Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Dissociative experiences of adolescents with borderline personality disorder: description and prediction

Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation volume 10, Article number: 9 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Aims

The first purpose of this study was to assess the severity of dissociative experiences reported by adolescent inpatients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). The second purpose was to compare the severity of their dissociative symptoms to those reported by a sample of adult inpatients with BPD. The third purpose of this study was to assess a range of clinically meaningful predictors of the severity of dissociation in adolescents and adults with BPD.

Methods

The Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) was administered to a total of 89 hospitalized girls and boys aged 13–17 with BPD and 290 adult inpatients with BPD. Predictors of the severity of dissociation in adolescents and adults with BPD were assessed using the Revised Childhood Experiences Questionnaire (a semi-structured interview), the NEO, and the SCID I.

Results

Borderline adolescents and adults had non-significant differences on their overall DES scores and subscale scores. They also had a non-significant distribution of low, moderate, and high scores. In terms of multivariate predictors, neither temperament nor childhood adversity was a significant predictor of the severity of dissociative symptoms in adolescents. However, co-occurring eating disorders were found in multivariate analyses to be the only bivariate predictor to significantly predict this outcome. In adults with BPD, however, both the severity of childhood sexual abuse and co-occurring PTSD were significantly related to the severity of dissociative symptoms in multivariate analyses.

Conclusions

Taken together, the results of this study suggest that the severity of dissociation is not significantly different in adolescents and adults with BPD. However, the etiological factors differ substantially.

Introduction

Dissociation has long been a clinical concern of those treating adults with borderline personality disorder (BPD) [1]. This concern is due to the suffering and functional impairment that clinicians often observe in their patients with BPD and dissociative symptoms. The prevalence of dissociative symptoms in adults with BPD has also long been a subject of interest to researchers. More specifically, 14 studies were published before 1990 that assessed the presence of the dissociative experiences reported by adults with BPD [2]. Taken together, it was found that these experiences were both common and discriminating for those with BPD when compared with adults with other psychiatric disorders.

More recently, a substantial number of studies have focused on the severity of the dissociative symptoms of adult borderline patients using the Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) [3,4,5]—a 28-item self-report measure with proven psychometric properties. In general, they have found that borderline patients have a mean DES score in the moderate range (i.e., lower than the scores associated with trauma-related disorders) but higher than those in other diagnostic groups (e.g., schizotypal personality disorder, affective disorders, substance use disorders, and eating disorders).

It was also found that borderline patients had a significantly higher mean score on the DES than comparison subjects with other forms of personality disorders [6,7,8]. Additionally, it was found that borderline patients had higher mean scores than personality-disordered comparison subjects on the three factors that underlie the DES: absorption, depersonalization, and amnesia [6,7,8]. These three samples were also used to investigate the relationship between sexual adversity and the severity of dissociation among adults with BPD. One study found a strong relationship between this type of adversity and the severity of dissociation reported by a mixed sample of men and women with BPD [9]. The other two studies [10, 11] focused respectively on men and women with BPD and found no significant relationship between severity of dissociation and sexual adversity. Rather, in a sample comprised of those with BPD and those with another type of personality disorder, only the BPD diagnosis was a significant predictor of severity of dissociation.

In contrast, only three studies of the severity of dissociation in adolescents with BPD have been published [12,13,14] and all three used the adolescent version of the DES to assess the severity of dissociation [15]. Atlas & Wolfson [12] found that 26 female inpatient adolescents with BPD had significantly higher scores on the overall Adolescent DES mean score than 12 female inpatient adolescents with other psychiatric diagnoses (32.8 vs. 8.5). In addition, two other studies of mixed samples of outpatients and inpatients found significantly higher severity of dissociative symptomatology in adolescents with BPD compared to psychiatrically healthy adolescents [13, 14]. Koenig et al. [13] also found that their adolescent patients with BPD had a significantly higher mean DES score than psychiatrically ill comparison subjects.

