The Validity and Reliability of the Chinese Version of the Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Participants
2.3. Measurements
2.3.1. Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (SI-Bord)
2.3.2. Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10)
2.3.3. Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ)
2.3.4. Experience in Close Relationships–Revised (ECR-R)
2.3.5. Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES)
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Analysis
3.2. CFA Model
3.3. Convergent and Discriminant Validity
3.4. Invariance Test
3.5. Reliability
4. Discussion
4.1. Implications
4.2. Strengths and Limitations of This Study, and Future Research
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
BPD | Borderline Personality Disorder |
SI-Bord | Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder |
PSS-10 | Perceived Stress Scale |
MLQ | Meaning in Life Questionnaire |
ECR-R | Experience in Close Relationships–Revised |
RSES | Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale |
References
- APA. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder (DSM-5), 5th ed.; APA: Washington, DC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Bretherton, I. The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. In Attachment Theory; Routledge: London, UK, 2013; pp. 45–84. [Google Scholar]
- Pearse, E.; Bucci, S.; Raphael, J.; Berry, K. The relationship between attachment and functioning for people with serious mental illness: A systematic review. Nord. J. Psychiatry 2020, 74, 545–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levy, K.N.; Johnson, B.N.; Clouthier, T.L.; Scala, J.; Temes, C.M. An attachment theoretical framework for personality disorders. Can. Psychol./Psychol. Can. 2015, 56, 197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, M.; South, S. Romantic attachment style and borderline personality pathology: A meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2020, 75, 101781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holmes, J. Disorganized attachment and borderline personality disorder: A clinical perspective. Attach. Hum. Dev. 2004, 6, 181–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bourvis, N.; Aouidad, A.; Cabelguen, C.; Cohen, D.; Xavier, J. How do stress exposure and stress regulation relate to borderline personality disorder? Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 2054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kellner, R. Psychosomatic Syndromes and Somatic Symptoms; American Psychiatric Publishing: Washington, DC, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Bourvis, N.; Aouidad, A.; Spodenkiewicz, M.; Palestra, G.; Aigrain, J.; Baptista, A.; Benoliel, J.J.; Chetouani, M.; Cohen, D. Adolescents with borderline personality disorder show a higher response to stress but a lack of self-perception: Evidence through affective computing. Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol. Biol. Psychiatry 2021, 111, 110095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, G.D.; Chang, J.J.; Yuan, M.Y.; Wang, G.F.; He, Y.; Chen, S.S.; Su, P.Y. Childhood abuse and borderline personality disorder features in Chinese undergraduates: The role of self-esteem and resilience. BMC Psychiatry 2021, 21, 326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jia, N.; Sakulsriprasert, C.; Wongpakaran, N.; Suradom, C.; Donnell, R.O. Borderline Personality Disorder Symptoms and Its Clinical Correlates among Chinese University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study. Healthcare 2022, 10, 1751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bozzatello, P.; Garbarini, C.; Rocca, P.; Bellino, S. Borderline Personality Disorder: Risk Factors and Early Detection. Diagnostics 2021, 11, 2142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zanarini, M.C.; Frankenburg, F.R.; Vujanovic, A.A. Inter-rater and test-retest reliability of the Revised Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines. J. Pers. Disord. 2002, 16, 270–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bohus, M.; Kleindienst, N.; Limberger, M.F.; Stieglitz, R.D.; Domsalla, M.; Chapman, A.L.; Steil, R.; Philipsen, A.; Wolf, M. The short version of the Borderline Symptom List (BSL-23): Development and initial data on psychometric properties. Psychopathology 2009, 42, 32–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arntz, A.; van den Hoorn, M.; Cornelis, J.; Verheul, R.; van den Bosch, W.M.; de Bie, A.J. Reliability and validity of the borderline personality disorder severity index. J. Personal. Disord. 