Transference-Focused Psychotherapy for BPD: Evidence and Process
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: October 13, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Transference-focused psychotherapy (TFP) is a structured, manualized psychodynamic treatment developed for people with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and related disturbances in personality functioning. It uses the relationship between the patient and therapist to examine emotionally charged patterns of experiencing oneself and others. Its central clinical aim is to help a person recognize, tolerate, and integrate contradictory views of self and other people, especially when those views shift sharply under stress. TFP also establishes a clear treatment framework for handling crises, maintaining continuity of care, and pursuing greater stability in identity, relationships, and daily functioning.
Clinical research supports TFP as an evidence-based option for BPD, although the number of substantial randomized trials is limited and their comparisons have yielded mixed results. The American Psychiatric Association's 2024 BPD guideline recommends a structured, evidence-supported psychotherapy aimed at the disorder's core features; it does not declare TFP universally superior to dialectical behavior therapy, mentalization-based treatment, or schema therapy. This guide examines the actual therapy process, its conceptual model, clinical studies, uncertainties, safety considerations, and the questions that matter when choosing care.
What Is Transference-Focused Psychotherapy?
TFP is an intensive form of individual psychotherapy grounded in contemporary object relations theory, particularly the clinical model developed by Otto Kernberg and colleagues. An object relation in this context means a psychologically organized experience involving a representation of oneself, a representation of another person, and the emotion connecting the two. These experiences can influence what someone expects from relationships and how they interpret ambiguous interactions. The term 'object' is historical psychoanalytic language for a significant other, not a claim that people are objects.
The defining feature of TFP is systematic attention to how such relational experiences appear in the ongoing interaction with the therapist. The therapist helps the patient notice when a strongly emotional interpretation becomes dominant, compare it with conflicting experiences, and think about both without needing to erase one of them. The treatment incorporates careful assessment, an agreed-upon therapy framework, frequent monitoring of risks and treatment obstacles, and a sequence of interventions called clarification, confrontation, and interpretation. The clinical overview by Levy and colleagues and the American Journal of Psychiatry clinical guide describe these core procedures.
TFP was developed for people with substantial difficulties in identity, emotion regulation, and interpersonal functioning, especially when BPD has been established by a comprehensive clinical assessment. It is one possible treatment among several specialized approaches. The diagnostic evaluation establishes treatment needs; a person's attachment style, conflict with a partner, occasional polarized thinking, or a high score on an online questionnaire cannot establish eligibility or a BPD diagnosis.
What Does 'Transference' Mean in TFP?
Transference refers to the activation of expectations, emotions, and relational patterns within the therapeutic relationship. A patient may experience a therapist as indifferent after a canceled appointment, idealize the therapist following a helpful session, or feel controlled when a scheduling boundary is discussed. Such experiences can carry meanings shaped by previous relationships, current circumstances, and the actual behavior of the therapist.
TFP begins with what can be observed and explored in the present. The therapist does not assume that every reaction reflects childhood history or that the patient has misperceived events. A cancellation may genuinely have been disruptive; a therapist can make mistakes; and the same event can also activate older expectations about abandonment, criticism, or power. The work consists of examining the interaction and the range of meanings it evokes, using the patient's account as essential evidence.
The word transference also occurs in general psychodynamic psychotherapy, but TFP is a specific, manualized treatment with its own clinical priorities, explanatory model, and use of the therapy relationship. Readers seeking the broader history or clinical meaning of the concept can consult Transference Neurosis: Psychoanalytic Meaning and Clinical Use. That historical concept has its own scope and is distinct from BPD-specific TFP.
The Personality-Functioning Model Behind TFP
Identity integration and different self-states
TFP conceptualizes some persistent problems in BPD as involving fragmented or poorly integrated representations of the self and significant others. Under one emotional condition, a person may feel competent and valued; under another, entirely inadequate or rejected. A relationship may be experienced as safe and supportive on one day and completely hostile after a painful interaction. Many people, including those without a personality disorder, experience contradictions. The clinical concern is the rigidity, severity, persistence, and functional consequences of such shifts.
