The Personality Inventory for DSM-5: Psychometric Evidence of Validity and Reliability-Updates

Investigating the associations between personality functioning, cognitive biases, and (non-)perceptive clinical high-risk symptoms of psychosis in the community

BACKGROUND

Beyond psychosis prediction, clinical high-risk (CHR-P) symptoms show clinical relevance by their association with functional impairments and psychopathology, including personality pathology. Impaired personality functioning is prioritized in recent dimensional personality disorder models (DSM-5, ICD-11), yet underexplored in CHR-P, as are associations with cognitive biases, which early studies indicate as possibly linking CHR-P-symptoms and personality pathology.

METHODS

A community sample (N = 444, 17-60 years, 61.8% female) was assessed via clinical telephone interview and online questionnaires. Using zero-inflated Poisson models, we explored associations of personality functioning, cognitive biases, current psychopathology, and psychosocial functioning with likelihood and severity of overall CHR-P, as well as perceptive (per-) and non-perceptive (nonper-)CHR-P-symptoms distinctly.

RESULTS

Higher nonper-CHR-P-symptom likelihood was associated with more impaired personality functioning and psychosocial functioning, while more severe cognitive biases were associated with higher CHR-P- and per-CHR-P-symptom likelihood, alongside higher CHR-P- and nonper-CHR-P-symptom severity. Further, more axis-I diagnoses were linked to higher CHR-P-, per-CHR-P-, and nonper-CHR-P-symptom likelihood, and younger age to higher CHR-P- and per-CHR-P-symptom severity, with CHR-P-symptom severity appearing higher in females. In an exploratory analysis, personality functioning elements identity and self-direction, and cognitive biases dichotomous thinking, emotional reasoning, and catastrophizing, respectively, showed multifaceted associations with nonper-CHR-P-symptom likelihood and overall CHR-P-symptom expression.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study supports the association of CHR-P-symptoms with multiple mental health factors. Findings suggest intricate associations between personality functioning impairments and cognitive biases with CHR-P-symptom expression in non-help-seeking populations, possibly contributing to different per-CHR-P- and nonper-CHR-P-symptom expression patterns. Therefore, they should be targeted in future longitudinal studies, aiming at better understanding CHR-P-manifestations to inform preventive intervention.

The sensitivity of the ICD-11 trait model to the symptoms of clinical disorders in young adults

Hierarchical psychopathology contributes to providing a broader picture of the links between emerging personality structures such as the DSM-5/ICD-11 trait models and clinical disorders. The present study aimed to predict the specific and general clinical symptoms by the less studied constructs of the ICD-11 model (negative affectivity, detachment, dissociality, disinhibition, and anankastia). Data from 642 young adults from Iran (63% female, 18-34 years) were collected by three mental symptom scales and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), which was recently used to harmonize the constructs of the DSM-5 and ICD-11 trait models. Multiple linear regressions showed that the ICD-11 model significantly predicted both the specific clinical symptoms (ranging from R2 = 0.15 to 0.40) and the general factor of clinical symptoms extracted by exploratory factor analysis (R2 = 0.40, all p < 0.001). Negative affectivity was the strongest construct correlated with both the specific symptoms (ranging from β = 0.36 to 0.69) and the general symptom factor (β = 0.59, all p < 0.001). Because the ICD-11 trait model is a practical structure related to the clinical psychopathology in young adults, screening for maladaptive traits can help clinicians in case formulation for diagnosis and treatment.

Internal consistency of measures for ICD-11 personality disorder severity and traits: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A number of measures and scales have been developed for the ICD-11 personality disorder (PD) diagnosis, including severity and trait dimensions. The present systematic review and meta-analysis sought to evaluate the internal consistency of these measures across different populations and cultures. A systematic search was conducted across four databases where relevant studies were subjected to explicit eligibility criteria resulting in 49 included studies and 370 effect sizes. Study characteristics were tabulated, their methodological quality was evaluated, and findings were synthesized using random effects meta-analysis. Findings overall indicated that measures of ICD-11 PD severity and trait domains have adequate levels of internal consistency (α/ω = 0.82, 95% CI [0.81; 0.83], I2 = 97.3%). Aspects such as sample, country, language, format, and measured construct were significant sources of variation. Additional meta-analyses revealed that some measures performed better than others for certain dimensions. Internal consistency was overall supported across ICD-11 measures of severity and trait domains. Future research should further investigate the interrater reliability, test-retest reliability and stability, and alignment with interview-based PD diagnoses.