Taken together, these earlier studies of adolescents only reported on the severity of the overall score of the DES, while the current study will also examine the severity of the three subtypes of dissociation and the three levels of dissociation assessed by the DES. This is important as these subtypes and levels of dissociation are qualitatively different from one another and have different treatment implications. In addition, these earlier studies were solely descriptive and did not include any predictor analyses of the severity of dissociation reported by adolescents with BPD. We have assessed predictors of severity of dissociation in both our adolescent and adult samples. We have studied childhood adversity factors, temperament, and co-occurring disorders that have their own clinical link to dissociation. This type of analysis is important to determine if the factors associated with the severity of dissociation reported by adolescents with BPD are the same as studies have found in adults with BPD.

As described below in the Methods section, our adult sample was collected 17 years before our adolescent sample. However, both samples consisted of inpatients who met the same rigorous, interview-based criteria for BPD, had the severity of their dissociation assessed by the same version of the DES, and had the same three measures administered to assess predictor variables. In addition, the difference in the years that each sample was collected provide a window into how changing parental and societal attitudes concerning the possibility of abuse inside and outside the family have changed over time.

The current study has three aims. The first is to describe the severity of the overall score of the DES, the levels of overall dissociation, and the severity of the three sub-scales of the DES reported by a well-defined sample of inpatient adolescents with BPD. The second is to compare their dissociative symptoms to those reported by a group of adult inpatients with BPD. The third is to study a range of clinically meaningful predictors of the severity of dissociation reported by adolescents with BPD. In addition, we will also study the same predictors of the severity of dissociation in our comparison sample of adults with BPD. We chose these three types of predictors of the severity of dissociation because either they were studied before in this context (childhood adversity), have been described as the core underlying aspect of BPD (Neuroticism), or have been recognized clinically as having their own dissociative features (co-occurring disorders).

Method

The methodology of this study (the McLean/Mount Sinai Study of Childhood Development) (MSCAD) has been presented before in detail [16]. The institutional review boards at the participating institutions approved all study procedures. Briefly, all adults with BPD were inpatients at McLean Hospital in Belmont, Massachusetts who were admitted between June 1992–December 1995. Each patient was first screened to determine whether he/she 1) was between the ages of 18 and 35; 2) had a known or estimated IQ of 71 or higher; 3) and had no history or current symptoms of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar I disorder, or an organic condition that could cause serious psychiatric symptoms.

Written informed consent was obtained from each patient. Then three diagnostic interviews were administered by research staff blind to their clinical diagnoses. The instruments were (1) the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R Axis I Disorders (SCID-I [17]), (2) the Revised Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines (DIB-R [18]; and (3) the Revised Diagnostic Interview for DSM-III-R Personality Disorders (DIPD-R [19]). The inter-rater and test-retest reliability of all three of these measures have been found to be good-excellent [20, 21].

Adolescents (aged 13–17) with presumptive BPD were recruited from four units at McLean Hospital and one unit at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai between August 2007 and September 2012. For adolescent participants, parents provided consent and adolescents provided assent.

Adolescent participants, who all met the same inclusion/exclusion criteria concerning intelligence and co-occurring disorders as adult participants, were then administered the following diagnostic assessments during their index admission: (1) the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Childhood Diagnoses (KID-SCID [22]; (2) the DIB-R [18] and (3) the Childhood Interview for DSM-IV BPD (CI-BPD [23]). Inter-rater reliability of the KID-SCID and the CI-BPD have been found to be good–excellent [23, 24].

Dissociative experiences were assessed in both study groups using the Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) [25]. The DES is a self-rating instrument comprised of 28 items that build on the assumption of a “dissociative continuum” ranging from mild normative to severe pathological dissociation, providing an overall score that has been normed in various clinical and non-clinical populations [26]. The scale also provides three sub-scores that have been found to be internally consistent: absorption, depersonalization, and amnesia [27]. Each item is rated according to the percentage of time that the patient has experienced that type of dissociative experience. For example, a score of 20 on the amnesia subscale of the DES suggests that the patient has spent 20% of his or her time having difficulties in remembering activities and relationships he or she might have had or in which he or she might have engaged. According to guidelines extrapolated from the developers of the DES [28], scores of less than 10 are considered to be in the low dissociation range, and scores between 10 and 29.9 are considered to be in the mid-range, similar to the range achieved by late adolescents and eating-disordered patients. Scores of 30 or above are in the high range, which is consistent with those of individuals meeting criteria for PTSD or dissociative identity disorder (DID).

