Abstract
ObjectivesThis study aims to test the psychometric proprieties of the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ) applied to younger (13–16 years) and older (17–20 years) Italian adolescents examining (1) the factorial structure of RFQ; (2) its invariance across age and sex; (3) correlations between RFQ subscale scores, as well as the associations of the RFQ with (4) psychological problems and alexithymia dimensions.MethodsA cross‐sectional study was conducted with 593 adolescents between the ages of 13 and 20 years old recruited from the community within Italy. These participants completed the RFQ, Symptom Checklist‑90, and Toronto Alexithymia Scale.ResultsThe two‐factor structure of the RFQ was confirmed. However, higher internal consistency of RFQ was obtained by removing two items that seemed problematic within this sample. Using a six‐item version of RFQ, the two‐factor structure was invariant across adolescent age and sex. Significant correlations among RFQ subscale scores, and between RFQ subscales with both psychological problems and alexithymia dimensions were found.ConclusionsPreliminary results reveal a short version of RFQ (six‐item) is a suitable measure to assess mentalizing in adolescents in the Italian context.
Highlights
Reflective functioning (RF) is the operationalization of the mental processes underlying the capacity to mentalize (Fonagy et al, 1998), namely the ability to understand and interpret—implicitly and explicitly—one's own and others' behavior as an expression of mental states such as feelings, thoughts, fantasies, beliefs, and desires (Fonagy et al, 2002)
This study aims to test the psychometric proprieties of the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ) applied to younger (13–16 years) and older (17–20 years) Italian adolescents examining (1) the factorial structure of RFQ; (2) its invariance across age and sex; (3) correlations between RFQ subscale scores, as well as the associations of the RFQ with (4) psychological problems and alexithymia dimensions
Because this assessment tool is time‐ and labor‐intensive, requires highly trained raters, necessarily restricting sample sizes, the development of the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ; Fonagy et al, 2016), a self‐report questionnaire measure, has become a suitable tool to assess mentalizing capacity in large samples of adults. This instrument permits the identification of two dimensions of mentalizing assessing Certainty (RFQc) and Uncertainty (RFQu) about the mental states of self and others, reflecting two impairments in RF that are common in many mental disorders such as borderline personality disorder, eating disorder, and depression
Summary
Reflective functioning (RF) is the operationalization of the mental processes underlying the capacity to mentalize (Fonagy et al, 1998), namely the ability to understand and interpret—implicitly and explicitly—one's own and others' behavior as an expression of mental states such as feelings, thoughts, fantasies, beliefs, and desires (Fonagy et al, 2002). RF emerges from the convergence of two theories: first, the development of psychic reality theory (Fonagy & Target, 1996), whereby children progressively move from experiencing inner and outer reality as either equivalent or dissociated toward a more integrated and reflective mode; second, social biofeedback theory (Gergely & Watson, 1996), whereby primary attachment relationships constitute the starting point for emotional self‐awareness and the development of self‐control in infancy. It is a manual providing rating categories designed to be applied to the interviewee's transcript from the Adult Attachment Interview (George et al, 1996) or the Parent Development Interview (Aber et al, 1985) Because this assessment tool is time‐ and labor‐intensive, requires highly trained raters, necessarily restricting sample sizes, the development of the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ; Fonagy et al, 2016), a self‐report questionnaire measure, has become a suitable tool to assess mentalizing capacity in large samples of adults. Hypomentalizing, by contrast, reflects concrete thinking characterized by an absence or unwillingness to develop nuanced and more complex models of the mind of others and/or the self (Fonagy et al, 2016)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
