L' « Ouverture émotionnelle » dans les Troubles de la dépendance et les Troubles de la personnalité

Emotion processing is supposed to play an important role in psychological dysfunctions in alcohol and drug dependency disorders (DD), as well as in personality disorders (PD). The model of “Emotional Openness” (“Ouverture émotionnelle”) provides a multidimensional framework to analyze problematic patterns of emotion processing. Within this framework, it is suggested that drug- and alcohol-dependent patients as well as borderline and antisocial patients show reduced a) “cognitive/conceptual representation” of affective states; b) “emotion regulation”; and c) “expression and communication of emotion”; but d) increased “awareness of body internal indicators” of affectivity; and e) appropriate psychological treatment is supposed to improve these patterns. Drug-dependent patients with PD comorbidity (in particular borderline or antisocial) are supposed to present even stronger deficits in (a) and (b). The hypotheses are tested with the 36-item DOE questionnaire (“Dimensions of Openness to Emotional experiences”, trait version; 19]), assessing six main dimensions of emotion processing as represented by the subject (French and Italian version). The instrument presents satisfying reliability coefficients (mean alphas of the scales in two recent studies (N = 251; N = 435) vary between 0.74 and 0.82) and good factorial validity (6-factor PCA solutions with varimax rotation solutions in the two samples are highly coherent; the mean of Tucker's congruence coefficients is 0.93). Results of two clinical studies are presented, comparing N = 71 patients (21 drug-dependent without personality disorder; 30 drug-dependent with borderline or antisocial personality; 20 dependent in-patients receiving psychological therapy) with normal control subjects (N = 51 matched; N = 50 reference group), including one pre-post treatment comparison. Results confirm marked deficits of DD patients concerning “conceptual representation” and “emotion regulation”, as well as a reduction of “communication/expression of emotion” but an increased “awareness of body internal indicators” of affectivity. Differences of patients with a double diagnosis correspond to effect sizes of d = -1.33 for cognitive/conceptual representation of emotions and d = -1.25 for emotion regulation; differences in emotion communication and expression are also significant but less important d = -0.44. Awareness of body internal emotion indicators is increased (d = +0.27) but does not differ significantly from the control group. As supposed, patients with a double diagnosis (DD and PD) described significantly stronger deficits in conceptual representation and emotion regulation than the patients with dependency disorder only. In the second study, a group of DD patients receiving multi-component treatment, including individual and group therapeutic intervention, according to the client-centered approach, and working on emotion processing, showed marked differences from the reference group at the beginning of the treatment (d = -0.91 for cognitive/conceptual representation, d = -0.82 for emotion regulation and d = +0.46 for awareness of bodily internal indicators). As supposed, pre-post comparisons indicate improvement with change effect sizes of d = 0.99 for conceptual representation, d = 0.97 for emotion regulation, as well as d = 0.88 for emotion communication and expression. Furthermore, the changes following treatment are highly significant and substantial, except for the awareness of internal bodily indicators, which only slightly decreased. Patients “normalize” their emotion processing following treatment, describing increased conceptual representation and emotion regulation, as well as emotion communication and expression. Results underline the importance of dysfunctional modes of emotion processing in both pathologies, and underline the validity of applying the model and the DOE instrument. They are discussed with reference to the model of alexithymia.