Elsevier

Psychiatry Research

Volume 137, Issue 3, 15 December 2005, Pages 191-202
Psychiatry Research

The neuropsychology of borderline personality disorder: A meta-analysis and review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2005.07.004Get rights and content

Abstract

The neuropsychological profile of borderline personality disorder (BPD) is unclear. Past investigations have produced seemingly inconsistent results concerning precisely what neuropsychological deficits characterize the patient with BPD. A meta-analysis of 10 studies was conducted comparing BPD and healthy comparison groups on selected neuropsychological measures comprising six domains of functioning: attention, cognitive flexibility, learning and memory, planning, speeded processing, and visuospatial abilities. BPD participants performed more poorly than controls across all neuropsychological domains, with mean effect sizes (Cohen's d) ranging from − 0.29 for cognitive flexibility to − 1.43 for planning. The results suggest that persons with BPD perform more poorly than healthy comparison groups in multiple neurocognitive domains and that these deficits may be more strongly lateralized to the right hemisphere. Although neuropsychological testing appears to be sensitive to the neurocognitive deficits of BPD, the clinical utility of these results is limited. Implications of these findings for future neurocognitive investigations of BPD are discussed.

Introduction

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a disorder characterized by affective instability, impulsivity, cognitive disruptions, and interpersonal difficulties (American Psychiatric Association, 2000), and it affects approximately 2% of the population (Swartz et al., 1990). The literature on BPD abounds with reports of memory (Korfine and Hooley, 2000, Startup et al., 2001) and perceptual distortions (George and Soloff, 1986, Sundbom et al., 1989, Yee et al., 2005), symptoms suggesting a potential underlying brain pathology in this often chronic psychiatric disorder. However, a clear characterization of the neurocognitive features of BPD has proved elusive.

While initial neurobehavioral studies of BPD appeared to demonstrate a link between acquired or developmental brain dysfunction and borderline psychopathology (Andrulonis et al., 1989, van Reekum, 1993, van Reekum et al., 1996), these early neuropsychological investigations failed to present a consistent pattern of neurocognitive disruption. For instance, a study by Cornelius et al. (1989) was unable to detect differences between BPD patients and a healthy control group selected from historical records in the domains of memory, language, motor, and spatial functioning.

O'Leary et al. (1991) were among the first to use a more methodologically sound approach to examine the neurocognition of BPD, revealing distinct impairments in BPD participants relative to controls primarily in tasks assessing memory, as well as the processes of visual discrimination and filtering. These results were largely supported by studies carried out by Judd and Ruff (1993) and Swirsky-Sacchetti et al. (1993). Although the latter investigation failed to replicate a decrement in performance for the BPD group on the digit-symbol test of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R, Wechsler, 1981), it was the only study to find a difference between groups in the interference condition of the Stroop Color and Word Test (Golden, 1978). In addition, using a short 11-item neurocognitive screening examination, Burgess (1990) demonstrated significant differences between groups on measures of memory and rhythm reproduction.

Many of the more recent neuropsychological investigations of BPD used more comprehensive neuropsychological batteries than used in earlier studies and seemed to identify specific neurocognitive impairments among BPD participants. Dinn et al. (2004) compared BPD and healthy control groups in a number of cognitive domains, particularly tasks assessing multiple facets of attention. BPD patients were impaired on tests of visuospatial abilities, speeded processing, and nonverbal memory skills, yet there were no striking differences observed on tests of attention, verbal memory, and alternation learning. Additional neurocognitive impairments associated with BPD were demonstrated by Bazanis et al. (2002), in which BPD participants performed more poorly on tasks assessing planning and decision-making but no differently in tests of visual recognition memory, including pattern and spatial recognition. Further, Posner et al. (2002) identified a specific deficiency in an attentional network involved in conflict resolution and cognitive control, which was distinct from systems involved in emotion regulation.

Despite the abundance of evidence in support of neurocognitive deficits in BPD, many investigations have failed to identify any remarkable differences between BPD and healthy control groups. Kunert et al. (2003) conducted extensive neuropsychological testing of BPD and healthy control participants, including assessments of intelligence, attention, visual scanning, cognitive flexibility, working memory, planning and problem solving, and learning and memory. Although BPD participants demonstrated higher scores on self-report measures of aggressiveness and impulsiveness, the patient group only performed more poorly than controls in the reading condition of the Stroop test and made more errors in the interference condition. Similarly, Sprock et al. (2000) observed no differences between groups on any of the neuropsychological measures they employed with the exception of one non-interference condition of the Stroop test in which BPD participants took significantly longer than the healthy control group to name color-congruent words. Theunissen and Walker (2003) also found no differences between BPD and depressed controls on measures of working memory, speeded processing, cognitive flexibility, planning, and visuospatial abilities.

Evidently the relationship between neurocognition and borderline psychopathology is unclear. The purpose of the present meta-analysis is to provide a unified examination of the current literature in to explicate the specific neuropsychological domains of functioning that may be impaired in persons with BPD. Interpreting individual investigations of BPD is complicated by the varied way in which BPD has been operationally defined, whether it be self-report, semi-structured interviews, or unstructured interviews. Studies have also differed widely in the specific neuropsychological measures used to assess the functional integrity of neural systems. These two sources of variability have contributed to an unclear understanding of the potential brain pathology that may underlie BPD, and it is expected that an amalgamation of these individual findings will generate a coherent characterization of the neurocognitive features of BPD.

