Trust in Therapeutic Work With Adolescents With and Without Personality Disorders: A Transference-Focused Therapy Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trust is central to successful therapeutic work with adolescents, but establishing trust can be challenging, especially with adolescents with personality disorders. We present our understanding of trust in working with adolescents with and without personality disorders. We draw on complementary and overlapping perspectives, namely the attachment model, Kernberg's object relations model, and Fonagy's mentalization model. In Kernberg's object relations conceptualization, difficulties in trust experienced by patients with borderline personality disorders result from paranoia associated with splitting and identity diffusion. In Fonagy's mentalization model, epistemic trust is rooted in early experiences of being responded to and understood. We outline how techniques used in transference-focused psychotherapy for adolescents promote the development of the adolescent's capacity to trust by facilitating identity integration, thus reducing paranoia. Finally, we use two clinical case illustrations to demonstrate how trust unfolds in working with adolescents with and without personality disorders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".