In TFP's theoretical model, polarized experiences may remain psychologically segregated, making it difficult to recognize that positive and negative feelings can refer to the same complex person. The treatment aims to strengthen identity integration and more coherent representations of others. These proposed mechanisms are elaborated in the TFP mechanism paper. The model is a clinically influential explanation, and its explanatory assumptions should be distinguished from outcomes actually demonstrated in trials.
Splitting, idealization, and devaluation
'Splitting' in psychodynamic theory refers to the separation of incompatible positive and negative experiences, often accompanied by idealization or devaluation. It is a process hypothesized to explain particular reactions, not a standalone DSM-5-TR diagnosis and not a label for any person who changes their mind about someone. Clinicians must examine specific circumstances before interpreting conduct within this framework. The everyday use of 'splitting' online often overlooks this clinical complexity.
A therapeutic example might involve a patient feeling deeply understood at the end of one session and convinced that the therapist is deliberately harmful after a perceived slight. Rather than choosing one view as the truth and rejecting the other, TFP invites examination of both experiences, their emotional intensity, and the evidence supporting each interpretation. The long-term goal is greater capacity to hold mixed feelings and preserve continuity in relationships.
Mentalization and reflective functioning
TFP also seeks to enhance the patient's capacity to think about thoughts, feelings, and intentions, both their own and those of others. In research, related constructs include reflective functioning and attachment representations. One analysis of a randomized TFP trial found improvements in reflective functioning and narrative coherence in the TFP group, alongside changes in attachment classification. These were assessed within a relatively small trial; they support a plausible mechanism but do not prove that a specific interpretive technique alone caused improvement. See Levy et al. (2006).
Mentalization-based treatment (MBT) also works with the understanding of mental states, yet it uses a distinct model and characteristic therapeutic strategies. The two approaches share some clinical objectives while differing in emphasis and technique. Our MBT for BPD guide examines those distinctions.
How a Course of TFP Is Organized
Assessment, suitability, and collaborative goals
A responsible course begins with evaluation of the person's difficulties, functioning, psychiatric and medical history, current relationships, substance use, co-occurring conditions, treatment goals, and safety needs. Clinicians assess whether the patient can participate in the proposed setting and whether a different or additional service is required. TFP is not offered merely because a person recognizes a description of 'splitting' or feels intensely attached to someone.
A thorough assessment should consider trauma exposure, depression, bipolar disorder, PTSD, substance use, dissociation, neurodevelopmental differences, and relevant physical conditions when indicated. Experiences that appear similar at first can arise from different processes. The APA BPD guideline's assessment recommendations emphasize a comprehensive, culturally informed, person-centered evaluation rather than diagnosis from an isolated characteristic.
Treatment goals may concern recurrent interpersonal crises, an unstable sense of self, emotional distress, self-injury when present, occupational impairment, or difficulty sustaining care. A person's priorities might include studying, working, parenting, or improving relationships. Treatment planning should identify measurable signs of change in the areas that matter to the patient.
The treatment agreement and therapeutic frame
Early sessions establish a treatment agreement. It clarifies session frequency, attendance, cancellations, confidentiality and its limits, payment where relevant, responsibilities, and procedures for emergencies and behaviors that threaten safety or treatment continuity. This agreement is designed to make the therapy reliable and workable, especially when powerful emotions arise. It is not a promise that a patient will never experience distress or a mechanism for punishing symptoms.
Traditional outpatient TFP is commonly delivered in two sessions each week, although service structures and adaptations vary. Published trials have examined treatment over one year or longer, and the three-year schema-focused therapy comparison used twice-weekly sessions. The frequency and duration of a particular course should be discussed with the clinician in relation to evidence, resources, functioning, and clinical needs. See Clarkin et al. (2007) and Giesen-Bloo et al. (2006).