Section snippets

Selection of studies

A search for articles was conducted using PubMed and PsycINFO with a combination of key words, including neuropsychology, neurocognition, cognitive, borderline personality, and personality disorder. All relevant references from articles obtained through this search were also reviewed for inclusion in the analysis. Table 1 presents descriptive data for the studies identified for inclusion in the meta-analysis.

Only those studies adhering to all of the following eligibility criteria were included

Results

Cohen (1988) provided guidelines by which to interpret effect sizes. An effect size (d) of 0.2 is considered small, 0.5 medium, and 0.8 or higher large. Effect sizes were calculated between BPD and healthy control groups across studies for each neuropsychological domain.

Discussion

The results of this meta-analysis revealed a significant difference between BPD and healthy comparison groups across multiple neuropsychological domains. BPD patients generally performed more poorly than healthy comparison groups on global dimensions of attention, cognitive flexibility, learning and memory, planning, speeded processing, and visuospatial abilities. The effect sizes were primarily in the medium-to-large range, with the smallest effect size observed for the cognitive flexibility

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges fellowship support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and Drexel University College of Arts and Sciences.

References (67)

  • D.T. Stuss et al.

    Stroop performance in focal lesion patients: dissociation of processes and frontal lobe lesion location

    Neuropsychologia

    (2001)
  • L. Tebartz van Elst et al.

    Frontolimbic brain abnormalities in patients with borderline personality disorder: a volumetric magnetic resonance imaging study

    Biological Psychiatry

    (2003)
  • L. Yee et al.

    Persistent hallucinosis in borderline personality disorder

    Comprehensive Psychiatry

    (2005)
  • L. Zago et al.

    Distinguishing visuospatial working memory and complex mental calculation areas within the parietal lobes

    Neuroscience Letters

    (2002)
  • K.K. Zakzanis

    Statistics to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth: formulae, illustrative numerical examples, and heuristic interpretation of effect size analyses for neuropsychological researchers

    Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology

    (2001)
  • American Psychiatric Association

    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders — Text Revision

    (2000)
  • P.A. Andrulonis et al.

    Organic brain dysfunction and the borderline syndrome

    Psychiatric Clinics of North America

    (1989)
  • E. Bazanis et al.

    Neurocognitive deficits in decision-making and planning of patients with DSM-III-R borderline personality disorder

    Psychological Medicine

    (2002)
  • J.W. Burgess

    Cognitive information processing in borderline personality disorder: a neuropsychiatric hypothesis

    Jefferson Journal of Psychiatry

    (1990)
  • D.T. Campbell et al.

    Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait–multimethod matrix

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1959)
  • J. Cohen

    Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences

    (1988)
  • J.R. Cornelius et al.

    An evaluation of the significance of selected neuropsychiatric abnormalities in the etiology of borderline personality disorder

    Journal of Personality Disorders

    (1989)
  • J.M. Fincham et al.

    Neural mechanisms of planning: a computational analysis using event-related fMRI

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

    (2002)
  • A. George et al.

    Schizotypal symptoms in patients with borderline personality disorders

    American Journal of Psychiatry

    (1986)
  • G.V. Glass

    Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research

    Educational Researcher

    (1976)
  • C.J. Golden

    Stroop Color and Word Test Manual

    (1978)
  • R.J. Grissom et al.

    Review of assumptions and problems in the appropriate conceptualization of effect size

    Psychological Methods

    (2001)
  • J.G. Gunderson et al.

    The Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines

    American Journal of Psychiatry

    (1981)
  • R.F. Haase et al.

    Too many variables! Some strategies for analyzing multiple dependent variables in complex designs

  • L.V. Hedges et al.

    Statistical Methods for Meta-analysis

    (1985)
  • Irani F., Platek, S.M., Ruocco, A.C., Bunce, S., Chute, D.L., in press. Applications of functional near infrared...
  • R. Jacobs et al.

    Planning and problem solving skills following focal frontal brain lesions in childhood: analysis using the Tower of London

    Neuropsychology, Development, and Cognition. Section C, Child Neuropsychology

    (2002)
  • S.C. Johnson et al.

    Brain activation on fMRI and verbal memory ability: functional neuroanatomic correlates of CVLT performance

    Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society

    (2004)
  • Cited by (217)

    • A dance movement therapy intervention for people with a personality disorder: A Delphi study

      2022, Arts in Psychotherapy
      Citation Excerpt :

      Moreover, core executive functions, such as self-control, working memory and creative thinking are addressed (Diamond, 2013; Hanna, 2014; Risner, 2000; Sheets-Johnstone, 2012). For these reasons, the use of choreography in DMT could be specifically beneficial for people with a borderline PD, as their executive functioning is often impaired (Ruocco, 2005). In addition, focusing on a specific task diminishes neural responses to emotional stimuli, while emotion regulation and mentalising capacities are expanded in PD clients (Batcup, 2013; Livesley & Larstone, 2018).

    • The Assessment of Intelligence: What is Behind Us, Before Us and Ahead of Us

      2022, Comprehensive Clinical Psychology, Second Edition
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text