Introduction: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are psychosocial factors acknowledged as significant contributors to health consequences later in adolescence, including psychological maladjustment. The research suggests that, at a transdiagnostic and transtheoretical level, working on restoring epistemic trust (ET), mentalized affectivity (MA), and reflective functioning (RF) in adolescents with ACEs assumes a central role in the therapeutic process. However, there are still few studies that attempted to investigate the specific role of these sociocognitive factors in the detrimental positive association between levels of experienced ACEs during childhood and psychological maladjustment in nonclinical adolescents. Methods: A community sample of 306 Italian cisgender adolescents (61.4% assigned females at birth; age range 13–19 years old; M _age = 16.1, SD = 1.64) self‐reported ACEs (Childhood Trauma Questionnaire‐Short Form), psychological maladjustment (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire), ET (Epistemic Trust, Mistrust and Credulity Questionnaire), MA (Brief‐Mentalized Affectivity Scale for Adolescence), and RF (Reflective Functioning Questionnaire). A multiple mediation regression analysis has been performed to explore the association between ACEs and psychological maladjustment through the interaction with socio‐cognitive factors. Results: ACEs are positive predictors of psychological maladjustment later in adolescence. Regardless of gender differences, epistemic mistrust and credulity, processing and expressing emotions, and uncertainty about mental states mediated this association, while epistemic trust, identifying emotions, and certainty about mental states did not configure as significant mediators. Conclusion: Findings suggest that ET disruptions and deficits in RF are risk factors, while MA is a protective factor within the link between ACEs and psychological maladjustment in adolescence. These links help to specify the role of sociocognitive factors in the development of mental problems in adolescents who have been exposed to adverse experiences in childhood.

Ageism is a social issue of growing concern; ageist beliefs can shape the individual and collective experience of aging. The present study aimed to explore positive and negative ageism in young adults (YA) (18-30 years) and adults (AD) (31-60 years) and their relationship with epistemic trust, psychological distress, and psychological well-being. 301 Italian adult participants completed an online survey that included the following self-report questionnaires: attitudes towards older people scale, epistemic trust, mistrust and credulity questionnaire, depression anxiety stress scale-21, and Warwick-Edinburgh mental wellbeing scale. Negative ageism was significantly higher in YA compared to AD; on the contrary, AD presented more positive ageism than YA. When considering the entire sample, negative ageism was correlated with various dimensions of psychological distress and epistemic trust. A mediation model revealed that epistemic mistrust fully mediated the relationship between age and negative ageism, suggesting that changes in ageist beliefs that seem to occur with age are mediated by a mistrustful epistemic stance. Future research should focus on further exploring the link between epistemic trust, mental health, and holding ageist beliefs. The results are also discussed in terms of their implications for the treatment of older patients.

The concept of mentalized affectivity (MA) encompasses the dimensions of identifying, processing, and expressing emotions and describes the process of making sense of and reevaluating one’s affects in light of autobiographical memory. This construct was developed within the theoretical framework of mentalization and, due to its interpersonal nature, added further complexity to the emotion regulation construct. This research aimed to examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Brief-Mentalized Affectivity Scale for adolescents (B-MAS-A) on an Italian sample of young people (aged 13-19 years). Data were collected using non-probabilistic sampling and an online survey. Participants were asked to complete a large battery of instruments, including the B-MAS-A, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale, the Reflective Functioning Questionnaire, the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity Questionnaire, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, and the General Self-Efficacy Scale. In study 1, factor analyses carried out on a total sample of 566 adolescents identified 3 distinct dimensions of the same components of MA found in the adult population: i) identifying; ii) processing; iii) expressing emotions. The subscales showed excellent internal consistency. Study 2 (involving a subsample of 288 participants) demonstrated good levels of construct and criterion validity. These results confirm that the B-MAS-A represents a valid and robust instrument for assessing the complex and multifaceted characteristics of MA in adolescents. The B-MAS-A can make a significant contribution to clinical practice and research and encourage systematic studies on MA in psychotherapy, taking into account the developmental stage of adolescence.

Defining and measuring epistemic trust and its disruptions have significantly enriched recent empirical research, broadening the attachment and mentalization theory paradigm to understand how epistemic stances inform individual and interpersonal functioning. While numerous studies have explored their relationships with different psycho(patho)logical dimensions, the interplay between epistemic stances and defense mechanisms remains largely unexplored. This study aimed to investigate this interaction by developing defensive profiles of epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity. 416 Italian participants completed the Epistemic Trust, Mistrust, and Credulity Questionnaire (ETMCQ) and Defense Mechanisms Rating Scale-Self-Report-30 (DMRS-SR-30). Epistemic trust correlated positively with more mature defensive functioning and negatively with immature defenses. Conversely, Epistemic mistrust and credulity were associated with less adaptive defenses, with mistrust showing a stronger relationship with immature defenses, pointing to more severely compromised global functioning than credulity. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed specific associations of each epistemic stance with distinct defense mechanisms, delineating three coherent defensive profiles. The findings underscore the importance of differentiating specific defense patterns related to epistemic trust and its disruptions. These defensive profiles of epistemic trust, mistrust, and credulity offer valuable insight for understanding individuals' intra- and interpersonal functioning and promoting the development of tailored interventions for psychological well-being.