

IASC
Inventory of Altered Self-Capacities (IASC)
The IASC is a self-report questionnaire designed to explore difficulties related to emotional regulation, identity, interpersonal relationships, and certain coping patterns frequently associated with psychological trauma, particularly developmental trauma and complex trauma. It helps the psychologist objectify alterations in self-functioning that are not always captured by scales focused solely on anxiety, depression, or posttraumatic stress disorder. The tool is particularly useful in the clinical assessment of adults with a history of abuse, neglect, repeated victimization, or marked disturbances of attachment and emotional stability. Its interpretation is based on a profile of subdimensions rather than a single categorical diagnosis, which makes it a relevant instrument for screening, case formulation, and therapeutic follow-up.
- Number of questions
- 63 questions
- Estimated duration
- 15 minutes
- Language
- English
- Original name
- Inventory of Altered Self-Capacities
- Target audience
- Adults
- Authors
- John Briere (2000)
- Category
- Emotion regulation
Scoring & interpretation
Items are rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale. Scoring consists of summing or averaging the responses for each subscale to obtain a clinical profile of altered self-capacities. Higher scores generally reflect more difficulties in the areas assessed, including affect regulation, identity, interpersonal influence, abandonment concerns, and relational tension. Interpretation should be based on the subscores and the overall clinical context, and not as a stand-alone diagnosis.
Usage
This tool isn't available on Mentaal. To use this questionnaire in your practice, you need a valid license. We invite you to send it directly from the publisher's website.
Available alternatives
What psychologists think
No ratings yet. Be the first to rate this questionnaire.
Clarity and comprehension
—Are the test's instructions and questions easy for patients to understand?
Clinical relevance
—Does the test measure what it's meant to measure, and is it useful in a clinical setting?
Perceived reliability of the results
—Do the results seem reliable and consistent in their interpretation?