, and marital satisfaction in the first 5 years of marriage. Fam Relat. 2002;51:63–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zacchilli TL, Hendrick C, Hendrick SS. The romantic partner conflict scale: a new scale to measure relationship conflict. J Soc Pers Relat. 2009;26:1073–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Hodgins DC, El-Guebaly N, Armstrong S. Prospective and retrospective reports of mood states before relapse to substance use. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1995;63:400–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Walitzer KS, Dearing RL. Gender differences in alcohol and substance use relapse. Clin Psychol Rev. 2006;26:128–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Depue RA, Morrone-Strupinsky JV. A neurobehavioral model of affiliative bonding: implications for conceptualizing a human trait of affiliation. Behav Brain Sci. 2005;28:313–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Gilbert P, Catarino F, Duarte C, Matos M, Kolts R, Stubbs J, et al. The development of compassionate engagement and action scales for self and others. J Compassionate Health Care. 2017;4:1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Gilbert P, McEwan K, Matos M, Rivis A. Fears of compassion: development of three self-report measures. Psychol Psychother. 2011;84:239–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Gilbert P, McEwan K, Gibbons L, Chotai S, Duarte J, Matos M. Fears of compassion and happiness in relation to alexithymia, mindfulness, and self-criticism. Psychol Psychother. 2012;85:374–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Fonagy P, Target M, Gergely G. Attachment and borderline personality disorder: a theory and some evidence. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2000;23:103–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Smith M, South S. Romantic attachment style and borderline personality pathology: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2020;75:101781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ebert A, Edel MA, Gilbert P, Brüne M. Endogenous oxytocin is associated with the experience of compassion and recalled upbringing in borderline personality disorder. Depress Anxiety. 2018;35:50–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Crocker J, Olivier MA, Nuer N. Self-image goals and compassionate goals: costs and benefits. Self Identity. 2009;8:251–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Crocker J, Canevello A, Lewis KA. Romantic relationships in the ecosystem: compassionate goals, nonzero-sum beliefs, and change in relationship quality. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2017;112:58–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Miyagawa Y, Niiya Y, Taniguchi J. Compassionate goals and responses to social rejection: a mediating role of self-compassion. Curr Psychol. 2021:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02345-8.