2003, 17, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pfohl, B.; Blum, N.; St John, D.; McCormick, B.; Allen, J.; Black, D.W. Reliability and validity of the Borderline Evaluation of Severity Over Time (BEST): A self-rated scale to measure severity and change in persons with borderline personality disorder. J. Pers. Disord. 2009, 23, 281–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zanarini, M.C.; Vujanovic, A.A.; Parachini, E.A.; Boulanger, J.L.; Frankenburg, F.R.; Hennen, J. Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder (ZAN-BPD): A continuous measure of DSM-IV borderline psychopathology. J. Pers. Disord. 2003, 17, 233–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marco, J.H.; Pérez, S.; García-Alandete, J.; Moliner, R. Meaning in life in people with borderline personality disorder. Clin. Psychol. Psychother. 2017, 24, 162–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Winter, D.; Steeb, L.; Herbert, C.; Sedikides, C.; Schmahl, C.; Bohus, M.; Lis, S. Lower self-positivity and its association with self-esteem in women with borderline personality disorder. Behav. Res. Ther. 2018, 109, 84–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lorca, F.; Pérez, S.; Giner, F.; Marco, J.H. What dimension of meaning in life is the stronger predictor of borderline personality disorder symptom? J. Constr. Psychol. 2021, 34, 365–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lohanan, T.; Leesawat, T.; Wongpakaran, T.; Wongpakaran, N.; Karawekpanyawong, N.; Oon-Arom, A.; Kuntawong, P. Development and validation of a screening instrument for borderline personality disorder (SI-Bord) for use among university students. BMC Psychiatry 2020, 20, 479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cohen, S.; Kamarck, T.; Mermelstein, R. A global measure of perceived stress. J. Health Soc. Behav. 1983, 24, 385–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, S.; Kamarck, T.; Mermelstein, R. Perceived stress scale. Meas. Stress A Guide Health Soc. Sci. 1994, 10, 1–2. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Z.; Wang, Y.; Wu, Z.; Chen, D.; Chen, J.; Xiao, Z. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of perceived stress scale. J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. (Med. Sci.) 2015, 35, 1448. [Google Scholar]
- Steger, M.F.; Frazier, P.; Oishi, S.; Kaler, M. The meaning in life questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. J. Couns. Psychol. 2006, 53, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, W.; Gao, R. A generalizability analysis of the meaning in life questionnaire for Chinese adolescents. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 687589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fraley, R.C.; Waller, N.G.; Brennan, K.A. An item response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2000, 78, 350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wongpakaran, T.; Wongpakaran, N.; Wannarit, K. Validity and reliability of the Thai version of the Experiences of Close Relationships-Revised questionnaire. Singap. Med. J. 2011, 52, 100–106. [Google Scholar]
- Li-Tonggui, K.-K. Measuring adult attachment: Chinese adaptation of the ECR scale. Acta Psychol. Sin. 2006, 38, 399. [Google Scholar]
- Rosenberg, M. Society and the Adolescent Self-Image; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 1965. [Google Scholar]
- Fleming, J.S.; Courtney, B.E. The dimensionality of self-esteem: II. Hierarchical facet model for revised measurement scales. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1984, 46, 404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, F.; Bi, C.; Han, M. The reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the revised-positive version of Rosenberg self-esteem scale. Adv. Psychol. 2015, 5, 531–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Browne, M.W.; Cudeck, R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Testing Structural Equation Models; Bollen, K.A., Long, J.S., Eds.; Sage: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Steiger, J.H. Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivar. Behav. Res. 1990, 25, 173–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bentler, P.M. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol. Bull. 1990, 107, 238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tucker, L.R.; Lewis, C. A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika 1973, 38, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steenkamp, J.-B.E.; Baumgartner, H. Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. J. Consum. Res. 1998, 25, 78–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, F.F. Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 2007, 14, 464–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allen, T.A.; Dombrovski, A.Y.; Soloff, P.H.; Hallquist, M.N. Borderline personality disorder: Stress reactivity or stress generation? A prospective dimensional study. Psychol. Med. 2022, 52, 1014–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghiasi, H.; Mohammadi, A.; Zarrinfar, P. An Investigation into the Roles of Theory of Mind, Emotion Regulation, and Attachment Styles in Predicting the Traits of Borderline Personality Disorder. Iran. J. Psychiatry 2016, 11, 206–213. [Google Scholar]
- Kockler, T.D.; Santangelo, P.S.; Eid, M.; Kuehner, C.; Bohus, M.; Schmaedeke, S.; Ebner-Priemer, U.W. Self-esteem instability might be more characteristic of borderline personality disorder than affective instability: Findings from an e-diary study with clinical and healthy controls. J. Psychopathol. Clin. Sci. 2022, 131, 301–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oon-arom, A.; Wongpakaran, T.; Kuntawong, P.; Wongpakaran, N. Attachment anxiety, depression, and perceived social support: A moderated mediation model of suicide ideation among the elderly. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2021, 33, 169–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Myint, K.M.; DeMaranville, J.; Wongpakaran, T.; Peisah, C.; Arunrasameesopa, S.; Wongpakaran, N. Meditation Moderates the Relationship between Insecure Attachment and Loneliness: A Study of Long-Term Care Residents in Thailand. Medicina 2024, 60, 622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lawrence, R.C. Collectivism at the individual level: A moderator of the relationship between emotion suppression and personal strain. Curr. Psychol. 2023, 42, 30364–30380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, C.; Yan, W. Negative parenting styles and social adjustment of university students: A moderated chain mediation model. Curr. Psychol. 2022, 42, 27719–27732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, W.-H.; Revicki, D. Differential item functioning (DIF). In Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024; pp. 1783–1786. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, J.; Chen, Y.; Zhang, W. Association between family economic hardship and university students’ risky alcohol use: Mediating and moderating roles of perceived discrimination and impulsivity. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2019, 141, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qu, D.; Wen, X.; Liu, B.; Zhang, X.; He, Y.; Chen, D.; Duan, X.; Yu, J.; Liu, D.; Zhang, X.; et al. Non-suicidal self-injury in Chinese population: A scoping review of prevalence, method, risk factors and preventive interventions. Lancet Reg. Health West. Pac. 2023, 37, 100794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Poudel, A.; Lamichhane, A.; Magar, K.R.; Khanal, G.P. Non suicidal self injury and suicidal behavior among adolescents: Co-occurrence and associated risk factors. BMC Psychiatry 2022, 22, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gangemi, A.; Suriano, R.; Fabio, R.A. Longitudinal Exploration of Cortical Brain Activity in Cognitive Fog: An EEG Study in Patients with and without Anosmia. J. Integr. Neurosci. 2024, 23, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fabio, R.A.; Suriano, R. The Influence of Media Exposure on Anxiety and Working Memory during Lockdown Period in Italy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 9279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variables | Frequency | Percent | |
---|---|---|---|
Sex | Male | 385 | 54.2 |
Female | 325 | 45.8 | |
Perceived family wealth | Poor | 21 | 2.9 |
Middle class | 418 | 58.5 | |
Wealthy | 276 | 38.6 | |
Personal income | Part-time job | 20 | 2.8 |