Two other measures were also administered to both study groups. One was the Revised Childhood Experiences Questionnaire (CEQ-R) [29]—a semi-structured interview that assesses four types of childhood adversity: childhood sexual abuse, other forms of childhood abuse (verbal, emotional, and physical abuse), seven forms of childhood neglect (physical neglect, emotional withdrawal, inconsistent treatment, denial of subject’s feelings, lack of real relationship with parent or parental figure, caretaker placing subject in parental role, and caretaker’s failure to protect subject), and witness to violence (verbal, physical, and sexual). All four of these forms of adversity and their subcomponents were scored for severity. Sexual abuse scores ranged from 0 to 12. Other abuse scores ranged from 0 to 18. Childhood neglect scores ranged from 0 to 42. Witness to violence scores ranged from 0 to 9.

The other measure assessed temperament using Costa and McRae’s NEO Five Factor Inventory—a 60 item self-report measure that yields continuous scores on Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness [30]. In these analyses, neuroticism scores were used as the core measure of temperament in those with BPD as it is linked to several emotions, such as anger and anxiety, that are significant in borderline symptomology [31].

Statistical analyses

Between-group differences in demographic variables and predictor variables were assessed using Student’s t-test for continuous variables and Pearson’s chi-square for binary variables. Raw DES data was log transformed. Between-group comparisons concerning continuous dissociative symptomatology were conducted using linear regression and between-group comparisons concerning binary categories using logistic regression.

Analyses pertaining to comparisons of adolescents and adults with BPD were conducted controlling for sex and race. Linear regression analyses were used in the predictor analyses. All bivariate predictors with a p-level of < 0.05 were then analyzed in a multivariate model using backwards deletion to attain the most parsimonious model. The significance level for this model was set at < 0.01.

Results

Subjects

Two hundred and ninety subjects were adult inpatients at McLean Hospital who met both DIB-R and DSM-III-R criteria for BPD and all completed the DES. One hundred and four subjects were adolescent inpatients at McLean Hospital or Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai who met both DIB-R and DSM-IV criteria for BPD and 89 of these subjects completed the DES. Due to staff error, the DES was not administered to 15 adolescents with BPD.

In terms of demographic characteristics (see Table 1), adolescents with BPD were significantly younger than adults with BPD. They were also significantly more likely to be female and non-white.

Table 1 Demographics of two study groups
Full size table

Dissociative experiences

Table 2 describes the mean overall DES scores for adolescents and adults with BPD as well as the mean scores of the three factors derived from the DES. Adolescents and adults with BPD had non-significantly different overall DES scores and scores on its sub-components (absorption, depersonalization, and amnesia).

Table 2 Overall DES Score and DES Cluster Scores (mean ± SD) for two study groups
Full size table

Adolescents with BPD, as indicated in Table 3, reported a substantial range of overall DES scores. About one third had a score less than 10, which is generally considered to be in the low range. About 45% had a score between 10 and 29.9, which has been found to be common in psychiatric diagnoses not primarily associated with trauma. The remaining one fifth had a score of 30 or higher, which has been found to be associated with PTSD and dissociative disorders, including DID. These results were not significantly different than those reported by adults with BPD.

Table 3 Severity of dissociative symptoms in adolescents and adults with BPD
Full size table

Predictor results

Table 4 describes and compares adolescents and adults with BPD on ten predictor variables. The four forms of childhood adversity all had significantly higher severity in the adult than the adolescent group. All five types of symptomatic disorders were significantly more common among adults than adolescents with BPD. Only neuroticism failed to distinguish between adults and adolescents with BPD.

Table 4 Descriptive statistics of predictor variables comparing adolescents and adults with BPD
Full size table

Table 5 focuses on the bivariate relationship between the ten predictor variables and the outcome of severity of dissociation in adolescents with BPD. The relationship between 10 predictor variables in three areas (childhood adversity, temperament, and co-occurring disorders) and the severity of overall dissociation reported by adolescents meeting criteria for BPD yielded four significant predicters at the p < 0.05 level: severity of childhood neglect, temperamental neuroticism score, history of a substance use disorder, and history of an eating disorder. However, the multivariate analyses resulted in only one variable with a p-level of < 0.01: co-occurring eating disorders (Values are the same as in Table 5).

