Internal structure of the Reflective Functioning Scale.

Abstract

The Reflective Functioning Scale (RFS) was developed to assess individual differences in the ability to mentalize attachment relationships. The RFS assesses mentalization from transcripts of the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). A global score is given by trained coders on an 11-point scale ranging from antireflective to exceptionally reflective. Coding procedures rely on a distinction of demand and permit questions during the AAI. Demand questions directly probe for reflective functioning (RF), whereas permit questions do not. Coding focuses on detecting qualitative markers of RF and qualitative markers of absent RF, respectively. Despite its relevant empirical contributions in clinical research, several psychometric properties of the RFS are still unclear. In this article, we present data on the reliability and internal structure of the RFS based on a combined sample of 196 subjects. We were able to show that (a) the global score can be assessed with good interrater reliability, is relatively stable across time, and is significantly reduced in persons with mental disorders; (b) demand questions are based on a single latent factor; (c) demand questions do not differ in terms of difficulty; (d) all demand questions but 1 are incrementally predictive of the global score; (e) 5 permit questions contribute to the global score over and above demand questions; and (f) the number of qualitative markers of RF is also predictive of the global score. Our results have important conceptual and methodological implications for future studies using the RFS.

Mentalization as Mediator between Adult Attachment and Interpersonal Distress

“…Although the instruments we used are evaluated as high-quality, studies have suggested that the results of self-­report measures and expert ratings may differ [59, 60]. Future research should consider this fact and verify our results by using interview measures, such as the Adult Attachment Interview [61], and expert ratings, such as the Reflective Functioning Scale [25]. …”

“…Later on, several researchers examined the link between the two concepts in more detail. The results demonstrated that the development of mentalization is influenced by attachment and attachment figures [24, 25]. In addition, several studies have revealed that a lack of mentalization is closely linked to different types of mental disorders, particularly those that involve pathology of the self, such as borderline personality disorder [24, 26].…”

Reflective functioning in patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) – preliminary findings of a comparison between reflective functioning (RF) in general and OCD-specific reflective functioning

“…The SRF interview has only been used a few times and needs to be better validated. The clinical impression is favorable, but psychometric assessment is needed (Rutiman & Meehan, 2012;Taubner et al, 2012). For the OCD-specific RF interview, there is no rating manual.…”

“…Rudden et al (2008) used a limited number of AAI questions, primarily the demand questions, to create an interview specifically aimed at measuring RF. This interview has been used in a few studies (Rutiman & Meehan, 2012;Taubner et al, 2012). Falkenström et al (in press) used an interview with the first 10 AAI questions for the same purpose.…”

Reflective Functioning in Initial Interviews of Psychotherapy: An Exploratory Study About the Role of Mentalizing in the Therapeutic Interaction

“…Asimismo, se tuvo en consideración que, para el caso de la AAI, las preguntas de demanda están determinadas por la guía semi-estructurada diseñada para su realización (Taubner et al, 2012).…”