The Assessment of Mentalization: Measures for the Patient, the Therapist and the Interaction

Abstract

Purpose: Mentalization has been clearly defined in the literature as a relational concept and yet in surveys and transcript-based measures it is almost universally treated as an individual capacity. That approach has value but may not capture the emergent nature of mentalization, as it is jointly constructed within a relational context. Methods: We report here on a critical evaluation of measurement approaches commonly used to conceptualize and assess mentalization and argue for the value of conversation analysis (CA) as an alternative approach. Results: A variety of approaches have been shown to have utility in assessing mentalization as an individual capacity. We illustrate how conversation analysis allows for an in-depth-analysis of mentalization as it is co-created across different contexts in real-life therapy sessions. This method of analysis shifts the focus from content to process. Conclusion: Conversation analysis is a potentially valuable tool to support training, to assess treatment integrity, and to improve outcomes with mentalization-based interventions.