Questionnaire Analysis

The Reflective Functioning Questionnaire (RFQ-54) is a self-report psychometric instrument developed by Fonagy and colleagues in 2016 to assess reflective functioning and the capacity for mentalizing. Mentalizing refers to the ability to understand and interpret one’s own behavior and the behavior of others in terms of underlying mental states, such as thoughts, feelings, intentions, wishes, and beliefs.

The RFQ-54 was designed as a relatively brief and easy-to-administer measure of reflective functioning. It does not aim to capture every dimension of mentalizing or the full process as it unfolds during real-time social interaction. Instead, it is intended to identify possible disturbances or imbalances in the way individuals understand mental states.

Purpose

The main purpose of the RFQ-54 is to assess significant disturbances or imbalances in mentalizing, particularly those that may be observed in individuals with borderline personality characteristics.

The questionnaire examines the extent to which individuals may feel either overly uncertain or excessively certain about their own mental states and those of other people. In this way, it can provide information about the flexibility with which individuals interpret thoughts, emotions, motives, and intentions.

Structure and Subscales

The RFQ-54 consists of 54 items. Participants indicate the degree to which they agree with each statement using a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree.

The questionnaire includes two main subscales:

  • RFQ-U – Uncertainty about Mental States: assesses uncertainty regarding mental states and may reflect difficulties in understanding thoughts, feelings, and intentions.
  • RFQ-C – Certainty about Mental States: assesses certainty concerning mental states and reflects the degree to which individuals believe they can understand or interpret their own and others’ internal experiences.

Considering these two dimensions together allows a broader assessment of mentalizing, since both excessive uncertainty and excessive certainty may reflect difficulties in interpreting mental states.

Scoring and Statistical Analysis

According to the source material, the RFQ-54 produces a total score ranging from 54 to 378. Higher scores are described as reflecting greater uncertainty and lack of knowledge regarding mental states, while lower scores characterized by more neutral responses are associated with acknowledging the opacity of mental states, which is described as a feature of good mentalizing.

In research applications, overall and subscale scores may be examined depending on the specific scoring protocol used. Scores may be employed to compare groups, investigate relationships with other psychological variables, or assess change following psychological or psychotherapeutic interventions.

Validity and Reliability

According to the available material, the RFQ subscales demonstrated good internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha values around 0.70. In a repeated assessment conducted three weeks later, internal consistency was reported as α = 0.84 for the RFQ-U and α = 0.75 for the RFQ-C.

These findings support the potential usefulness of the questionnaire for assessing dimensions of reflective functioning, although psychometric properties should ideally be examined whenever the instrument is applied to different populations or cultural settings.

Applications

The RFQ-54 may be used in clinical psychology, psychiatry, and psychotherapy research, particularly in studies focusing on mentalizing, interpersonal functioning, emotional regulation, and personality-related difficulties.

It may also be used to investigate associations between reflective functioning and other psychological variables, including interpersonal difficulties and personality characteristics. The instrument can be especially useful in research involving populations in which the ability to understand mental states may be disrupted.

Interpretation of the results should not rely solely on the total score. The specific scoring method, the research or clinical context, and the characteristics of the population should also be taken into consideration.

Author

P. Fonagy and colleagues (2016).

Reference

Fonagy, P., Luyten, P., Moulton-Perkins, A., Lee, Y. W., Warren, F., Howard, S., Ghinai, R., Fearon, P., & Lowyck, B. (2016). Development and validation of a self-report measure of mentalizing: The Reflective Functioning Questionnaire. PLoS ONE, 11(7), e0158678.