The contract includes a plan for crisis situations. If immediate self-harm or suicide risk is identified, safety assessment and appropriate care take priority over interpretive work. That priority is a safety principle, not an assumption that everyone with BPD is suicidal. NICE recommends collaborative crisis planning and assessment that distinguishes immediate from longer-term risk in CG78.
What a typical session may feel like
A session commonly begins with whatever seems most pressing to the patient. The therapist pays attention to the content of the account, the emotional atmosphere, contradictory descriptions, and how the patient and therapist are relating at that moment. At times, the clinician may ask what a statement means, connect two apparently incompatible descriptions, or explore the emotional meaning of a reaction to the therapist. Sessions can include ordinary events outside therapy as well as feelings arising during treatment.
TFP is active and collaborative, though its questions may be demanding. The therapist is expected to help make emotionally intense experiences thinkable while maintaining boundaries and attending to the patient's capacity to reflect. Interpretations are clinical hypotheses offered for exploration, not facts that override the patient's perspective. The 2015 clinical guide outlines how therapists use clinical priorities, clarification, confrontation, interpretation, and technical neutrality.
The Three Main TFP Techniques
Clarification
Clarification asks for detail when an experience is confusing, contradictory, or emotionally charged. A therapist might say, 'When you say you felt completely abandoned after our scheduling change, what happened in that moment, and what did you believe I intended?' Clarification allows a more accurate shared understanding before interpreting motives.
Confrontation
In TFP, confrontation means respectfully drawing attention to discrepancies between experiences, statements, or behavior. It is not verbal aggression, shaming, or pressuring a patient to accept the therapist's account. For example, a therapist may observe that the patient described a colleague as trustworthy earlier in the session but now describes the same colleague as entirely dangerous, and invite reflection on how the change occurred. The technique works only when delivered with clinical skill and a sufficiently safe working relationship.
Interpretation
Interpretation proposes a possible connection among emotion, interpersonal expectations, behavior, and representations of self and others. It may explore how a pattern taking shape with the therapist resembles a conflict in another relationship. Interpretations are timed to the patient's ability to consider them. A useful interpretation expands curiosity and self-understanding; its value should be evaluated in the context of the patient's responses and treatment outcomes.
The therapy's approach to clarification, confrontation, and interpretation is described by Levy and colleagues. A 2024 systematic review of transference interpretation across psychotherapy found that evidence concerning the relationship between the technique and outcomes remains insufficiently settled. Evidence that a complete manualized treatment can be helpful should therefore not be equated with proof that any isolated interpretation reliably produces improvement.
Technical Neutrality and the Therapeutic Relationship
Technical neutrality is a specialized therapeutic stance. It means the clinician tries to avoid being pulled into one side of the patient's polarized inner conflict or automatically assuming the role the patient expects. The therapist remains engaged, responsive, and responsible for safety while facilitating an examination of competing perspectives. Neutrality does not require indifference, withholding validation, or remaining silent about harmful behavior.
Therapists also pay attention to their own emotional reactions, sometimes called countertransference, as one potential source of information. Such reactions require reflection, supervision, and careful separation from factual conclusions about the patient. Training and supervision matter because relationship-focused interventions can be misunderstood or become unhelpful when clinicians respond defensively. The American Psychiatric Association's guideline implementation discussion emphasizes a trustworthy therapeutic alliance and a nonjudgmental, validating stance across BPD psychotherapy models.
What Does Research Say About TFP for BPD?
A three-treatment randomized trial: TFP, DBT, and supportive treatment
In a randomized study of 90 adults with BPD, Clarkin, Levy, Lenzenweger, and Kernberg (2007) compared yearlong transference-focused psychotherapy, dialectical behavior therapy, and a structured supportive psychodynamic therapy. All three groups improved in depression, anxiety, global functioning, and social adjustment. Both TFP and DBT were associated with improvements in suicidality. Outcomes differed across domains, and TFP was associated with change in some measures of aggression and irritability.
