*My* point is, how can we take this "objective" report seriously when the report authors make wild, unrelated assumptions on the motives of the BPD patients during the study, and the writer conveying the report to us doesn't seem to have any clue (or else a biased clue) about the disorder they're writing on?

It's possible I'm missing something somewhere where the BPD patients' motives for not liking the 50/50 split could somehow be attributed to wanting an unequal split in their favor. If I did and it's in there, I'd welcome you pointing it out please. I did have trouble following the results as written.