Measurement invariance of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 across sex

Introduction

There has been an international movement towards dimensional models of personality disorders (PDs) in the last decades, which culminated in the publication of the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) in the Emerging Measures and Models section of the DSM-5. This model was accompanied by a APA-sanctioned Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) for the assessment of the AMPD pathological personality traits. One major issue with the assessment of personality disorders pertains to sex differences, and measurement invariance across sex in assessment instruments for PDs is necessary in order to ensure non-biased evaluations and to make valid comparisons between men and women. This study aimed to provide more information on measurement invariance across sex for the PID-5, using both the original scoring approach provided by the authors of the instrument and the scoring approach suggested by the APA in the published version of the PID-5.

Methods

This study was conducted with a sample of 2273 participants from the general Québec (Canada) adult population aged 18 to 90 years (M = 46.59; SD = 16.32; 51.8% women).

Results

The original scoring approach model showed good fit to data after freeing paths between certain traits and reached strict invariance. The APA scoring approach also showed good fit to data and reached strict invariance, but needed an adjustment (path freed between Emotional lability and Impulsivity in men) to reach scalar invariance.

Discussion

In line with previous research, the PID-5 is invariant across sex and the five-factor structure adjusts well to data. The APA scoring approach appears to attenuate the cross-loading problem observed with the original scoring approach. In light of these results, we recommend using the APA scoring approach to derive domain scores.

Profiles of theory of mind impairments and personality in clinical and community samples: integrating the alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders

Introduction

Deficits in theory of mind (ToM)-the ability to infer the mental states of others-have been linked to antagonistic traits in community samples. ToM deficits have also been identified in people with personality disorders (PD), although with conflicting evidence, partly due to the use of categorical diagnoses. The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) provides an opportunity for a more precise understanding of the interplay between ToM abilities and personality pathology. Therefore, the study aims to determine whether and how individuals with diverse ToM profiles differ regarding personality impairment (AMPD Criterion A) and pathological facets (AMPD Criterion B).

Method

Adults with PD (n = 39) and from the community (n = 42) completed tests assessing ToM skills and self-reported questionnaires assessing AMPD Criteria A and B. Hierarchical agglomerative and TwoStep cluster analyses were consecutively computed using scores and subscores from ToM tests as clustering variables. Multivariate analyses of variance were subsequently performed to compare the clusters on both AMPD Criteria. Five clinically and conceptually meaningful clusters were found. The most notable differences across clusters were observed for Intimacy and Empathy dysfunctions (Criterion A), as well as for the Deceitfulness, Callousness, and Hostility facets from the Antagonism domain and the Restricted affectivity facet from the Detachment domain (Criterion B).

Discussion

The results support the association between antagonistic personality facets and ToM deficits. However, clusters showing impairments in ToM abilities did not necessarily exhibit high levels of personality dysfunction or pathological facets, emphasizing that both constructs are not isomorphic. Nevertheless, specific profiles can help refine existing interventions to make them more sensitive and specific to the nature of ToM dysfunctions while considering personality functioning and facets.

Convergence between the dimensional PD models of ICD-11 and DSM-5: a meta-analytic approach