This study supports the value of structured outpatient care and provides promising findings for TFP, but a relatively small study cannot establish a universal treatment ranking. Group-level change does not predict every individual's experience, and observed differences across numerous outcomes require cautious interpretation. It is also important that the study compared three active approaches rather than an inactive placebo condition.
TFP compared with experienced community psychotherapists
A separate randomized trial by Doering and colleagues (2010) enrolled 104 female outpatients and compared one year of TFP with treatment by experienced community psychotherapists. TFP showed advantages in BPD symptoms, psychosocial functioning, personality organization, psychiatric admissions, and certain measures of suicidal behavior. Dropout was reported as 38.5% in the TFP group versus 67.3% in community psychotherapy. Both groups improved in depression and anxiety without significant between-group differences; self-harm behavior did not significantly change in either group.
The comparator was heterogeneous community psychotherapy, and participants were women treated in a particular clinical context. The findings cannot be extended automatically to all genders, health systems, levels of severity, or community-care models. The suicide-related findings are study-specific rather than a guarantee of protection for an individual patient.
TFP compared directly with schema-focused therapy
A three-year multicenter randomized trial by Giesen-Bloo and colleagues (2006) compared TFP and schema-focused therapy in 88 randomized patients. Both treatments were associated with clinically meaningful improvement. However, schema-focused therapy performed better in this study on several measures of recovery, symptom improvement, quality of life, and treatment retention; the TFP group had a higher dropout risk.
This finding is essential to a balanced account. The comparison demonstrates that TFP can be beneficial while also showing that another structured treatment outperformed it under specific trial conditions. It cannot establish a definitive hierarchy across all populations or present-day services. Findings about the therapeutic alliance in the same research program suggest that early negative alliance ratings predicted dropout and that improving alliance ratings were associated with subsequent clinical benefit. See Spinhoven et al. (2007).
What systematic reviews conclude
The 2024 systematic review by Crotty and colleagues assessed trials of multiple psychotherapies for BPD. It found low-certainty evidence suggesting that several approaches, including TFP, were more effective than treatment as usual for BPD outcomes, while evidence from direct comparisons was limited and of low or very low certainty. The reviewers found no strong basis for concluding that one commonly used psychotherapy is consistently more beneficial than all others.
Evidence certainty matters. It reflects issues such as sample sizes, study methods, heterogeneity, incomplete follow-up, and uncertainty about whether findings apply across treatment settings. It does not imply that patients who improve during TFP have imagined their improvement. It means the estimated size and comparative advantage of the treatment remain uncertain. An empirical review of TFP developments by Clarkin and colleagues (2022) also considers how the clinical model and evidence base have evolved.
Does TFP Improve Identity, Attachment, and Reflective Functioning?
TFP explicitly targets identity coherence and recurring representations of self and others. In an ancillary analysis of the 90-patient randomized treatment study, Levy and colleagues (2006) reported increased narrative coherence and reflective functioning in the TFP group and changes in attachment-state classification. These results are compatible with the proposed integration model, but an outcome measure changing does not conclusively identify the therapeutic ingredient responsible.
Identity functioning is broader than symptom counts. Improvement might involve being able to describe oneself consistently across emotional states, maintain personal goals, recognize that a relationship can contain both care and disappointment, or remain engaged in work or study during interpersonal stress. Clinicians should assess these changes alongside safety, distress, quality of life, and the patient's own view of progress.
The language of identity integration belongs to the therapeutic model. It should not be confused with a biological test, an online 'identity integration score' that independently diagnoses BPD, or a claim that every patient shares the same psychological organization.
TFP Versus DBT, MBT, and Schema Therapy
TFP and dialectical behavior therapy
Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) commonly emphasizes structured skills in mindfulness, distress tolerance, emotion regulation, and interpersonal effectiveness, often combined with individual therapy and other program components. TFP places greater emphasis on analyzing representations of self and others through the therapeutic relationship. Both use treatment structure, explicit attention to safety, and active clinical intervention. The Clarkin trial provides a direct comparison but does not justify declaring one treatment best for every patient. Read our DBT for BPD evidence guide for its specific format and findings.
