Evidence Hub

Judging Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review of Clinician Attitudes and Responses to Borderline Personality Disorder; and an Examination of Causal Attributions, Stigmatising Stereotypes and Jury Decision Making Regarding the ICD-11 “Severe Personality Disorder, Borderline Pattern” Criteria

James Baker

UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia), 2020

Abstract

Aims: This portfolio aims to aid understanding of processes of mental health stigma relating to “Borderline Personality Disorder” (BPD), and how developments in the nosology of Personality Disorder may affect the perceptions of laypeople in legal settings. It contains a review of the evidence concerning clinician attitudes and reactions toward BPD, and an empirical investigation of the effect of International Classification of Diseases-11 (ICD-11) terminology upon jury decision-making and perceptions. \n \nDesign: This portfolio consists of an general introduction to the topic, a systematic review of clinician attitudes and responses to BPD, an empirical paper outlining a quasi-experimental study of the effect of the “Severe Personality Disorder, Borderline Pattern” ICD-11 classification upon jury decision-making, an extended methodology, and an overall discussion and evaluation section. \n \nFindings: The systematic review confirms that negative attitudes toward BPD remain a problem in clinical groups and are likely to relate to both unhelpful stereotypes and challenging therapeutic interactions, implicating a need for well-evidenced training programmes. Various methodological limitations of this literature are discussed. \n \nThe empirical paper identified significant differences relating to increased perceptions of dangerousness and the need for segregation and coercion when a defendant’s mental health problems were described as a “Severe Personality Disorder, Borderline…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free