1
|
Crego C, Oltmanns JR, Widiger TA. FFMPD scales: Comparisons with the FFM, PID-5, and CAT-PD-SF. Psychol Assess 2019; 30:62-73. [PMID: 29323514 DOI: 10.1037/pas0000495] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
A series of 8 Five Factor Model Personality Disorder (FFMPD) scales have been developed to assess, from the perspective of the Five Factor Model (FFM), the maladaptive traits included within DSM-5 Section II personality disorders. An extensive body of FFMPD research has accumulated. However, for the most part, each study has been confined to the scales within 1 particular FFMPD Inventory. The current study considered 36 FFMPD scales, at least 1 from each of the 8 FFMPD inventories, including 8 scales considered to be from neuroticism, 8 from extraversion, 5 from openness, 8 from agreeableness, and 7 from conscientiousness. Their convergent, discriminant, and structural relationship with the FFM was considered, and compared with the structural relationship with the FFM obtained by the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Computerized Adaptive Test-Personality Disorder-Static Form (CAT-PD-SF). Support for an FFM structure was obtained (albeit with agreeableness defining 1 factor and antagonism a separate factor). Similarities and differences across the FFMPD, PID-5, and CAT-PD-SF scales were highlighted. (PsycINFO Database Record
Collapse
|
2
|
Widiger TA, Bach B, Chmielewski M, Clark LA, DeYoung C, Hopwood CJ, Kotov R, Krueger RF, Miller JD, Morey LC, Mullins-Sweatt SN, Patrick CJ, Pincus AL, Samuel DB, Sellbom M, South SC, Tackett JL, Watson D, Waugh MH, Wright AGC, Zimmermann J, Bagby RM, Cicero DC, Conway CC, De Clercq B, Docherty AR, Eaton NR, Forbush KT, Haltigan JD, Ivanova MY, Latzman RD, Lynam DR, Markon KE, Reininghaus U, Thomas KM. Criterion A of the AMPD in HiTOP. J Pers Assess 2018; 101:345-355. [PMID: 29746190 DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2018.1465431] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
The categorical model of personality disorder classification in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed. [DSM-5]; American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ) is highly and fundamentally problematic. Proposed for DSM-5 and provided within Section III (for Emerging Measures and Models) was the Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) classification, consisting of Criterion A (self-interpersonal deficits) and Criterion B (maladaptive personality traits). A proposed alternative to the DSM-5 more generally is an empirically based dimensional organization of psychopathology identified as the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP; Kotov et al., 2017 ). HiTOP currently includes, at the highest level, a general factor of psychopathology. Further down are the five domains of detachment, antagonistic externalizing, disinhibited externalizing, thought disorder, and internalizing (along with a provisional sixth somatoform dimension) that align with Criterion B. The purpose of this article is to discuss the potential inclusion and placement of the self-interpersonal deficits of the DSM-5 Section III Criterion A within HiTOP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Bo Bach
- b Psychiatric Research Unit, Slagelse Psychiatric Hospital , Slagelse , Denmark
| | | | | | - Colin DeYoung
- e Department of Psychology , University of Minnesota
| | | | - Roman Kotov
- g Department of Psychiatry , Stony Brook University
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Aaron L Pincus
- l Department of Psychology , Pennsylvania State University
| | | | - Martin Sellbom
- n Department of Psychology , University of Otago , Dunedin , New Zealand
| | - Susan C South
- m Department of Psychological Sciences , Purdue University
| | | | - David Watson
- d Department of Psychology , University of Notre Dame
| | - Mark H Waugh
- p Department of Psychology , University of Tennessee
| | | | | | - R Michael Bagby
- s Departments of Psychology and Psychiatry , University of Toronto , Toronto , Canada
| | - David C Cicero
- t Department of Psychology , University of Hawaii at Manoa
| | | | - Barbara De Clercq
- v Department of Developmental, Personality, and Social Psychology Ghent University , Ghent , Belgium
| | | | | | | | - J D Haltigan
- z Department of Psychiatry , University of Toronto , Toronto , Canada
| | | | | | - Donald R Lynam
- m Department of Psychological Sciences , Purdue University
| | | | - Ulrich Reininghaus
- ad Department of Psychiatry and Psychology , Masstricht University , Maastricht , The Netherlands , and Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College , London
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Oltmanns JR, Widiger TA. A self-report measure for the ICD-11 dimensional trait model proposal: The personality inventory for ICD-11. Psychol Assess 2018; 30:154-169. [PMID: 28230410 PMCID: PMC5930359 DOI: 10.1037/pas0000459] [Citation(s) in RCA: 92] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Proposed for the 11th edition of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is a dimensional trait model for the classification of personality disorder (Tyrer, Reed, & Crawford, 2015). The ICD-11 proposal consists of 5 broad domains: negative affective, detachment, dissocial, disinhibition, and anankastic (Mulder, Horwood, Tyrer, Carter, & Joyce, 2016). Several field trials have examined this proposal, yet none has included a direct measure of the trait model. The