TFP and mentalization-based treatment
MBT aims to strengthen curiosity and flexibility in understanding mental states, particularly when attachment stress makes interpretations of self and others less reliable. TFP also involves reflection on mental states but uses object relations interpretations and the transference relationship in a more explicitly defined way. A therapist's training, the patient's priorities, and the structure of local programs may be more useful in choosing between them than a simplistic school-versus-school ranking. See Mentalization-Based Treatment for BPD.
TFP and schema therapy
Schema therapy addresses persistent patterns of belief, emotion, coping, and interpersonal behavior, using techniques that may include cognitive, experiential, behavioral, and relationship-focused work. It has been compared directly with TFP; the Giesen-Bloo trial favored schema-focused therapy on several outcomes over three years. This result is an important consideration, but treatment fit and service quality still matter. Our Schema Therapy for Personality Disorders article covers its broader clinical evidence.
What all these comparisons leave unanswered
Most trials were conducted in specialist settings with specific inclusion criteria and trained providers. They do not provide a reliable personalized algorithm for matching every individual to a treatment. No therapist should dismiss the role of alliance, practical access, safety, patient preference, cultural context, co-occurring disorders, and prior care simply because a modality has a recognizable name. The 2024 systematic review underscores how uncertain many direct treatment comparisons remain.
How Long Does TFP Take, and How Is Progress Measured?
Traditional TFP research has commonly involved intensive outpatient treatment delivered twice weekly for at least one year, with some studies continuing longer. A published protocol does not mean every person needs precisely that duration. Clinicians and patients should establish a realistic plan, review how the therapy is working, and discuss adaptations or referrals when the current arrangement is ineffective or unsafe.
Useful outcome domains include severity and frequency of the patient's target symptoms, suicidal or self-injurious behavior when relevant, emergency and inpatient service use, relationship functioning, employment or education participation, self-understanding, and quality of life. Change may be uneven. A person can improve considerably in daily functioning even while some intense emotional reactions persist. Conversely, attendance alone is not proof of treatment effectiveness.
Patient-reported experience deserves attention alongside clinician-rated measures. Feeling respected and able to raise concerns is fundamental. In the Spinhoven study, early alliance problems were associated with treatment dropout, highlighting the importance of routinely discussing ruptures in the therapeutic relationship.
Risks, Limitations, and When Other Care May Be Needed
Emotionally intensive therapy may temporarily increase distress when painful relational experiences are examined. A skilled clinician should pace interventions, monitor the person's stability, address misunderstandings, and adapt the plan if the work becomes destabilizing. Intensified feelings during a session should not be portrayed as proof that the treatment is necessarily working.
TFP requires clinician expertise, reliable appointments, time, and financial or service resources that may be unavailable in some settings. Research samples may not adequately represent all cultural groups, gender identities, age ranges, clinical presentations, or combinations of conditions. Different service models and adaptations cannot automatically claim the same evidence as the specific protocols tested in trials.
A clinician may recommend coordinated treatment or another level of care when someone is experiencing acute suicidal risk, severe substance intoxication, major psychosis, mania, a medical emergency, or another condition requiring immediate specialized assessment. TFP can be part of longer-term care for some people with complex needs, but the acute problem must be addressed appropriately. The APA guideline and NICE guidance emphasize structured planning, crisis assessment, and coordinated care.
If someone is in immediate danger, has taken an overdose, or cannot remain safe, seek local emergency medical care or contact emergency services now. Where risk is not immediate, contact a treating clinician or an appropriate crisis service and use an agreed safety plan. Clinical support should be organized around the person's actual risk, not assumptions based solely on a diagnostic label.
Can TFP Be Used Alongside Medication?
TFP is a psychotherapy and does not require a medication with the same name or a specific pharmaceutical regimen. Medication decisions should follow an assessment of co-occurring conditions, previous responses, current symptoms, adverse effects, and the individual's preferences. The 2024 APA guideline treats medication for BPD as potentially time-limited, target-focused, and adjunctive to psychotherapy; medication is not established as a primary treatment for the core personality disorder.
