We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Borderline personality disorder (BPD) and bipolar disorder (BD) have overlapping clinical presentations and symptoms – sources of persistent clinical confusion. Game-theory can characterize how social function might be sub-optimal in the two disorders and move the field beyond the anecdotal description of clinical history. Here, we tested the hypothesis that BPD and BD can be distinguished on the basis of diminished reciprocal altruism in iterated Prisoner's Dilemma (PD) games.
Method
Twenty females with BPD, 20 females with euthymic BD and 20 healthy (non-clinical) females, matched for age and cognitive ability, were assessed for Axis-I and personality disorders, and completed psychometric measures of state affect, impulsivity and hostility. Participants completed two iterated PD games and a test of gaze-cueing.
Results
In the PD games, BPD participants failed to show statistically stable preferences to cooperate with social partners (playing tit-for-tat) and made significantly fewer cooperative responses compared to BD or controls (ANOVA main effect p = 0.03, post-hoc Tukey p < 0.05 for both comparisons). BPD participants were also less likely to sustain cooperation following experiences involving mutual cooperation than the other groups. Neither BPD nor BD participants demonstrated impairments in shifting visual attention on the basis of other peoples’ gaze.
Conclusions
These data indicate that BPD is (selectively) associated with difficulties in establishing, and then maintaining, reciprocal cooperation, involving altruism. These difficulties are not seen in euthymic BD. Our data support the differentiation of BPD from BD and offer fresh insights into the social difficulties experienced by individuals with diagnoses of BPD.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.