View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Brief Reflective Functioning Interview.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Brief Reflective Functioning Interview.
Authors: Andreas, Sylke, Plümer, Paul, Reichholf, Katharina, Dehoust, Maria, Schulz, Holger, Müllauer, Pia, Rudden, Marie G., Senft, Birgit, Gaugeler, Richard, Hayden, Markus
Source: Psychology & Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice. Mar2022, Vol. 95 Issue 1, p18-33. 16p. 1 Diagram, 4 Charts, 1 Graph.
Subjects: Research evaluation, Research methodology evaluation, Research methodology, Interviewing, Psychometrics, Undergraduates, Comparative studies, Descriptive statistics
Abstract: Objectives: To measure mentalization in a feasible manner, various instruments have been designed in recent years. The Brief Reflective Functioning Interview (BRFI) is a short interview that is based on the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). The aim of both studies was to examine the psychometric properties of the German version of the BRFI and to compare them to those of the AAI. Methods: In Study 1, we examined 60 students using the BRFI and the AAI. In Study 2, the validity of the BRFI was examined using a mixed sample of students and patients (N = 149). Trained coders evaluated the Reflective Functioning Scale (RFS) for the BRFI and the AAI. Results: We found a significant positive correlation between the RFS total scores of the BRFI and those of the AAI. In addition, both interviews showed excellent internal consistency. We could also show that persons with mental disorders exhibit lower levels of RF score than mentally stable individuals. Women had higher RF scores in the BRFI than men in both samples. Persons whose mentalization capacity was rated below average in either the BRFI or the AAI also reported significantly lower mentalization ability in the self‐assessment (p <.01). Conclusions: Our results revealed that the RFS scores measured by the BRFI are highly comparable to those measured by the AAI. Our findings support the results of previous studies, suggesting that the BRFI is a reliable, valid and easy‐to‐administer alternative to the AAI. Practitioner points: The German version of the Brief Reflective Functioning Interview (BRFI) proved to be a reliable and valid instrument for the assessment of reflective functioning that is shorter in terms of time to complete and the evaluation process than the measurement via the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI).Reflective functioning is negatively associated with psychopathology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Psychology & Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 155147199
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Brief Reflective Functioning Interview.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: &lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Andreas%2C+Sylke%22&quot;&gt;Andreas, Sylke&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Pl&#252;mer%2C+Paul%22&quot;&gt;Pl&#252;mer, Paul&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Reichholf%2C+Katharina%22&quot;&gt;Reichholf, Katharina&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Dehoust%2C+Maria%22&quot;&gt;Dehoust, Maria&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Schulz%2C+Holger%22&quot;&gt;Schulz, Holger&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22M&#252;llauer%2C+Pia%22&quot;&gt;M&#252;llauer, Pia&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Rudden%2C+Marie+G%2E%22&quot;&gt;Rudden, Marie G.&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Senft%2C+Birgit%22&quot;&gt;Senft, Birgit&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Gaugeler%2C+Richard%22&quot;&gt;Gaugeler, Richard&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;AR&quot; term=&quot;%22Hayden%2C+Markus%22&quot;&gt;Hayden, Markus&lt;/searchLink&gt;
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: &lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;JN&quot; term=&quot;%22Psychology+%26+Psychotherapy%3A+Theory%2C+Research+%26+Practice%22&quot;&gt;Psychology &amp; Psychotherapy: Theory, Research &amp; Practice&lt;/searchLink&gt;. Mar2022, Vol. 95 Issue 1, p18-33. 16p. 1 Diagram, 4 Charts, 1 Graph.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: &lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Research+evaluation%22&quot;&gt;Research evaluation&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Research+methodology+evaluation%22&quot;&gt;Research methodology evaluation&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Research+methodology%22&quot;&gt;Research methodology&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Interviewing%22&quot;&gt;Interviewing&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Psychometrics%22&quot;&gt;Psychometrics&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Undergraduates%22&quot;&gt;Undergraduates&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Comparative+studies%22&quot;&gt;Comparative studies&lt;/searchLink&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;searchLink fieldCode=&quot;DE&quot; term=&quot;%22Descriptive+statistics%22&quot;&gt;Descriptive statistics&lt;/searchLink&gt;
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Objectives: To measure mentalization in a feasible manner, various instruments have been designed in recent years. The Brief Reflective Functioning Interview (BRFI) is a short interview that is based on the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). The aim of both studies was to examine the psychometric properties of the German version of the BRFI and to compare them to those of the AAI. Methods: In Study 1, we examined 60 students using the BRFI and the AAI. In Study 2, the validity of the BRFI was examined using a mixed sample of students and patients (N = 149). Trained coders evaluated the Reflective Functioning Scale (RFS) for the BRFI and the AAI. Results: We found a significant positive correlation between the RFS total scores of the BRFI and those of the AAI. In addition, both interviews showed excellent internal consistency. We could also show that persons with mental disorders exhibit lower levels of RF score than mentally stable individuals. Women had higher RF scores in the BRFI than men in both samples. Persons whose mentalization capacity was rated below average in either the BRFI or the AAI also reported significantly lower mentalization ability in the self‐assessment (p &lt;.01). Conclusions: Our results revealed that the RFS scores measured by the BRFI are highly comparable to those measured by the AAI. Our findings support the results of previous studies, suggesting that the BRFI is a reliable, valid and easy‐to‐administer alternative to the AAI. Practitioner points: The German version of the Brief Reflective Functioning Interview (BRFI) proved to be a reliable and valid instrument for the assessment of reflective functioning that is shorter in terms of time to complete and the evaluation process than the measurement via the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI).Reflective functioning is negatively associated with psychopathology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: &lt;i&gt;Copyright of Psychology &amp; Psychotherapy: Theory, Research &amp; Practice is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder&#39;s express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.&lt;/i&gt; (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=155147199
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/papt.12360
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 18
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Research evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research methodology evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research methodology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interviewing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychometrics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Undergraduates
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comparative studies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Descriptive statistics
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Brief Reflective Functioning Interview.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Andreas, Sylke
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Plümer, Paul
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Reichholf, Katharina
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Dehoust, Maria
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Schulz, Holger
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Müllauer, Pia
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Rudden, Marie G.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Senft, Birgit
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Gaugeler, Richard
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hayden, Markus
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Text: Mar2022
              Type: published
              Y: 2022
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 14760835
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 95
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Psychology & Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice
              Type: main
ResultId 1