comparing causal attribution style between a group of students with borderline traits and a normal group

aim and background: cognitive investigations of emotional disorders proposed that cognitive biases have at least a role as maintenance factors in psychopathology. this study aimed to compare the styles of attribution in a group of students with borderline personality traits and a normal group. methods and materials: this was a cross-sectional survey. through stratified random sampling, 330 students from azerbaijan university of tarbiat moallem were selected and screened by borderline personality questionnaire (jacson and claridge). then, 30 cases were selected as the borderline group and 30 as the normal group. they were tested using the style attribution questionnaire (seligman et al.). data was analyzed using one way analysis of variance. findings: the results showed that in comparison with the normal group, the attributions of people with borderline traits were more external, stable and global for negative events and more external and unstable for positive events. however, scores of the two groups in the dimensions of globality/specificity for positive events were not significantly different. conclusions: application of external attribution style in positive and negative situations in the present study indicates the role of projection defense mechanism and paranoid thinking in causal explanations made by people with borderline traits. similarity of stability/instability dimension of attribution styles between depressed people and people with borderline traits could be due to the relationship between depression disorder and borderline traits. in addition, the similarity in attribution styles between individuals with borderline and schizotypal traits for negative situations in each of the three dimensions may be caused by the common characteristics among these groups.