Background
Intimate partner violence (IPV), with its extensive consequences, profoundly affects personal well-being and relationships, and even intensifies the risk of psychological crises and suicidality. However, accurate recognition of IPV perpetrated by a partner is not universally achieved. Perception of partner’s IPV perpetration (often termed as IPV victimization) can be biased, thereby potentially escalating violence, destabilizing the relationship, and eliciting intense negative emotions that could lead to suicidality.
Known as a relationship disorder with a high risk of self-mutilation and suicide attempts, borderline personality disorder (BPD) is linked to both IPV and distorted perceptions.
Individuals with borderline pathology frequently report being victims of IPV. When they experience being violently treated by a romantic partner and sense a loss of emotional connection, they may resort to suicidal threats as a response. Nonetheless, to what extent their reports of IPV victimization accurately reflect the violent behaviors of their partners remains unknown. Given that BPD is frequently linked to the use of the defense mechanism of projection, it is plausible that individuals with borderline pathology report more IPV victimization partly due to their own aggression within romantic relationships and a tendency to project their own IPV perpetration onto their partners.
Objective
To shed light on the understanding of IPV and borderline pathology, two significant predictors of suicidality, this study examined the associations between borderline pathology and both IPV perpetration and victimization within romantic partners. Furthermore, the study employed the truth and bias model, which is well-known in the relationship science, to investigate the accuracy (i.e., to what extent one’s perception of a partner’s mental process is shaped by the actual mental process of their partner) and the assumed similarity bias (i.e., to what extent one’s perception of a partner’s mental process is shaped by the mental process of their own) in individuals’ report of IPV victimization (i.e., their partner’s IPV perpetration), and how borderline pathology influences such accuracy and assumed similarity bias.
Methods
Dating couples (N = 80 pairs) recruited from the community in Hong Kong and mainland China completed questionnaires about BPD features, as well as IPV perpetration and victimization within their relationship.
Results
Participants with more BPD features reported higher levels of IPV perpetration and victimization, whereas their partner reported normal levels of IPV perpetration and victimization. Furthermore, truth and bias analyses revealed that when reporting IPV victimization, participants with more BPD features exhibited same level of accuracy and more assumed similarity bias than participants with fewer BPD features.
Conclusions
Both elevated self-reported IPV perpetration and a distorted perception wherein an individual projects their own IPV perpetration onto their partner may serve as indicators of borderline pathology. In light of the established predictive links between borderline pathology, IPV victimization, and suicidality, future research endeavors would benefit from an investigation into the mediating role of biased perceptions of IPV victimization within the nexus between borderline pathology and suicidality.
Keywords: BPD features, romantic partners, IPV perpetration and victimization, truth and bias model, suicidality
 

BPD features, romantic partners, IPV perpetration and victimization, truth and bias model, suicidality