Development and validation of the Brief-Mentalized Affectivity Scale: Evidence from cross-sectional online data and an urban community-based mental health clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate the Brief-Mentalized Affectivity scale (B-MAS), a shorter version of the Mentalized Affectivity Scale (MAS). METHODS: In Study 1 (N = 978), participants from Amazon's Mechanical Turk were administered a battery of questionnaires including the B-MAS and traditional emotion regulation measures. In Study 2 (N = 230), clients from a community clinic completed a separate battery of measures, including the B-MAS, and personality and emotion regulation measures. RESULTS: There were four main findings: (1) the B-MAS is a psychometrically robust measure of emotion regulation and mentalization; (2) scores on the B-MAS are highly predictive of many clinical diagnoses; (3) scores on the B-MAS are just as or more predictive of wellbeing than traditional emotional regulation measures; and (4) as observed in an urban clinic with a diverse population, the B-MAS is useful clinically, especially because of its brevity. CONCLUSION: The B-MAS contributes to the expanding scope of research on emotion regulation and has valuable clinical applications.

Virtue, well-being, and mentalized affectivity.

Virtue ethics, featuring the claim that virtue leads to wellbeing, has been imported by psychologists from philosophy. In the first part of the paper, we re-examine the source of virtue ethics in Aristotle's philosophy and question whether virtues can be the path to eudaimonistic well-being for us, given that contemporary society differs from ancient society in terms of a lack of consensus about virtues. We focus on the modulation of emotions as a good starting place for reconstruing virtue ethics, and we affirm a connection to well-being through the construct of "mentalized affectivity", which is a specific kind of emotion regulation. In the second half of this hybrid paper, we provide evidence for the link between mentalized affectivity and well-being, based upon an empirical study with an adult sample (N=558). Our study examined how the Mentalized Affectivity Scale (MAS) predicts subjective well-being compared to five commonly used and related measures: Difficulty with Emotion Regulation Scale; Emotion Regulation Questionnaire; Flexibility Regulation of Emotional Expression scale; Reflective Functioning Questionnaire; Toronto Alexithymia Scale. The most important finding is that the MAS and Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale are most predictive of satisfaction with life. A second finding, less relevant for the present paper, is that the MAS (namely, its components of Identifying and Processing) strongly predicted psychopathology, including anxiety and mood disorders. This suggests that the MAS is a valuable tool for research on emotion regulation, well-being, and psychopathology, and that mentalized affectivity ought to be regarded as a promising construct for re-describing and specifying the contemporary relevance of virtue ethics.

The catcher in the mind: validation of the brief-mentalized affectivity scale for adolescents in the Italian population.

The concept of mentalized affectivity (MA) encompasses the dimensions of identifying, processing, and expressing emotions and describes the process of making sense of and reevaluating one's affects in light of autobiographical memory. This construct was developed within the theoretical framework of mentalization and, due to its interpersonal nature, added further complexity to the emotion regulation construct. This research aimed to examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Brief-Mentalized Affectivity Scale for adolescents (B-MAS-A) on an Italian sample of young people (aged 13-19 years). Data were collected using non-probabilistic sampling and an online survey. Participants were asked to complete a large battery of instruments, including the B-MAS-A, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale, the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire, the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity Questionnaire, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, and the General Self-Efficacy Scale. In study 1, factor analyses carried out on a total sample of 566 adolescents identified 3 distinct dimensions of the same components of MA found in the adult population: i) identifying; ii) processing; iii) expressing emotions. The subscales showed excellent internal consistency. Study 2 (involving a subsample of 288 participants) demonstrated good levels of construct and criterion validity. These results confirm that the B-MAS-A represents a valid and robust instrument for assessing the complex and multifaceted characteristics of MA in adolescents. The B-MAS-A can make a significant contribution to clinical practice and research and encourage systematic studies on MA in psychotherapy, taking into account the developmental stage of adolescence.

Correction: The Mentalized Affectivity Scale (MAS): Development and validation of the Italian version.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249272.].

The Mentalized Affectivity Scale (MAS): Development and validation of the Italian version.