purpose of the current study was to develop and provide initial validation for the Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (PiCD), a self-report measure of this proposed 5-domain maladaptive trait model. Item selection and scale construction proceeded through 3 initial data collections assessing potential item performance. Two subsequent studies were conducted for scale validation. In Study 1, the PiCD was evaluated in a sample of 259 MTurk participants (who were or had been receiving mental health treatment) with respect to 2 measures of general personality structure: The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised and the 5-Dimensional Personality Test. In Study 2, the PiCD was evaluated in an additional sample of 285 participants with respect to 2 measures of maladaptive personality traits: The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 and the Computerized Adaptive Test for Personality Disorders. Study 3 provides an item-level exploratory structural equation model with the combined samples from Studies 1 and 2. The results are discussed with respect to the validity of the measure and the potential benefits for future research in having a direct, self-report measure of the ICD-11 trait proposal. (PsycINFO Database Record
Collapse
|
5
|
Calvo N, Valero S, Sáez-Francàs N, Gutiérrez F, Casas M, Ferrer M. Borderline Personality Disorder and Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5): Dimensional personality assessment with DSM-5. Compr Psychiatry 2016; 70:105-11. [PMID: 27624429 DOI: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2016.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2016] [Revised: 06/30/2016] [Accepted: 07/01/2016] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Borderline personality disorder (BPD) diagnosis has been considered highly controversial. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5) proposes an alternative hybrid diagnostic model for personality disorders (PD), and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) has adequate psychometric properties and has been widely used for the assessment of the dimensional component. METHODS Our aim was to analyze the utility of the personality traits presented in Section III of the DSM-5 for BPD diagnosis in an outpatient clinical sample, using the Spanish version of the PID-5. Two clinical samples were studied: BPD sample (n=84) and non-BPD sample (n=45). Between-sample differences in PID-5 scores were analyzed. RESULTS The BPD sample obtained significantly higher scores in most PID-5 trait facets and domains. Specifically and after regression logistic analyses, in BPD patients, the domains of Negative Affectivity and Disinhibition, and the trait facets of emotional lability, [lack of] restricted affectivity, and impulsivity were more significantly associated with BPD. CONCLUSIONS Although our findings are only partially consistent with the algorithm proposed by DSM-5, we consider that the combination of the PID-5 trait domains and facets could be useful for BPD dimensional diagnosis, and could further our understanding of BPD diagnosis complexity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalia Calvo
- Psychiatry Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, CIBERSAM, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
| | - Sergi Valero
- Psychiatry Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, CIBERSAM, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Institut de Recerca, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Naia Sáez-Francàs
- Psychiatry Department, Sant Rafael Hospital, CIBERSAM, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Miguel Casas
- Psychiatry Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, CIBERSAM, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Marc Ferrer
- Psychiatry Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, CIBERSAM, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
McGee Ng SA, Bagby RM, Goodwin BE, Burchett D, Sellbom M, Ayearst LE, Dhillon S, Yiu S, Ben-Porath YS, Baker S. The Effect of Response Bias on the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5). J Pers Assess 2015; 98:51-61. [DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2015.1096791] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
|
9
|
Abstract
The Five Factor Obsessive Compulsive Inventory (FFOCI) was developed in part to facilitate a shift from the categorical classification of personality disorder to a dimensional trait model, more specifically, the five-factor model (FFM). Questions though have been raised as to whether obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) can be understood as a maladaptive variant of FFM conscientiousness. The present study provides a further validation of the FFOCI, emphasizing in particular its association with FFM conscientiousness, as well as comparing alternative measures and models of OCPD. A total of 380 undergraduates (obtained in two samples of 274 and 106), including 146 oversampled for OCPD traits (93 for the first sample and 53 for the second), completed the FFOCI, measures of general personality, OCPD trait scales, and alternative measures of OCPD. Results supported the validity of the FFOCI as a measure of OCPD and maladaptive variants of FFM traits, as well as identifying substantive differences among the alternative measures of OCPD, particularly with respect to their relationship with FFM conscientiousness, antagonism, and introversion.
Collapse
|