Table 5 Bivariate predictors of severity of dissociation in adolescents with BPD
Full size table

Table 6 describes the same set of bivariate predictors and their relationship to the severity of dissociation reported by adults with BPD. It was found that the severity of all four forms of childhood adversity as well as co-occurring PTSD, anxiety, and eating disorders were all significantly related to the severity of dissociation reported by adults with BPD. The relationships between the Neuroticism score of the NEO and co-occurring mood and substance use disorders and the outcome of severity of dissociation in adults with BPD were not significant at the p < 0.05 level.

Table 6 Bivariate predictors of severity of dissociation in adults with BPD
Full size table

Table 7 describes the multivariate predictors of severity of dissociation in adults with BPD. Both the severity of childhood sexual abuse and co-occurring PTSD were significantly related to the severity of dissociation reported by adults with BPD.

Table 7 Multivariate predictors of severity of dissociation in adults with BPD
Full size table

Discussion

Our study has three main findings. First, borderline adolescents and adults were not significantly different in terms of mean overall DES score, mean DES factor scores, and in the distribution of overall severity scores. This is not surprising as they meet the same diagnostic criteria, of which dissociation is one. However, the fact that the severity of their dissociation is not significantly different lends even more evidence to the validity of the borderline diagnosis in adolescents as young as 13–17. Finding that there were no significant between-group differences in the overall score of the DES or its sub-scores gives added weight to the validity of the BPD diagnosis in adolescents as the BPD diagnosis has been found to be a valid psychiatric diagnosis in adults by the multifaceted criteria of Robins and Guze [32].

Second, facets of childhood adversity and the temperament aspect of neuroticism were not significant multivariate predictors of the severity of dissociation in adolescents with BPD. Only co-occurring eating disorders but not substance use disorders were significantly related to the severity of dissociation reported by adolescents with BPD.

While clinicians who specialize in the treatment of adults with BPD rarely link a co-occurring eating disorder to the severity of their patients’ dissociative symptoms, there are a number of research papers that do make this link [33,34,35,36]. More specifically, four research papers have found that binging is strongly associated with the severity of dissociation in eating disordered samples. The prevalence of binge eating disorder was substantial in both groups of patients with BPD—adolescents (21%) and adults with BPD (28%)—a non-significant difference [37].

Third, the severity of childhood sexual abuse seems to play a greater role in the severity of dissociation in adults with BPD than in adolescents with BPD. This may be due to the generally recognized fact that parents and society in general are far more hypervigilant about preventing the sexual abuse of children than they were a generation or two ago. Parents are not as trusting of extended family members, coaches, and neighbors as they once might have been and often limit unsupervised contact with these adults. In the same vein, children are taught to tell a teacher or school nurse if they are being abused at home or at school. In addition, teachers and school nurses are now mandated reporters of abuse. In addition, it may be that adolescents with BPD experienced forms of adversity that were less common when study adults were children or adolescents—being bullied or, particularly, being harassed on social media.

Limitations

Limitations include that all subjects with BPD were initially inpatients. It may well be that borderline patients who have never been hospitalized have less severe dissociative experiences. It may also be that today’s adolescents have greater access to evidence-based treatments for BPD than adults who began their treatment histories before the development and/or dissemination of such treatments.

Conclusions

Taken together, the results of this study suggest that the overall severity of dissociation, the severity of the sub-types of dissociation, and the prevalence of different levels of dissociation (low, moderate, and high) reported by adolescents with BPD are not significantly different than those reported by adults with BPD. In terms of predictive factors, the presence of an eating disorder centered around binging was significantly related to the severity of the dissociation reported by adolescents with BPD; a finding that is not surprising as reports of binge eating often include feelings of depersonalization and derealization. In contrast with adolescents with BPD, both the severity of childhood sexual abuse and co-occurring PTSD were significant predictors of the severity of overall dissociation reported by adults with BPD, who were initially assessed in an earlier time period. These differences in predictive factors may be due, at least in part, to differing levels of childhood adversity, which in turn, may be due to the more trusting vs. hypervigilant attitudes of parents and society in general in these different time periods.

Availability of data and materials

Requests for data must be made to Dr. Zanarini. Data is held in a secure cloud at Mass General Brigham, McLean’s parent company.