In the current diagnostic systems, the International Classification of Diseases-11th rev. (ICD-11) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5th ed. (DSM-5), the evaluation and diagnosis of personality disorder (PD) aim at dimensional examination of the severity of its dysfunction and the stylistic features that accompany it. Since their implementation, or even before, several measures have been developed to assess PD severity and traits in both models. Thus, convergent validity metrics have been reported with various PD measures; however, the convergence of the same constructs included in the measures of these two models remains undefined. The objective of the present review was to examine whether there is a sufficient relationship between PD measures of the ICD-11 and DSM-5 AMPD in the general population. For this meta-analytic review, systematic searches were conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar. We included studies that reported Pearson's r correlations without restrictions on language, age, sex, setting, type of sample, or informant of the measures. We excluded associations with anankastia, psychoticism or the borderline pattern because they were not comparable between one dimensional model and the other. We examined the quality of the evidence with the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies, and performed the random effects meta-analysis with the 'meta' package of the RStudio software. Of the 5,629 results returned by the search, 16 studies were eligible; and showed moderate quality. The risk of bias was manifested by not specifying the details of the sample, the recruitment environment, and the identification and control of confounding factors. Thirteen studies provided two or more correlations resulting in a total of 54 studies for meta-analysis. The overall effect size estimate (correlation) was moderate for the overall model (r = 0.62, 95% CI [0.57, 0.67], p < 0.0001, I2 = 97.6%). For the subgroup of associations, ICD-11 severity model and DSM-5 AMPD severity model, the correlation was also moderate (k = 10, r = 0.57, 95% CI [0.48; 0.66]; I2 = 92.9%); as for the subgroup of associations, ICD-11 traits model and DSM-5 AMPD traits model (k = 44, r = 0.63, 95% CI [0.57; 0.69], I2 = 97.9%). The convergent validity between measures of PD severity and traits between one diagnostic system and another has been demonstrated in this review and they can probably be used interchangeably because they also measure the same constructs. Future research can address the limitations of this study and review the evidence for the discriminant validity of these measures.

Bridging the ICD11 and the DSM-5 personality disorders classification systems: The role of the PID5BF + M

Introduction

In both the ICD-11 Classification of Personality Disorders and the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) personality disorders (PD) are characterized by impairments in self- and interpersonal functioning which distinguish the various levels of dysfunction. Moreover, pathological traits are used by these classification systems to define the stylistic expression of personality dysfunction. Negative affectivity, detachment, antagonism/dissociality, and disinhibition feature as trait domains in each of these models. However, there are also differences between the two models, namely, in the psychoticism domain, which does not feature as a personality trait domain in the ICD-11, and in the anankastia domain, corresponding to compulsivity in the DSM-5, which was removed from the final AMPD model. Furthermore, facets are acknowledged by the DSM-5 within each trait domain, while this does not occur in the ICD-11. In view of the similarity between these classification systems, their harmonization would be beneficial for the clinical profession. With this goal in mind, the PID5BF + M, an algorithm that assesses the DSM-5 and ICD-11 six trait domains and 18 facets, was developed and has proven to adequately characterize the ICD-11 trait domains by means of DSM-5 trait facets.

Methods

The current study compares a community sample (N = 280, M age = 48.01, 53.2% females) with a PD sample (N = 131, M age = 42.66, 45.0% females) along with the PID5BF + M, the LPFS-SR and the PID-5. Given that the PID5BF + M total can be seen as a measure of the level of personality dysfunction, strong relations between the PID5BF + M total and the LPFS-SR total are expected. Strong relations between the trait specifiers measured by the PID5BF + M and the PID-5 are also expected. Finally, the community and clinical samples are expected to differentiate by means of the dimensions assessed through the three afore-mentioned measures. The Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient was used to measure the strength and direction of associations between the PID5BF + M total and the LPFS-SR total and between the PID5BF + M and the PID-5 traits. Group differences were explored using the Mann-Whitney U test for independent samples.

Results

As expected, there were strong, significant, and positive relations between the measures. Furthermore, higher scores were observed in all the variables for the PD group against the community group.

Discussion

Although this study has limitations, its findings sustain that the PID5BF + M has potential to assess the severity of personality disfunction and to characterize the stylistic features of PD as they are conceived by both the ICD-11 and the DSM-5. Although more research is needed regarding the convergent validity of the PID5BF + M, this new test contributes to the harmonization of both systems and to parsimony in the assessment of PD, which is the main objective of clinical practice.

Maladaptive personality traits in patients with recent-onset psychosis: A case-control study using the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5)

BACKGROUND

The relationship between maladaptive personality traits and psychotic disorders in the early stages of disease has not been thoroughly investigated, even though it is essential for developing prevention and early intervention strategies.

