Cited by 134Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionBullying, Victimization, and Aggression

Perception of Social Participation in Borderline Personality Disorder

Renneberg, Babette, Herm, Kerstin, Hahn, Adam, Staebler, Katja, Lammers, Claas‐Hinrich, Roepke, Stefan·2012·Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy

Abstract

Interpersonal dysfunction is a key feature of borderline personality disorder (BPD). Distorted perception of participation in social situations and altered emotional responses could contribute to these typical interpersonal problems in BPD. Thirty patients with BPD were compared with a healthy control group ( n = 30) in their perceptions and subjective emotional reactions to situations of social inclusion and exclusion. Participants played Cyberball, a virtual ball‐tossing paradigm, in which social inclusion and exclusion are experimentally induced. Control participants reacted with an increase in sadness, anger and overall negative affect when excluded. In BPD patients, social exclusion also induced anger, while general participating in the game seemed to reduce levels of sadness. Compared with healthy controls, BPD patients felt more readily excluded independent of the condition of inclusion or exclusion. In conclusion, patients with BPD displayed a negative bias toward perceived participation in social situations. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Key Practitioner Message: Patients with BPD have a biased perception for exclusion. Virtual ball‐tossing games can be used to induce anger in patients with BPD. Participating in a virtual ball‐tossing game may reduce levels of sadness in BPD in the short term.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cpp.772

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Renneberg, B., Herm, K., Hahn, A., Staebler, K., Lammers, C., & Roepke, S.
Affiliations
  • Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • Heidelberg University (DE)
  • Asklepios (DE)
Corresponding author
Renneberg, Babette
Venue
Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-08-24
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
473-480
ISSN
  • 1063-3995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0879
OpenAlex
W1507453991
Cited by
134
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
6.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Keywords
borderline personality disorder, social exclusion, social inclusion, interpersonal problems, Cyberball paradigm, virtual reality, anger, sadness, negative affect
MeSH terms
Adult, Affect, Anger, Borderline Personality Disorder, Emotions, Female, Germany, Humans, Male, Rejection, Psychology, Social Perception, Sports, Case-Control Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review