A psychiatrist may prescribe medication for an independently diagnosed co-occurring disorder or a particular clinical indication, but prescribing should not substitute for appropriate psychotherapy and safety planning. Our published medication and personality disorders guide explains the broader evidence and limits.
How to Choose a TFP Therapist
Ask whether the clinician has formal training, supervision, and experience delivering manualized TFP for BPD or related personality-functioning difficulties. Discuss the expected frequency and duration, what a treatment agreement will include, how crises and missed sessions are managed, whether the clinician coordinates with other providers, and how treatment goals will be reviewed.
It is reasonable to ask about competing treatments and whether a comprehensive DBT program, MBT service, schema therapy, or another structured option might fit your needs better. The quality of the working relationship matters. You should be able to raise doubts, experience the therapist as interested in understanding your perspective, and discuss interpretations that feel inaccurate or distressing.
Access barriers can be significant. If twice-weekly specialist TFP is unavailable or unaffordable, other evidence-supported structured care can still be meaningful. The APA guideline recommends a treatment approach with evidence for core BPD features and collaborative, person-centered planning rather than insisting that everyone receive one named modality.
Misconceptions About TFP and BPD
TFP does not mean that every interpersonal reaction is projected onto the therapist or determined by childhood. Clinicians also consider present-day events, including the therapist's real behavior and the patient's social context. Nor is 'confrontation' permission to humiliate someone: its clinical purpose is to understand discrepancies while protecting collaboration.
The concept of splitting is neither a standalone diagnosis nor evidence of manipulation. Intense feelings, unstable relationships, and difficulty trusting others occur in a range of clinical and ordinary situations. Similarly, self-injury and suicidality are important assessment domains when present, but neither defines every person with BPD. The goal of specialized care is improved functioning and well-being, including the possibility of meaningful long-term recovery.
A psychodynamic theory is a framework for formulating clinical problems. Experimental findings support some aspects of treatment effectiveness without validating every theoretical account of why it works. Clear differentiation between the clinical model, measured results, and unresolved questions makes informed treatment decisions possible.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is transference-focused psychotherapy evidence-based?
Yes, TFP has been examined in randomized clinical trials and is recognized among structured treatments supported by BPD psychotherapy research. Confidence about exactly how much better it is than other specialist approaches is limited. The 2024 systematic review rated important comparisons as low or very low certainty and found no consistent overall winner.
Is TFP the same as psychoanalysis?
TFP draws on psychoanalytic and object relations theories, but it is a structured, manualized psychotherapy with specific clinical targets, treatment agreements, and research protocols. It should be distinguished from classical psychoanalysis and from psychodynamic therapy as a broad category.
Does TFP involve talking about childhood trauma?
Developmental history can be relevant, but the ongoing relationship and current patterns of feeling and interpreting are central. A person does not need to uncover a single hidden childhood cause for therapy to proceed. Trauma assessment and trauma-focused treatment are separate clinical decisions made on individual indications.
Can TFP help someone who does not self-harm?
Potentially. TFP addresses difficulties in identity and relationships as well as other core BPD features. Self-harm is not universal in BPD and is not a prerequisite for considering TFP. Treatment suitability depends on a comprehensive professional assessment.
Does TFP work better than DBT?
Current research does not establish universal superiority. A small randomized study found distinct improvements across several TFP and DBT outcomes, but broader reviews do not support a definitive ranking. Treatment needs and available competent services influence the decision.
How many sessions per week does TFP require?
Many traditional TFP programs and trials use twice-weekly individual sessions. Frequency may vary according to an adapted protocol and clinical setting. Ask a prospective therapist which model they use and what evidence supports that arrangement.
Can an online TFP course or self-help exercise replace treatment?
Reading and psychoeducation can support informed choices, but the clinically studied TFP model relies on an ongoing therapeutic relationship, individualized assessment, and a safety framework. An online quiz or standalone exercise does not replicate a treatment tested in randomized trials.