METHODS

The five domains and the 25 facets of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) were compared between 102 patients with recent-onset psychosis (ROP) and 116 community subjects (C) with a general linear model including age and sex in the analyses. In addition, multiple linear regression models were used to identify which factors associated with the PID-5 domains in ROP, and correlation analyses were used to explore the relationship between personality traits.

RESULTS

Patients with ROP, compared to C, exhibited higher scores in four out of the five domains with medium effect sizes (Cohen's f² ≥ 0.15) in two of them: negative affect (NA, p = 0.013, f² = 0.04), detachment (DET, p < 0.001, f² = 0.15), disinhibition (DIS, p < 0.001, f² = 0.14) and psychoticism (PSY, p < 0.001, f² = 0.16). Significant group differences were observed in 15 of the 25 facets and the largest effects were observed in the facets of withdrawal (p ≤ 0.001, f² = 0.20), irresponsibility (p < 0.001, f² = 0.23) and unusual beliefs (p = 0.001, f² = 0.22). Interestingly, being on antidepressants and high scores on the positive subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) were associated with high scores of NA, antagonism (ANT) and PSY.

CONCLUSIONS

Maladaptive personality traits were prominent in persons with ROP. These findings suggest that personality traits might play a role in vulnerability to psychosis and highlight the importance of evaluating personality in the early stages of psychosis.

Maladaptive personality traits may link childhood trauma history to current internalizing symptoms

Research supports a strong relationship between childhood maltreatment and internalizing psychopathology (e.g., anxiety and depression), and features of personality are assumed to explain some of this relationship. In this study, we proposed a model in which maladaptive traits mediate the effect of childhood trauma history on internalizing symptoms in adult individuals. A mixed sample (N = 462) composed of 142 psychiatric patients and 320 community-dwelling individuals completed the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), and the Symptom Checklist (SCL-27) for internalizing psychopathology. The effect of childhood traumas explained 34% of the variance in internalizing symptoms while controlling for the influence of age and gender. The traits accounted for 78% of this effect, which was predominantly exerted through the domains of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, and Psychoticism, and specifically through the facets of Depressivity, Suspiciousness, Anxiousness, Perceptual Dysregulation, and Distractibility. This finding provides preliminary support for the proposed model indicating that the aforementioned maladaptive trait domains potentially function as mediating links by which childhood traumas are translated into internalizing symptoms in adulthood. However, these findings must be interpreted with caution due to the cross-sectional and retrospective mono-method design of this study. Clinical implications are discussed in relation to transdiagnostic treatment and the potential value of specifying trait domain specifiers in ICD-11 and DSM-5 models of personality disorders.

Psychometric study of the brazilian version of the personality inventory for DSM-5-paper-and-pencil version

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 - Self Reported Form (PID-5-SRF) operationalizes Criterion B of the personality alternative model of DSM-5 Section III and has already been cross-culturally adapted to many countries. The objective is to present evidence of validity and reliability of the Brazilian version of PID-5 (pencil-and-paper) in a Brazilian community sample. The sample was composed of 730 individuals from the general population [67.8% women, aged 33.84 (SD = ±15.2), 69.5% ≥ 12 years of schooling]. The participants were recruited in academic, organizational, healthcare, and business facilities in three Brazilian states. The snowball method was used. The PID-5 Brazilian version and the Revised NEO-Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI-R) were individually applied, and the retest was applied 30 days after. Satisfactory internal consistency (facets α ≥0.51; domains α ≥0.82) and test-retest reliability (facets ICC ≥ 0.45; domains ICC ≥0.76) were found, but a floor effect was verified in 97.7% of the items. Regarding convergent validity, strong correlations were found between the PID-5 and the NEO-FFI-R domains (r = -0.44 to 0.70). Ten facets did not fit the unidemensional structure. Confirmatory Factor Analyses did not present adequate goodness of fit, and Exploratory Analyses indicated that a five-factor model is more appropriate, though it presents some peculiarities concerning the original model. PID-5 also presented satisfactory goodness of fit to the personality hierarchical model. Generally, the instrument's psychometric indicators favor its use in the Brazilian context. However, some aspects demand attention, and more specific studies should be conducted to verify the impact of reverse-scored items, floor effect, and peculiarities of its internal structure (some facets' multidimensionality and interstitiality) concerning the original model.