This study proposes a psychometric validation of the Italian version of the Mentalized Affectivity Scale (MAS) developed by Greenberg and colleagues in 2017. The mentalized affectivity construct integrates mentalization ability in the process of emotional regulation. An adult sample (N = 506) completed the 60-items MAS online version. In contrast to the three-factor structure of the original version, the Italian context confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses with splitted sample (CFA = 258; EFA = 248) revealed a five-factor structure. The hierarchically structured MAS factors are: Emotional Processing (being able to process emotion in situations); Expressing Emotions (talking and knowing emotions); Identifying Emotions (awareness of emotions); Control Processing (to control emotional reactions and expression), and Autobiographical Memory (related to childhood experiences). We also verified the convergent validity and reliability of the Italian version of the MAS by correlating the above five factors with measures of emotion regulation and reflective functioning. Moreover, we analyzed the relationships among the factors of the MAS, personality measures and well-being indexes, such as life satisfaction and self-efficacy: The new 35-item MAS scale showed robust correlations with all the tested constructs. Our results confirm that the MAS is a useful measure to assess mentalized affectivity, with the Italian version showing a more complex structure than the original English one, thus enriching the literature about mentalization.

Mentalized affectivity in a nutshell: Validation of the Italian version of the Brief-Mentalized Affectivity Scale (B-MAS).

The term "mentalized affectivity" describes the ability to reflect on, process, modulate and express emotions through the prism of autobiographical memory. It represents a bridge concept that integrates previous contributions on emotion regulation and mentalization, offering a quite unique perspective on affective and reflective functioning. The overall aim of this study was to validate the Brief-Mentalized Affectivity Scale (B-MAS), a 12-items self-report instrument, on the Italian population. We tested both the factorial validity of the instrument and its reliability and convergent validity with other similar constructs. We also obtained normative data for the Italian population, broken down by gender. Participants (n = 389) were recruited through snowball sampling. Data was collected through an online survey. Besides the Brief-Mentalized Affectivity Scale, the survey included an ad hoc schedule with questions investigating socio-demographic characteristics, and self-report measures of empathy and reflective functioning. Statistical analysis has shown a three-component (Identifying, Processing, and Expressing emotions) hierarchical structure underlying mentalized affectivity, mirroring the model already proposed in the original validation of the instrument. Moreover, the B-MAS showed good psychometric properties for what regards both reliability and convergent validity. The results of our study highlight the good operationalization and robust empirical foundation of the construct, revealing that the B-MAS is a promising instrument to assess mentalized affectivity. Its brevity makes it particularly valuable both in clinical and research contexts, and the normative data provided in this study will allow an easy comparison with the scores obtained by other samples (clinical and non-clinical).

Mentalized affectivity: A new model and assessment of emotion regulation.

Here we introduce a new assessment of emotion regulation called the Mentalized Affectivity Scale (MAS). A large online adult sample (N = 2,840) completed the 60-item MAS along with a battery of psychological measures. Results revealed a robust three-component structure underlying mentalized affectivity, which we labeled: Identifying emotions (the ability to identify emotions and to reflect on the factors that influence them); Processing emotions (the ability to modulate and distinguish complex emotions); and Expressing emotions (the tendency to express emotions outwardly or inwardly). Hierarchical modeling suggested that Processing emotions delineates from Identifying them, and Expressing emotions delineates from Processing them. We then showed how these components are associated with personality traits, well-being, trauma, and 18 different psychological disorders (including mood, neurological, and personality disorders). Notably, those with anxiety, mood, and personality disorders showed a profile of high Identifying and low Processing compared to controls. Further, results showed how mentalized affectivity scores varied across psychological treatment modalities and years spent in therapy. Taken together, the model of mentalized affectivity advances prior theory and research on emotion regulation and the MAS is a useful and reliable instrument that can be used in both clinical and non-clinical settings in psychology, psychiatry, and neuroscience.

Art and emotion in psychoanalysis.

Freud's view that art satisfies psychic needs has been taken to mean that art has its source in the unconscious and that it unifies pleasure and reality. The author argues that there is a third point that Freud repeatedly emphasizes, which should not be overlooked, that art influences our emotions. The author examines what Freud means by this claim, in particular, his reading of Michelangelo's Moses. Freud's focus here on emotions as fundamental to subjective experience, as subject to regulation and as potentially healthy forms of communication serves to supplement and even challenge what he says in his theory of affect. The author concludes by making inferences about a contemporary psychoanalytic theory of affects: that it ought to be inclusive of science (more receptive to neurobiology and less bound to Freud) as well as art (preserving the focus on subjective experience, especially the processing of complex emotions), which is illustrated with the concept of mentalized affectivity.