گزارش مختصر: تنظیم احساسات و مقابله به عنوان تعدیل در روابط بین شخصیت و آسیب به خود

Abstract Self-injury without conscious suicidal intent is an increasingly prevalent phenomenon particularly among adolescent populations. This pilot study examined the extent and correlates of self-injurious behaviour in a school population sample of 393 adolescents (aged 13–18 years) using a self-report questionnaire. Specifically, we aimed to determine whether personality was related to self-injury and whether this relationship was moderated by emotion regulation or coping strategies. Few personality and coping variables were directly related to self-injury after controlling for age and psychopathology. However the relationship between personality and self-injury was moderated by coping skills and emotion regulation. We suggest future research explore these relationships in order to determine the role of coping skills and emotional regulation training in prevention of self-injury.

Results The nature and extent of NSSI In this sample, 33.3% (n = 131) reported engaging in NSSI at least once in the last 12 months. Of this percentage, 17.8% had self-injured within the previous month ( Table 1). Most used one (39.7%) or two (30.5%) methods. Scores regarding recency, frequency and severity for each form of self-injury were averaged and weighted by the number of methods participants reported using, providing a continuous score with a range from 0 (no self-injury) to 70 (uses five or more methods, everyday, and each incident is life-threatening; see Hasking et al., 2008 and Williams and Hasking, in press). In this sample scores ranged from 0 to 47 (total sample mean = 3.29 ± 8.06; NSSI participants mean = 8.02 ± 11.00). Table 1. The nature and extent of self-injury. Cutting Scratching Burning Wound interference Other % of total sample admitting to self-injury 23.4 28.8 8.4 13.0 17.8 (n = 131) n = 92 n = 113 n = 33 n = 51 n = 70 Frequencya Yearly or less 57.6 65.2 84.9 49.0 52.9 Daily, weekly or monthly 42.4 34.8 15.1 51.0 47.2 Recency More than a year ago 23.9 30.9 27.3 17.7 21.4 In the last year 39.1 32.7 48.5 27.5 27.1 Today, last week or last month 36.9 36.3 24.2 54.9 51.5 Severity Not at all or home first aid 97.7 98.2 87.9 85.7 92.9 Medical or life-threatening 2.3 1.8 12.1 14.3 7.1 Location Face 7.6 13.3 6.1 9.8 28.6 Thighs 47.8 28.3 15.2 25.5 18.6 Lower arm 40.2 48.7 48.5 29.4 14.3 Feet 5.4 2.7 .0 15.7 8.6 Hands 34.8 38.9 66.7 41.2 32.9 Upper arm 17.4 14.2 21.2 25.5 12.9 Ankle 12.0 5.3 6.1 19.6 5.7 Chest 14.1 9.7 12.1 5.9 5.7 Shoulders 8.7 8.0 6.1 9.8 5.7 Lower leg 13.0 15.0 6.1 41.2 12.9 Wrists 53.3 40.7 15.2 33.3 11.4 Genitals .0 1.8 .0 .0 .0 a All figures are percentage of sample reporting each form of self-injury, with the exception of the first row which represents percentage of the total sample reporting self-injury. Table options Regression analysis The majority of variables were related in the expected direction (Table 2). To examine the proposed relationships, a hierarchical multiple regression was performed with NSSI score as the criterion. Both age and psychological distress were statistically controlled by entering them in the first step. Personality was entered in the second step, coping strategies and emotional regulation were entered in the third step and two-way interactions between each of the personality factors and each of the coping and emotion regulation factors were examined in the fourth step. Table 2. Descriptive data and correlations. Variable Mean (SD) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1. Self-injury 3.29 (8.06) .61*** −.12* .19*** −.34*** −.04 .35*** −.12* −.15** −.18** −.35*** .003 2. Psych. distress .16 (.14) 1.0 .17** .27*** −.37*** .09 .64*** −.22*** −.07 −.30*** −.66*** .004 3. ER appraisal 27.21 (6.45) 1.0 −.05 .41*** .23*** −.18** .13* .17** .24*** .22*** .11* 4. ER suppression 13.92 (5.33) 1.0 −.32*** −.25*** .32*** −.36*** −.23*** −.12* −.19** −.11* 5. Problem-solving 63.82 (13.64) 1.0 .28*** −.16** .27*** .26*** .38*** .33*** .13* 6. Ref to others 48.07 (14.14) 1.0 .19** .16** .09 .16** −.16** .02 7. Non-productive 49.60 (12.60) 1.0 −.12* −.02 −.33*** −.54*** −.08 8. Openness 33.82 (7.89) 1.0 .18** .07 .28*** .28*** 9. Conscientiousness 37.37 (6.12) 1.0 .19* −.01 .40*** 10. Extraversion 30.05 (6.34) 1.0 .19** .23*** 11. Agreeableness 30.93 (8.08) 1.0 −.02 12. Neuroticism 34.81 (6.20) 1.0 *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. Table options After controlling for age, psychopathology and personality, only problem-solving was related to NSSI (Table 3). Several interactions were observed which were investigated with simple slopes analyses (Aiken & West, 1991). As seen in Fig. 1, conscientiousness was related (negatively) to NSSI for those suppressing emotion (b = −.27, t = −3.35, p < .001), but not for those who did not suppress emotion (b = −.00, t = −.00, p = .50). Similarly, there was a negative relationship between conscientiousness and NSSI for those who relied on support from others to cope (b = −.34, t = −3.51, p = .000), but not for those who did not rely on others (b = .07, t = .75, p = .23). Neuroticism was related to NSSI only for those suppressing emotions (b = .21, t = 2.41, p = .008) ( Fig. 2). Neuroticism also appeared to interact with non-productive coping, although simple slopes analysis revealed neither slope to be significantly different from zero (both p > .05). Table 3. Results of multiple regression analysis. B β R R2 AdjR2 ΔR2 ΔF df Step 1 .60 .36 .36 .36 111.64*** 2,390 Age .51 .06 Psych distress 34.28 .59*** Step 2 .61 .38 .37 .01 1.65 5,385 Openness −.001 −.001 Conscientiousness −.01 −.01 Extraversion −.15 −.11 Agreeableness .05 .05 Neuroticism .06 .05 Step 3 .63 .40 .38 .02 2.27* 5,380 Non-productive .01 .02 Reference to others −.03 −.05 Problem-solving −.09 −.15** ER appraisal .04 .04 ER suppression −.04 −.02 Step 4a .69 .48 .43 .08 2.28** 25,355 Consc × supp −.03 −.12* Consc × ref −.02 −.18** Neurot × supp .03 .14** Neurot × non −.01 −.14** *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. a only significant interactions included in table. Table options Emotional suppression and reference to others moderate the relationship between ... Fig. 1. Emotional suppression and reference to others moderate the relationship between conscientiousness and self-injury. Figure options Emotional suppression and non-productive coping moderate the relationship ... Fig. 2. Emotional suppression and non-productive coping moderate the relationship between neuroticism and self-injury.