Psychopathy: Current Knowledge and Future Directions

Research on psychopathy has progressed considerably in recent years against the backdrop of important advances in the broader field of clinical psychological science. My major aim in this review is to encourage integration of investigative work on dispositional, biobehavioral, and developmental aspects of psychopathy with counterpart work on general psychopathology. Using the triarchic model of psychopathy as a frame of reference, I offer perspective on long-standing debates pertaining to the conceptualization and assessment of psychopathy, discuss how dispositional facets of psychopathy relate to subdimensions of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology, and summarize findings from contemporary biobehavioral and developmental research on psychopathy. I conclude by describing a systematic strategy for coordinating biobehavioral-developmental research on psychopathy that can enable it to be informed by, and help inform, ongoing research on mental health problems more broadly. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, Volume 18 is May 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Differences between ICD-11 PTSD and complex PTSD on DSM-5 section III personality traits

Background: The formulations of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and the newly included disorder complex PTSD (CPTSD) in the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) have not been evaluated on a broad range of maladaptive personality traits. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD on maladaptive personality traits. Method: In a cross-sectional study of 106 Danish outpatients with ICD-10 PTSD, we used the International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) to identify patients with either ICD-11 PTSD or CPTSD (N = 84). We utilized the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) from the alternative model of personality disorders in DSM-5, section III, to evaluate personality trait differences between ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD. Furthermore, PID-5 was also used to investigate relationships between personality traits and ICD-11 PTSD/CPTSD symptom clusters. The Life Event Checklist was used to assess traumatic experiences, and the MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview was applied to assess comorbidity. Results: Patients with ICD-11 PTSD or CPTSD had elevated scores on personality traits indicative of internalizing psychopathology. However, higher impairment levels of the trait domains Negative Affectivity (d= 0.75) and Psychoticism (d = 0.80) discriminated patients with ICD-11 CPTSD from patients with PTSD. The PID-5 trait domain Detachment was moderately positively correlated to most of the ITQ symptom clusters and, the ITQ Negative Self-concept symptom cluster showed a relatively high number of significant correlations across all the PID-5 trait domains and facets. The PID-5 domain Negative Affectivity and almost all the encompassing facets were significantly correlated with DSO symptom clusters. Conclusions: The findings demonstrate the relevance of applying dimensional assessment of personality features to study the psychopathology of ICD-11 PTSD and CPTSD and potential differences. The results suggest that CPTSD is a more debilitating disorder than PTSD considering the severity of the personality features.

The ICD-11 Personality Disorder Trait Model Fits the Kurdish Population Better Than the DSM-5 Trait Model

The ICD-11 Classification of Personality Disorders and the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) operate with trait domains that contribute to the individual expression of personality disturbance (i.e., negative affectivity, detachment, dissociality, disinhibition, anankastia, and psychoticism). To date, these trait frameworks have not been investigated sufficiently in Middle Eastern cultures. Thus, the present study explored the structure of the ICD-11 and AMPD personality disorder (PD) trait domains in a large mixed sample from the Kurdistan zone of Iran. The ICD-11 and AMPD trait domains were operationalized using empirically supported algorithms for the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). The PID-5 was administered to a large mixed sample (N = 3,196) composed of 2,678 community and 518 clinical participants. Structural validity was investigated using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), whereas differential construct validity was explored by comparing clinical and community scores. Model fit and the expected factor structure were deemed appropriate for the ICD-11 trait model, but less adequate for the DSM-5 trait model (i.e., disinhibition did not emerge as a separate factor). All domain and facet scores showed significant differences between clinical and community subsamples with moderate to large effects, mostly for disinhibition and dissociality/antagonism while least for anankastia. The findings of the present study may suggest that the ICD-11 trait model is more cross-culturally fitting than the DSM-5 AMPD trait model, at least with respect to a large mixed sample from the region of Kurdistan. Accordingly, there is evidence for using PID-5 data for WHO ICD-11 purposes in this part of the World.