Daily pocket money from parents | 367 | 51.3 | |
Both | 321 | 44.9 | |
Others | 7 | 0.9 | |
Scale scores (mean ± SD) | |||
SI-Bord (0–14) | 5.22 ± 2.58 | ||
Attachment anxiety (8–63) | 28.92 ± 11.99 | ||
Attachment avoidance (9–63) | 42.93 ± 9.68 | ||
Rosenberg self-esteem (11–45) | 33.23 ± 6.31 | ||
Meaning in life (11–70) | 49.72 ± 9.68 | ||
Perceived stress (0–32) | 16.84 ± 5.23 |
SI-Bord Item | Mean | SD | Variance | Skewness | Kurtosis |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Fear of abandonment | 1.230 | 0.796 | 0.634 | −0.167 | −0.929 |
2. Unstable relationships | 1.180 | 0.734 | 0.538 | −0.107 | −0.767 |
3. Identity disturbances | 1.240 | 0.774 | 0.600 | −0.151 | −0.814 |
4. Self-harm/suicidal behaviors | 0.450 | 0.709 | 0.502 | 1.381 | 0.831 |
5. Mood instability | 1.120 | 0.724 | 0.524 | 0.007 | −0.659 |
Model | CMIN | DF | CMIN/DF | RMSEA | SRMR | TLI | CFI |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Unidimensional model | 25.518 | 6 | 4.253 | 0.076 | 0.0314 | 0.937 | 0.969 |
SI- Bord Items | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | SI-Bord Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Fear of abandonment | - | |||||
2. Unstable relationships | 0.379 ** | - | ||||
3. Identity disturbances | 0.268 ** | 0.409 ** | - | |||
4. Self-harm/suicidal behaviors | 0.242 ** | 0.304 ** | 0.269 ** | - | ||
5. Mood instability | 0.308 ** | 0.411 ** | 0.499 ** | 0.372 ** | - | |
SI-Bord total | 0.650 ** | 0.723 ** | 0.713 ** | 0.621 ** | 0.745 ** | - |
SI-Bord | Perceived Stress | Attachment Anxiety | Attachment Avoidance | Meaning in Life | Self-Esteem | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SI-Bord | - | |||||
Perceived stress | 0.359 ** | - | ||||
Attachment anxiety | 0.481 ** | 0.313 ** | - | |||
Attachment avoidance | −0.068 | 0.152 ** | 0.020 | - | ||
Meaning in life | −0.137 ** | 0.101 ** | −0.095 * | 0.341 ** | - | |
Self-esteem | −0.075 * | −0.110 ** | −0.043 | 0.042 | 0.014 | - |
Model | χ2 (df) | Δχ2 (Δdf) | CFI | TLI | RMSEA | ΔCFI | ΔTLI | ΔRMSEA |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sex group | ||||||||
Configural Invariance | 31.470 (11) | 0.968 | 0.943 | 0.051 | ||||
Metric Invariance | 36.742 (15) | 5.272 (4) | 0.967 | 0.955 | 0.045 | −0.001 | 0.012 | −0.006 |
Scalar Invariance | 40.339 (20) | 3.579 (5) | 0.969 | 0.969 | 0.038 | 0.002 | 0.014 | −0.007 |
Age group | ||||||||
Configural Invariance | 26.137 (11) | 0.977 | 0.958 | 0.044 | ||||
Metric Invariance | 29.120 (15) | 2.983 (4) | 0.978 | 0.971 | 0.036 | 0.001 | 0.013 | −0.008 |
Scalar Invariance | 48.295 (20) | 19.175 (5) | 0.957 | 0.957 | 0.045 | −0.021 | −0.014 | 0.009 |
Income group | ||||||||
Configural Invariance | 36.635 (11) | 0.961 | 0.929 | 0.057 | ||||
Metric Invariance | 38.914 (15) | 2.279 (4) | 0.964 | 0.952 | 0.047 | 0.003 | 0.023 | −0.010 |
Scalar Invariance | 51.938 (20) | 13.024 (5) | 0.952 | 0.952 | 0.047 | −0.012 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhou, H.; Chang, Y.; Sakulsriprasert, C.; Wongpakaran, T.; Wongpakaran, N.; Suradom, C.; O’Donnell, R.; Jia, N. The Validity and Reliability of the Chinese Version of the Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder. Psychiatry Int. 2025, 6, 108. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint6030108
Zhou H, Chang Y, Sakulsriprasert C, Wongpakaran T, Wongpakaran N, Suradom C, O’Donnell R, Jia N. The Validity and Reliability of the Chinese Version of the Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder. Psychiatry International. 2025; 6(3):108. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint6030108
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhou, Hui, Yu Chang, Chaiyun Sakulsriprasert, Tinakon Wongpakaran, Nahathai Wongpakaran, Chawisa Suradom, Ronald O’Donnell, and Nan Jia. 2025. "The Validity and Reliability of the Chinese Version of the Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder" Psychiatry International 6, no. 3: 108. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint6030108
APA StyleZhou, H., Chang, Y., Sakulsriprasert, C., Wongpakaran, T., Wongpakaran, N., Suradom, C., O’Donnell, R., & Jia, N. (2025). The Validity and Reliability of the Chinese Version of the Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder. Psychiatry International, 6(3), 108. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint6030108