Mentalizing and epistemic trust as critical success factors in psychosomatic rehabilitation: results of a single center longitudinal observational study.

Background: Inpatient psychosomatic rehabilitation is a key treatment for patients with mental health issues. However, knowledge about critical success factors for beneficial treatment outcomes is scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of mentalizing and epistemic trust with the improvement of psychological distress during rehabilitation. Methods: In this naturalistic longitudinal observational study, patients completed routine assessments of psychological distress (BSI), health-related quality of life (HRQOL; WHODAS), mentalizing (MZQ), and epistemic trust (ETMCQ) before (T1) and after (T2) psychosomatic rehabilitation. Repeated measures ANOVA (rANOVAs) and structural equation models (SEMs) were calculated to investigate the association of mentalizing and epistemic trust with the improvement in psychological distress. Results: A total sample of n = 249 patients were included in the study. Improvement in mentalizing was correlated with improvement in depression (r = 0.36), anxiety (r = 0.46), and somatization (r = 0.23), as well as improved cognition (r = 0.36), social functioning (r = 0.33), and social participation (r = 0.48; all p < 0.001). Mentalizing partially mediated changes in psychological distress between T1 and T2: the direct association decreased from ß = 0.69 to ß = 0.57 and the explained variance increased from 47 to 61%. Decreases in epistemic mistrust (ß = 0.42, 0.18-0.28; p < 0.001) and epistemic credulity (ß = 0.19, 0.29-0.38; p < 0.001) and increases in epistemic trust (ß = 0.42, 0.18-0.28; p < 0.001) significantly predicted improved mentalizing. A good model fit was found (χ2 = 3.248, p = 0.66; CFI = 0.99; TLI = 0.99; RMSEA = 0.000). Conclusion: Mentalizing was identified as a critical success factor in psychosomatic inpatient rehabilitation. A key component to increase mentalizing in this treatment context is the improvement of epistemic mistrust.

Self-Rated Mentalizing Mediates the Relationship Between Stress and Coping in a Non-Clinical Sample.

BACKGROUND: The clinical concept of mentalizing has recently been extended into non-clinical contexts. In particular, the protective function of robust mentalizing as a processing capacity of interpersonal and intrapsychic events has become a focus of consideration. Theoretical approaches hypothesize that mentalizing may allow for an adequate self-awareness in the face of aversive experiences such as stress, leading to a reappraisal of these experiences and therefore enables the use of adaptive coping behaviors. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to investigate the association between coping behavior, mentalizing and experiences of stress. METHOD: 534 healthy adults completed the German-language Stress Processing Questionnaire (SVF), the Mentalization Questionnaire (MZQ), and a short scale of the Trierer Inventory of Chronic Stress (TICS) in a cross-sectional research design. RESULTS: Correlational analyses suggested associations between coping and mentalizing. Furthermore, MZQ scores predicted both positive and negative coping behavior. The relationship between stress and both negative and positive coping was mediated by mentalizing capacity. CONCLUSION: Findings confirm the hypothesis that mentalizing may represent a coping resource within a resilience framework. An implementation of the concept in preventive mental health interventions is discussed.

Measuring Impairments of Mentalization with the 15-Item Mentalization Questionnaire (MZQ) and Introducing the MZQ-6 Short Scale: Reliability, Validity and Norm Values Based on a Representative Sample of the German Population.

Deficits in mentalization are indicated by impaired emotional awareness and self-reflectiveness, and are associated with various mental disorders. However, there is a lack of validated research instruments. In this study, the psychometric properties of the Mentalization Questionnaire (MZQ) were evaluated in a representative German population sample with n = 2487 participants. Analyses included evaluation of the MZQs acceptance, reliability, and validity. Factorial validity was established with exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) after the dataset was randomly split. Dimensionality was evaluated with a bi-factor model. For convergent validity, correlations with the OPD SQS, PHQ-4, and POMS were calculated. While acceptance was good, internal consistencies (ω = 0.65-0.79) and factor structure of the original four subscales were not acceptable (TLI = 0.87, CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.071). EFA indicated a 3-factor solution, which was not confirmed by CFA (TLI = 0.89, CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.073). Correlations between subscales and bi-factor analyses indicated an underlying general factor (TLI = 0.94, CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.053). A shortened 6-item version was comparable to the original scale. Age and sex-specific representative norm-values are presented. The MZQ is a feasible, reliable and valid self-report instrument to measure representations of inner mental states. However, when applied to non-clinical samples, the total score of the MZQ should be used.