Identifying personality pathology associated with major depressive episodes: incremental validity of informant reports

The Role of Personality in the Mental and Physical Health of World Trade Center Responders: Self- versus Informant-Reports

Personality is linked to important health outcomes, but most prior studies have relied on self-reports, making it possible that shared-method variance explains the associations. The present study examined self- versus informant-reports of personality and multi-method outcomes. World Trade Center (WTC) responders and informants, 283 pairs, completed five-factor model personality measures and multi-method assessments of stressful events, functioning, mental disorders, 9/11-related treatment costs, BMI, and daily activity across three years. Self-reports were uniquely related to stressful events and functioning. Both self-reports and informant-reports showed incremental validity over one another for mental disorder diagnoses and treatment costs. For objective outcomes daily activity and BMI, informant-reports showed incremental validity over self-reports, accounting for all self-report variance and more. The findings suggest that informant-reports of personality provide better validity for objective health outcomes, which has implications for understanding personality and its role in mental and physical health.

Do patients' cognitive therapy skills predict personality change during treatment of depression?

BACKGROUND

Psychological interventions can change personality, including increasing positive temperament (extraversion) and decreasing negative temperament (neuroticism), but why these changes occur is unclear. The current study tested the extent to which patients' acquisition and use of skills taught in cognitive therapy (CT) correlated with changes in positive and negative temperament during treatment of depression.

METHOD

Outpatients (N = 351) with recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) were enrolled in a 12-week CT protocol. Temperament (early and late in CT), patient skills (mid and late in CT), and depressive symptoms (early, mid, and late in CT) were measured repeatedly.

RESULTS

Patients with greater acquisition and use of CT skills showed significantly larger increases in positive temperament and larger decreases in negative temperament in path analyses. Effect sizes were small, median standardized |beta| = 0.13. Models controlled depressive symptom levels and changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Skills taught in CT for recurrent depression correlate with personality change during this efficacious treatment. The absence of measures of CT skills at baseline and personality mid-CT allows several interpretations of the current findings. Future research is needed to clarify whether patients' use of CT skills facilitates adaptive changes in personality during CT.

Improving Interpretability of Subjective Assessments About Psychological Phenomena: A Review and Cross-Cultural Meta-Analysis

Attempts to understand subjectivity have historically involved distinguishing the strengths of subjective methods (e.g., survey ratings from informants) from those of alternative methods (e.g., observational/performance-based tasks). Yet a movement is underway in Psychology that considers the merits of intersubjectivity: Understanding the space between two or more informant’s subjective impressions of a common person or phenomenon. In mental health research, understanding differences between subjective impressions have less to do with informants’ characteristics and more to do with the social environments or contexts germane to the people or phenomena examined. Our article focuses on one relatively understudied social environment: the cultural context. We draw from seminal work on psychological universals, as well as emerging work on cultural norms (i.e., cultural tightness) to understand intersubjectivity effects through a cross-cultural lens. We report a meta-analysis of 314 studies of intersubjectivity effects in mental health, revealing that (a) this work involves independent research teams in more than 30 countries, (b) informants rating a target person’s mental health (e.g., parent and teacher ratings of a child’s behavior) commonly provide diverging estimates of that person’s mental health, and (c) greater convergence between subjective reports relates to a “tighter” or more norms-bound culture. Our article illustrates strategies for understanding divergence between subjective reports. In particular, we highlight theoretical and methodological frameworks for examining patterns of divergence between subjective reports in relation to data from nonsubjective methods. We also describe how research on intersubjectivity informs efforts to improve the interpretability of subjective assessments in multiple subdisciplines in Psychology.

Incremental Validity of Self- and Informant Report of Personality Disorders in Later Life

Research shows moderate agreement between different sources of information when assessing personality disorders (PDs) in older adults. The differences between measurement methods appear to be not only the result of measurement error, but also an indication that each source holds nonredundant information relevant to PD diagnosis. The current article examines three sources of diagnostic information (self-report, informant report, and clinical interview) and the utility of these instruments in predicting important outcomes in older adulthood. We analyzed data from 1,630 adults between the ages of 55 and 64 years participating in a longitudinal study of later life. PD symptomatology was assessed using multiple methods, which were then used to predict health, marital satisfaction, and cognitive decline. All three sources contributed significantly to the prediction of these outcomes, with important implications for the assessment of older adults in research and clinical settings.

Personality, Psychopathology, and Psychotherapy: A Pre-specified Analysis Protocol for Confirmatory Research on Personality-Psychopathology Associations in Psychotherapy Outpatients

The role of personality trait variation in psychopathology and its influence on the outcome of psychotherapy is a burgeoning field. However, thus far most findings were based on controlled clinical trials that may only poorly represent real-world clinical settings due to highly selective samples mostly restricted to patients with major depression undergoing antidepressive medication. Focusing on personality and psychopathology in a representative naturalistic sample of psychotherapy patients is therefore worthwhile. Moreover, up to date hardly any confirmatory research has been conducted in this field. Strictly confirmatory research implies two major requirements: firstly, specific hypotheses, including expected effect sizes and statistical approaches to data analysis, must be detailed prior to inspection of the data, and secondly, corresponding protocols have to be published online and freely available. Here, we introduce a longitudinal naturalistic study aimed at examining, firstly, the prospective impact of baseline personality traits on the outcome of psychotherapy over a 6-month observation period; secondly, the stability and change in personality traits over time; thirdly, the association between longitudinal change in psychopathology and personality; fourthly, the agreement between self-reports and informant rating of personality; and fifthly, the predictive validity of personality self-reports compared to corresponding informant ratings. For it, we comprehensively state a priori hypotheses, predict the expected effect sizes and detail the statistical analyses that we intend to conduct to test these predictions. Such a stringent confirmatory design increases the transparency and objectivity of psychopathological research, which is necessary to reduce the rate of false-positive findings and to increase the yield of scientific research.