  56. Miyagawa Y, Taniguchi J. Sticking fewer (or more) pins into a doll? The role of self-compassion in the relations between interpersonal goals and aggression. Motiv Emot. 2022;46:1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Neff KD, Beretvas SN. The role of self-compassion in romantic relationships. Self Identity. 2013;12:78–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Yarnell LM, Neff KD. Self-compassion, interpersonal conflict resolutions, and well-being. Self Identity. 2013;12:146–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Zhang JW, Chen S, Tomova Shakur TK. From me to you: self-compassion predicts acceptance of own and others’ imperfections. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 2020;46:228–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Geller J, Kelly AC, Samson L, Iyar MM, Srikameswaran S. The relation between two barriers to self-compassion and clinical characteristics in individuals with eating disorders. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2020;28:766–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Horowitz LM, Krasnoperova EN, Tatar DG, Hansen MB, Person EA, Galvin KL, et al. The way to console may depend on the goal: experimental studies of social support. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2001;37:49–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Bishop SR, Lau M, Shapiro S, Carlson L, Anderson ND, Carmody J, et al. Mindfulness: a proposed operational definition. Clin Psychol. 2004;11:230–41.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Neff KD, Dahm KA. Self-compassion: what it is, what it does, and how it relates to mindfulness. In: Ostafin BD, Robinson MD, Meier BP, editors. Handbook of mindfulness and self-regulation. New York: Springer; 2015. p. 121–37.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  64. Harvey Knowles J, Manusov V, Crowley J. Minding your matters: predicting satisfaction, commitment, and conflict strategies from trait mindfulness. Interpersona. 2015;9:44–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Zanarini MC, Vujanovic AA, Parachini EA, Boulanger JL, Frankenburg FR, Hennen J. A screening measure for BPD: the McLean screening instrument for borderline personality disorder (MSI-BPD). J Personal Disord. 2003;17:568–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Patel AB, Sharp C, Fonagy P. Criterion validity of the MSI-BPD in a community sample of women. J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2011;33:403–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Noblin JL, Venta A, Sharp C. The validity of the MSI-BPD among inpatient adolescents. Assessment. 2014;21:210–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Gardner K, Qualter P. Reliability and validity of three screening measures of borderline personality disorder in a nonclinical population. Pers Individ Diff. 2009;46:636–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Kirby JN, Day J, Sagar V. The ‘Flow’of compassion: a meta-analysis of the fears of compassion scales and psychological functioning. Clin Psychol Rev. 2019;70:26–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Paquette V, Rapaport M, St-Louis AC, Vallerand RJ. Why are you passionately in love? Attachment styles as determinants of romantic passion and conflict resolution strategies. Motiv Emot. 2020;44:621–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. McLellan AT, Luborsky L, Woody GE, O’Brien CP. An improved diagnostic evaluation instrument for substance abuse patients. The addiction severity index. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1980;168:26–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 5th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Hayes AF. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis, 2nd edition: a regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Gottman JM. Psychology and the study of marital processes. Ann Rev Psychol. 1998;49:169–97.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Gunderson JG, Lyons-Ruth K. BPD's interpersonal hypersensitivity phenotype: a gene-environment-developmental model. J Personal Disord. 2008;22:22–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Reichenberger J, Blechert J. Malaise with praise: a narrative review of 10 years of research on the concept of fear of positive evaluation in social anxiety. Depress Anxiety. 2018;35:1228–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Weinbrecht A, Roepke S, Renneberg B. Fear of positive evaluation in borderline personality disorder. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0237944.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Maffei C, Fusi V. Emotion dysregulation in borderline personality disorder: a literature review. Phenomenol Mind. 2016;11:210–20.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Beblo T, Fernando S, Kamper P, Griepenstroh J, Aschenbrenner S, Pastuszak A, et al. Increased attempts to suppress negative and positive emotions in borderline personality disorder. Psychiatry Res. 2013;210:505–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Bacon MM, Rood EA, Washburn MF. A study of affective contrast. Am J Psychol. 1914;25:290–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Manstead AS, Wagner HL, MacDonald CJ. A contrast effect in judgments of own emotional state. Motiv Emot. 1983;7:279–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Keng SL, Wong YY. Association among self-compassion, childhood invalidation, and borderline personality disorder symptomatology in a Singaporean sample. Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2017;4:24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Pohl S, Steuwe C, Mainz V, Driessen M, Beblo T. Borderline personality disorder and childhood trauma: exploring the buffering role of self-compassion and self-esteem. J Clin Psychol. 2021;77:837–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Chen KW, Banducci AN, Guller L, Macatee RJ, Lavelle A, Daughters SB, et al. An examination of psychiatric comorbidities as a function of gender and substance type within an inpatient substance use treatment program. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;118:92–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr. Alec Boros and the staff and patients of Oriana House, Inc. for their assistance with this study. The authors also wish to thank Sadie for her assistance with manuscript preparation.

Funding

No funding was obtained for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

AGV and MTT oversaw data collection for the study. KLG and MTT conceptualized the study and generated hypotheses. KLG and MTT analyzed the data. WWM and AJDM conducted literature reviews. KLG and MTT wrote the initial draft of the manuscript with assistance from WWM, AJDM, and AGV. All authors reviewed and provided critical revisions of the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript for submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kim L. Gratz.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The University of Toledo Institutional Review Board and the Executive Vice President of Operations and Executive Director of the treatment facility reviewed and approved all study procedures (201929-UT). All participants provided informed consent before participating in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gratz, K.L., Myntti, W., Mann, A.J.D. et al. Fear of compassion from others explains the relation between borderline personality disorder symptoms and ineffective conflict resolution strategies among patients with substance use disorders. bord personal disord emot dysregul 9, 36 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-022-00207-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-022-00207-8

Keywords