References

  1. Gunderson JG, Singer MT. Defining borderline patients: an overview. Am J Psychiatry. 1975;132:1–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Zanarini MC, Gunderson JG, Frankenburg FR. Cognitive features of borderline personality disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1990;147:57–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Al-Shamali HF, Winkler O, Talarico F, Greenshaw AJ, Forner C, Zhang Y, et al. A systematic scoping review of dissociation in borderline personality disorder and implications for research and clinical practice: exploring the fog. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2022;56:1252–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Korzekwa MI, Dell PF, Pain C. Dissociation and borderline personality disorder: an update for clinicians. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2009;11:82–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Scalabrini A, Cavicchioli M, Fossati A, Maffei C. The extent of dissociation in borderline personality disorder: a meta-analytic review. J Trauma Dissociation. 2017;2017(18):522–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zanarini MC, Ruser T, Frankenburg FR, Hennen JH. The dissociative experiences of borderline patients. Compr Psychiatry. 2000;41:223–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zweig-Frank H, Paris J, Guzder J. Dissociation in female patients with borderline and non-borderline personality disorders. J Pers Disord. 1994;8:203–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zweig-Frank H, Paris J, Guzder J. Dissociation in male patients with borderline and non-borderline personality disorders. J Pers Disord. 1994b;8:210–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zanarini MC, Ruser TF, Frankenburg FR, Hennen J, Gunderson JG. Risk factors associated with the dissociative experiences of borderline patients. J Nerv Ment. 2000;188:26–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Zweig-Frank H, Paris J, Guzder J. Psychological risk factors for dissociation and self-mutilation in female patients with borderline personality disorder. Can J Psychiatry. 1994;39:259–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zweig-Frank H, Paris J, Guzder J. Psychological risk factors and self-mutilation in male patients with BPD. Can J Psychiatry. 1994b;39:266–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Atlas JA, Wolfson MA. Depression and dissociation as features of borderline personality disorder in hospitalized adolescents. Psychol Rep. 1996;78:624–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Koenig J, Brunner R, Parzer P, Resch F, Kaess M. The physiological orienting response in female adolescents with borderline personality disorder. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol. 2018;86:287–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ludäscher P, von Kalckreuth C, Parzer P, Kaess M, Resch F, Bohus M, et al. Pain perception in female adolescents with borderline personality disorder. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2015;24:351–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Armstrong JG, Putnam FW, Carlson EB, Libero DZ, Smith SR. Development and validation of a measure of adolescent dissociation: the adolescent dissociative experiences scale. J Nerv Ment. 1997;185:491–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Zanarini MC, Temes CM, Magni LR, Fitzmaurice GM, Aguirre BA, Goodman M. Prevalence rates of borderline symptoms reported by adolescent inpatients with BPD, psychiatrically healthy adolescents and adult inpatients with BPD. Personal Ment Health. 2017;11:150–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Spitzer RL, Williams JBW, Gibbon M, First MB. The structured clinical interview for DSM-III-R (SCID): I: history, rationale, and description. Arch Genet. 1992;49:624–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Zanarini MC, Gunderson JG, Frankenburg FR, Chauncey DL. The revised diagnostic interview for borderlines: discriminating BPD from other Axis II disorders. J Pers Disord. 1989;3:10–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zanarini MC, Frankenburg FR, Chauncey DL, Gunderson JG. The diagnostic interview for personality disorders: interrater and test-retest reliability. Compr Psychiatry. 1987;28:467–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zanarini MC, Frankenburg FR. Attainment and maintenance of reliability of axis I and II disorders over the course of a longitudinal study. Compr Psychiatry. 2001;42:369–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Zanarini MC, Frankenburg FR, Vujanovic AA. Interrater and test-retest reliability of the revised diagnostic interview for borderlines (DIB-R). J Pers Disord. 2002;16:270–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Matzner F, Silva R, Silvan M, Chowdhury M, Nastari L: Preliminary test-retest reliability of the KID-SCID. 1997. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association.

  23. Sharp C, Ha C, Michonski J, Venta A, Carbone C. Borderline personality disorder in adolescents: evidence in support of the childhood interview for DSM-IV borderline personality disorder in a sample of adolescent inpatients. Compr Psychiatry. 2012;53:765–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Smith DC, Huber DL, Hall JA. Psychometric evaluation of the structured clinical interview for DSM-IV childhood diagnoses (KID-SCID). Approaches to Measuring Human Behavior in the Social Environment. 2012;11:1–22.

