Exploring trait assessment of samples, persons, and cultures

Arabic Version of the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) in a Community Sample of United Arab Emirates Nationals

Background:

Section III of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) proposes a model for conceptualizing personality disorders in which they are characterized by impairments in personality functioning and maladaptive personality traits. The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) is a self-report measure that assesses the presence and severity of these maladaptive personality traits.

Objective:

The current study examined the reliability and validity of the Arabic version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) to measure maladaptive personality traits in the Emirati population of the United Arab Emirates.

Methods:

The Arabic version of the PID-5 was administered to a community sample of 1,090 United Arab Emirates nationals (89.5% female and 10.5% male, mean age = 22.44 years old). The descriptive measures, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity with NEO – Five Factor Inventory, as well as PID-5’s factor structure, were all addressed.

Results:

The PID-5facets and domains mean scores were higher in the Emirati sample compared to the original US sample. Internal consistency of the PID-5 scales was acceptable to high and test-retest coefficients ranged from 0.84 (facets) to 0.87 (domains). As expected, the five domains of the Arabic version of the PID-5 correlated significantly with all Five-Factor Model domains of personality. Additionally, the Arabic version of the PID-5 confirmed a five-factor structure that resembles the PID-5 domains.

Conclusion:

The findings of this study provided initial support for the use of the Arabic version of the PID-5 to assess maladaptive personality traits in the Emirati population of the United Arab Emirates.

Integrating the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) into clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

Diagnosis is a cornerstone of clinical practice for mental health care providers, yet traditional diagnostic systems have well-known shortcomings, including inadequate reliability, high comorbidity, and marked within-diagnosis heterogeneity. The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is a data-driven, hierarchically based alternative to traditional classifications that conceptualizes psychopathology as a set of dimensions organized into increasingly broad, transdiagnostic spectra. Prior work has shown that using a dimensional approach improves reliability and validity, but translating a model like HiTOP into a workable system that is useful for health care providers remains a major challenge.

METHOD

The present work outlines the HiTOP model and describes the core principles to guide its integration into clinical practice.

RESULTS

Potential advantages and limitations of the HiTOP model for clinical utility are reviewed, including with respect to case conceptualization and treatment planning. A HiTOP approach to practice is illustrated and contrasted with an approach based on traditional nosology. Common barriers to using HiTOP in real-world health care settings and solutions to these barriers are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

HiTOP represents a viable alternative to classifying mental illness that can be integrated into practice today, although research is needed to further establish its utility. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Personality traits across cultures

Current questions in the study of personality traits across cultures include (a) the universality versus cultural uniqueness of trait structure, (b) cultural differences in trait levels, (c) the consistency and validity of traits and their measures across cultures, and (d) the evolutionary, ecological, and cultural contexts of personality. Although the Five Factor Model (FFM) of personality continues to find cross-cultural support, new research suggests that the model may be difficult to replicate in less educated or preliterate groups and that indigenous social-relational concepts may be distinguishable from the FFM in some cultures. In lexical studies, two or three broad dimensions may replicate better across cultures than alternative models. Substantial evidence suggests that mean trait profiles of cultures may be reasonably accurate. Nonetheless, research on response styles and measurement invariance raises questions about cross-cultural trait comparisons. Findings regarding cultural differences in trait-related consistency and validity are mixed. Researchers are offering innovative theory and research on the evolutionary, ecological, and cultural contexts of personality.