Based on typical everyday trust situations, a short and ecologically valid self-report instrument for the assessment of interpersonal trust was developed (Interpersonal Trust Scenario Questionnaire [ITSQ]). Data from 1,359 clinical and nonclinical participants were analyzed to examine psychometric properties and group differences. The authors assessed interpersonal trust in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD), patients with major depressive disorder, and patients with social anxiety disorder. Lastly, the relationship between interpersonal trust and the perceived quality of the therapeutic alliance was examined. The ITSQ showed satisfactory reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.72). Convergent validity and discriminant validity were obtained for correlations with a hypothetical trust game, another interpersonal trust scale (KUSIV-3), risk propensity, optimism and pessimism, and the HEXACO-60. Patients with BPD showed the lowest interpersonal trust scores of all groups. Interpersonal trust and the perceived quality of the therapeutic alliance were significantly associated only in the group of patients with BPD.

IntroductionAffective disturbances and difficulty in affect regulation are core features of major depressive disorder (MDD) as well as borderline personality disorder (BPD). Whereas depressed individuals are characterised by affective inertia, individuals with BPD are characterised by affective instability. Both groups have been found to use more maladaptive affect regulation strategies than healthy controls. Surprisingly, however, there have been hardly any studies directly comparing these two disorders to disentangle shared and disorder-specific deficits in affective dynamics and affect regulation.Furthermore, theoretical models link deficits in affect regulation to deficits in cognitive control functions. Given that individuals with MDD or BPD are both characterised by impairments in cognitive control, the present study will further examine the link between individual differences in cognitive control and disturbances in affect dynamics and regulation in the daily life of individuals with MDD or BPD.Methods and analysesWe will use a smartphone application to assess negative and positive affect as well as affect regulation strategies at eight times a day for 7 days. We will further employ four computerised tasks to assess two cognitive control functions, namely interference control and discarding irrelevant information from working memory. Our hypotheses will be tested using a multimethod approach. Power analyses determined a sample size of 159 (53 MDD, 53 BPD, 53 controls) to detect medium effect sizes.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been obtained from the Freie Universität Berlin. Data collection started in January 2017 and will last until the end of 2018. Results will be disseminated to relevant psychotherapeutic and patient communities in peer-reviewed journals, and at scientific conferences.

Emotional problems are a core aspect of most mental disorders and especially prominent in major depression and borderline personality disorder (BPD). Theories propose that deficits in affect regulation underly these affective disturbances. However, it is unclear whether individuals suffering from different mental disorders face similar or distinct difficulty in affect regulation. The present study is the first to address this question by assessing the employment and effectiveness of six affect regulation strategies in the daily lives of 55 healthy individuals, 55 individuals with current major depressive disorder (MDD), and 52 individuals with BPD using experience sampling methodology. Results demonstrate that both clinical groups share similar impairments in affect regulation. Specifically, both groups employed putatively maladaptive regulation strategies, such as rumination and suppression more often than they employed cognitive reappraisal. Additionally, they employed maladaptive strategies relatively more often, and adaptive strategies less often than healthy individuals. The only difference between clinical groups was found for rumination, with depressed individuals ruminating even more often than individuals with BPD. Interestingly, both clinical groups were able to effectively implement adaptive strategies if they selected them. In sum, both clinical groups showed a marked pattern of dysfunctional strategy selection, but no deficits in their ability to effectively implement adaptive regulation strategies.

Emotional disturbances are an inherent aspect of most mental disorders and possibly driven by impaired emotion regulation. In the present study, we examined how exactly affected individuals differ from healthy individuals in regulating their emotions and whether individuals suffering from different mental disorders face similar or distinct difficulty in emotion regulation. We overcome earlier methodological constraints by using a 7-day experience sampling assessing the employment and effectiveness of six regulation strategies real time in 55 individuals with current major depressive disorder, 52 individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD), and 55 healthy individuals. All participants were female. Both clinical groups employed rumination and suppression more often and acceptance less often than healthy individuals. Depressed individuals ruminated even more often than individuals with BPD. Expressive suppression and rumination showed negative effects on subsequent emotions in all groups. Remarkably, both clinical groups were able to benefit from adaptive regulation strategies if they did select them.