  25. Bernstein EM, Putnam FW. Development, reliability, and validity of a dissociation scale. J Nerv Ment. 1986;174:727–35.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Holtgraves T, Stockdale G. The assessment of dissociative experiences in a non-clinical population: reliability, validity, and factor structure of the dissociative experiences scale. Pers Individ Differ. 1997;22:699–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Cardeña E, Carlson E. Acute Stress Disorder Revisited. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2011;7(1):245–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Waller NG, Putnam FW, Carlson EB. Types of dissociation and dissociative types: A taxometric analysis of dissociative experiences. Psychol Methods. 1996;1:300–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Zanarini MC, Williams AA, Lewis RE, Reich RB, Vera SC, Marino MF, et al. Reported pathological childhood experiences associated with the development of borderline personality disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1997;154:1101–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Costa PT, McCrae RR. Revised NEO Personality Inventory and NEO Five-Factor Inventory Professional Manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Widiger TA, McCabe GA. The five-factor model is a competing theory of borderline personality disorder: Commentary on Gunderson et al. J Pers Disord. 2018;32:181–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Robins E, Guze SB. Establishment of diagnostic validity in psychiatric illness. Am J Psychiatry. 1970;12:983–7.

  33. Everill J, Waller G, Macdonald W. Dissociation in bulimic and non-eating-disordered women. Int J Eat Disord. 1994;17:127–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. La Mela C, Maglietta M, Castellini G, Amoroso L, Lucarelli S. Dissociation in eating disorders: Relationship between dissociative experiences and binge-eating episodes. Compr Psychiatry. 2010;51:393–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mason TB, Lavender JM, Wonderlich SA, Steiger H, Cao L, Engel SG, et al. Comfortably numb: The role of momentary dissociation in the experience of negative affect about binge eating. J Nerv Ment. 2017;205:335–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Nilsson D, Lejonclou A, Holmqvist R. Psychoform and somatoform dissociation among individuals with eating disorders. Nord J Psychiatry. 2019;74:1–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Zanarini MC, Athanasiadi A, Temes CM, Magni LR, Hein KE, Fitzmaurice GM, et al. Symptomatic disorders in adults and adolescents with borderline personality disorder. J Pers Disord. 2021;35:48–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Funding

This research was supported by two NIMH grants – MH47588 and MH62169 – granted to Dr. Mary C. Zanarini.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Mary C. Zanarini and Eduardo Martinho Jr are joint first authors.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. McLean Hospital, McLean Hospital, 115 Mill Street, Belmont, MA, 02478, USA

    Mary C. Zanarini, Isabel V. Glass, Blaise A. Aguirre & Garrett M. Fitzmaurice

  2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Mary C. Zanarini, Christina M. Temes, Blaise A. Aguirre & Garrett M. Fitzmaurice

  3. University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

    Eduardo Martinho Jr

  4. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Christina M. Temes

  5. James J. Peters Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Bronx, USA

    Marianne Goodman

  6. Icahn School of Medicine, Mt. Sinai, New York, NY, USA

    Marianne Goodman

Authors
  1. Mary C. Zanarini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eduardo Martinho Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christina M. Temes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Isabel V. Glass
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Blaise A. Aguirre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Marianne Goodman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Garrett M. Fitzmaurice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Drs. Zanarini and Martinho wrote the first and subsequent drafts of the paper. Dr. Temes and Isabel Glass conducted the relevant analyses under the direction of Dr. Fitzmaurice. Dr. Temes, Ms. Glass and Drs. Aguirre and Goodman made helpful suggestions about each draft of the paper. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mary C. Zanarini.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

APA ethical standards were followed in the conduct of this study, and we received approval from the MGB Institutional Review Board and the IRB of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai to conduct this research. All research participants were properly consented prior to 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

Zanarini, M.C., Martinho, E., Temes, C.M. et al. Dissociative experiences of adolescents with borderline personality disorder: description and prediction. bord personal disord emot dysregul 10, 9 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-023-00217-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40479-023-00217-0

Keywords

Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation

ISSN: 2051-6673