What if I feel criticized or misunderstood during TFP?
Discuss it directly when possible. A therapist should take your experience seriously, clarify what occurred, and work collaboratively to address a rupture. Persistent fear, coercion, dismissal of safety concerns, or deterioration without an appropriate response warrant reassessment and potentially a second professional opinion.
Can people recover from BPD?
Many people experience substantial reduction in symptoms and meaningful improvement over time with appropriate care. Recovery also includes relationships, self-direction, education, work, and quality of life. Individual courses vary, and treatment outcomes cannot be predicted from a label alone.
Related Articles
For the clinical overview and treatment choices, read Psychotherapy for Personality Disorders: Treatments and Evidence and Borderline Personality Disorder: Symptoms, Diagnosis, and Treatment.
For specialist approaches, see Dialectical Behavior Therapy for BPD: How DBT Works and Evidence, Mentalization-Based Treatment for BPD: How MBT Works and Evidence, and Schema Therapy for Personality Disorders: Evidence and Practice.
For the role of medication in coordinated care, see Are Medications Used for Personality Disorders? Clinical Guidance.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2024). The American Psychiatric Association practice guideline for the treatment of patients with borderline personality disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 181(11), 1024–1028. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.24181010.
Clarkin, J. F., Levy, K. N., Lenzenweger, M. F., & Kernberg, O. F. (2007). Evaluating three treatments for borderline personality disorder: A multiwave study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 164(6), 922–928. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.2007.164.6.922.
Clarkin, J. F., Meehan, K. B., De Panfilis, C., & Doering, S. (2023). Empirical developments in transference-focused psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 76(1). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.20220017.
Crotty, K., Viswanathan, M., Kennedy, S., Edlund, M. J., Ali, R., Siddiqui, M., Wines, R., Ratajczak, P., & Gartlehner, G. (2024). Psychotherapies for the treatment of borderline personality disorder: A systematic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 92(5), 275–295. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000833.
Doering, S., Hörz, S., Rentrop, M., Fischer-Kern, M., Schuster, P., Benecke, C., Buchheim, A., Martius, P., & Buchheim, P. (2010). Transference-focused psychotherapy v. treatment by community psychotherapists for borderline personality disorder: Randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry, 196(5), 389–395. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.109.070177.
Giesen-Bloo, J., van Dyck, R., Spinhoven, P., van Tilburg, W., Dirksen, C., van Asselt, T., Kremers, I., Nadort, M., & Arntz, A. (2006). Outpatient psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder: Randomized trial of schema-focused therapy vs transference-focused psychotherapy. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63(6), 649–658. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.63.6.649.
Levy, K. N., Clarkin, J. F., Yeomans, F. E., Scott, L. N., Wasserman, R. H., & Kernberg, O. F. (2006). The mechanisms of change in the treatment of borderline personality disorder with transference focused psychotherapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(4), 481–501. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20239.
Levy, K. N., Meehan, K. B., Kelly, K. M., Reynoso, J. S., Weber, M., Clarkin, J. F., & Kernberg, O. F. (2006). Change in attachment patterns and reflective function in a randomized control trial of transference-focused psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74(6), 1027–1040. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.74.6.1027.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2009, updated). Borderline personality disorder: Recognition and management (CG78). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg78/chapter/Recommendations.
Spinhoven, P., Giesen-Bloo, J., van Dyck, R., Kooiman, K., & Arntz, A. (2007). The therapeutic alliance in schema-focused therapy and transference-focused psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75(1), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.75.1.104.
Yilmaz, M., Türkarslan, K. K., Zanini, L., Hasdemir, D., Spitoni, G. F., & Lingiardi, V. (2024). Transference interpretation and psychotherapy outcome: A systematic review of a no-consensus relationship. Research in Psychotherapy: Psychopathology, Process and Outcome, 27(1), 744. https://doi.org/10.4081/ripppo.2024.744.