Agreement Between Self- and Informant-Reported Ratings of Personality Traits: The Moderating Effects of Major Depressive and/or Panic Disorder

Several personality traits are risk factors for psychopathology. As symptoms of psychopathology may influence self-rated personality, informant reports of personality are also sometimes collected. However, little is known about self-informant agreement in individuals with anxiety and/or depression. We investigated whether self-informant agreement on positive and negative affectivity (PA and NA) and anxiety sensitivity differs for individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) and/or panic disorder (PD; total n = 117). Informant- and self-reported PA was correlated among those with MDD, but not among those without MDD. Informant- and self-reported anxiety sensitivity was correlated among those with PD, but not among those without PD. Informant- and self-reported NA was correlated irrespective of diagnosis. Results indicate that the agreement of self- and informant-reported personality may vary as a function of depression and/or anxiety disorders.

Convergence of Self-Reports and Informant Reports on the Personality Assessment Screener

The present study is the first to investigate the Personality Assessment Screener, a brief self-report measure of risk for emotional and behavioral dysfunction, in relation to the informant report version of this instrument, the Personality Assessment Screener–Other. Among a sample of undergraduate roommate dyads ( N = 174), self-report and informant report total scores on the Personality Assessment Screener/Personality Assessment Screener–Other moderately converged ( r = 0.45), with generally greater agreement between perspectives observed for externalizing behaviors compared with internalizing distress. In addition, selves tended to report more psychological difficulties relative to informant ratings ( d = 0.45) with an average absolute discrepancy between sources of 6.31 ( SD = 4.96) out of a possible range of 66. Discrepancies between self-report and informant report were significantly associated with characteristics of the dyadic relationship (e.g., length of acquaintanceship) as well as the severity of self-reported psychological difficulties and positive impression management.

The validity of the multi-informant approach to assessing child and adolescent mental health

Child and adolescent patients may display mental health concerns within some contexts and not others (e.g., home vs. school). Thus, understanding the specific contexts in which patients display concerns may assist mental health professionals in tailoring treatments to patients' needs. Consequently, clinical assessments often include reports from multiple informants who vary in the contexts in which they observe patients' behavior (e.g., patients, parents, teachers). Previous meta-analyses indicate that informants' reports correlate at low-to-moderate magnitudes. However, is it valid to interpret low correspondence among reports as indicating that patients display concerns in some contexts and not others? We meta-analyzed 341 studies published between 1989 and 2014 that reported cross-informant correspondence estimates, and observed low-to-moderate correspondence (mean internalizing: r = .25; mean externalizing: r = .30; mean overall: r = .28). Informant pair, mental health domain, and measurement method moderated magnitudes of correspondence. These robust findings have informed the development of concepts for interpreting multi-informant assessments, allowing researchers to draw specific predictions about the incremental and construct validity of these assessments. In turn, we critically evaluated research on the incremental and construct validity of the multi-informant approach to clinical child and adolescent assessment. In so doing, we identify crucial gaps in knowledge for future research, and provide recommendations for "best practices" in using and interpreting multi-informant assessments in clinical work and research. This article has important implications for developing personalized approaches to clinical assessment, with the goal of informing techniques for tailoring treatments to target the specific contexts where patients display concerns. (PsycINFO Database Record

The validity of the multi-informant approach to assessing child and adolescent mental health

Child and adolescent patients may display mental health concerns within some contexts and not others (e.g., home vs. school). Thus, understanding the specific contexts in which patients display concerns may assist mental health professionals in tailoring treatments to patients' needs. Consequently, clinical assessments often include reports from multiple informants who vary in the contexts in which they observe patients' behavior (e.g., patients, parents, teachers). Previous meta-analyses indicate that informants' reports correlate at low-to-moderate magnitudes. However, is it valid to interpret low correspondence among reports as indicating that patients display concerns in some contexts and not others? We meta-analyzed 341 studies published between 1989 and 2014 that reported cross-informant correspondence estimates, and observed low-to-moderate correspondence (mean internalizing: r = .25; mean externalizing: r = .30; mean overall: r = .28). Informant pair, mental health domain, and measurement method moderated magnitudes of correspondence. These robust findings have informed the development of concepts for interpreting multi-informant assessments, allowing researchers to draw specific predictions about the incremental and construct validity of these assessments. In turn, we critically evaluated research on the incremental and construct validity of the multi-informant approach to clinical child and adolescent assessment. In so doing, we identify crucial gaps in knowledge for future research, and provide recommendations for "best practices" in using and interpreting multi-informant assessments in clinical work and research. This article has important implications for developing personalized approaches to clinical assessment, with the goal of informing techniques for tailoring treatments to target the specific contexts where patients display concerns. (PsycINFO Database Record