Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Three Measures of Depressive Personality Disorder

Expanding the utility of the malignant self-regard construct

The empirical and theoretical literature suggest that several proposed personality disorders (PDs) - Masochistic/Self-Defeating, Depressive, and Vulnerably Narcissistic - may be related through a common self-representation know as Malignant Self-Regard (MSR). To assess this construct, the MSR Questionnaire (MSRQ) was developed. Though its initial psychometric properties were very strong, the present study extended these findings by examining the relationship of the MSRQ with measures of other PDs and depressive subtypes, and by establishing four-week and eight-week test-retest reliability in two samples (Ns=840, 911) of undergraduate students. The MSRQ was internally consistent and temporally stable over four and eight weeks. It was positively correlated with measures of introjective and anaclitic depression, measures of Self-Defeating, Depressive, and Vulnerably Narcissistic personalities (rs ranging between 0.60 and 0.82), and other select PDs. After controlling for depressive symptoms and self-esteem, the highest remaining partial correlations were with Vulnerably Narcissistic, Self-Defeating, Depressive, and Avoidant personalities. A factor analysis of the MSRQ with measures of other PDs yielded a two-factor solution, with MSR loading most strongly on one factor, along with Vulnerably Narcissistic, Avoidant, Depressive, and Self-Defeating personalities. It is concluded that MSR is a psychometrically supported construct that might have good clinical utility in explaining personality pathology that has historically been difficult to assess.

Malignant self-regard: accounting for commonalities in vulnerably narcissistic, depressive, self-defeating, and masochistic personality disorders

Several personality disorders (PDs) have been of interest in the clinical literature, yet failed to have been adequately represented in the diagnostic manuals. Some of these are masochistic, self-defeating, depressive, and narcissistic PDs. The theoretical and empirical relationships among these disorders are reviewed. It is proposed that a particular type of self-structure, malignant self-regard (MSR), may account for similarities among all of them and provide a better framework upon which to understand the nature of these personality types and their discrimination from related constructs. Subsequently, a questionnaire to assess MSR was created and evaluated for its psychometric properties. The measure was found to be reliable (Cronbach's alpha=.93) and valid, given its correlations with measures of self-defeating, depressive, and vulnerably narcissistic personalities (rs range from .66 to .76). MSR also can be meaningfully differentiated from a nomological network of related constructs, including neuroticism, extraversion, depression, and grandiose narcissism. The utility of assessing self-structures, such as MSR, in the diagnostic manuals is discussed.

New directions for an old construct: Depressive personality research in the DSM-5 era

The DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group has suggested that the DSM-IV depressive personality disorder (DPD) construct be assessed within a proposed set of trait domains, which include anxiousness, depressivity, and anhedonia, and that the diagnostic category itself be removed from the DSM-5. A review of studies on DPD has demonstrated many challenges and limitations to DPD research, despite strong evidence of its validity and clinical utility. Nevertheless, there remains much interest in how a depressive personality construct fits into a dimensionalized framework of assessing psychopathology. In this paper, I offer three major research directions that can help advance our understanding of the depressive personality construct. These directions can inform researchers and clinicians how depressive personality fits within broad trait dimensions of classification, as well as the internal psychological processes, dynamics and content that characterize this type of psychopathology.

Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the diagnostic interview for depressive personality

The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Spanish-language version of the diagnostic interview for depressive personality (DIDP). The DIDP was administered to 328 consecutive outpatients and the test-retest and inter-rater reliability were assessed. Factor analysis was used in search of factors capable of explaining the scale and a cutoff point was established. The DIDP scales showed adequate Cronbach's α values and acceptable test-retest and inter-rater reliability coefficients. Convergent and discriminant validity were explored, the latter with respect to avoidant and borderline personality disorders. The results of the factor analysis were consistent with the four-factor structure of the DIDP scales. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed the area under the curve to be 0.848. We found 30 to be a good cutoff point, with a sensitivity of 74.5% and a specificity of 78.5%. The DIDP proved to be a reliable and valid instrument for assessing depressive personality disorder, at least among our outpatients. The psychometric properties of the DIDP support its clinical usefulness in assessing depressive personality.

Genetic and environmental contributions to the co-occurrence of depressive personality disorder and DSM-IV personality disorders

One of the main controversies with regard to depressive personality disorder (DPD) concerns the co-occurrence with the established DSM-IV personality disorders (PDs). The main aim of this study was to examine to what extent DPD and the DSM-IV PDs share genetic and environmental risk factors, using multivariate twin modeling. The DSM-IV Structured Interview for Personality was applied to 2,794 young adult twins. Paranoid PD from Cluster A, borderline PD from Cluster B, and all three PDs from Cluster C were independently and significantly associated with DPD in multiple regression analysis. The genetic correlations between DPD and the other PDs were strong (.53-.83), while the environmental correlations were moderate (.36-.40). Close to 50% of the total variance in DPD was disorder specific. However, only 5% was due to disorder-specific genetic factors, indicating that a substantial part of the genetic vulnerability to DPD also increases the vulnerability to other PDs.

The Swedish Depressive Personality Disorder Inventory: psychometrics and clinical correlates from a DSM-IV and proposed DSM-5 perspective

BACKGROUND

Depressive personality is commonly seen in clinical practice, and today only one exclusive self-report instrument-the Depressive Personality Disorder Inventory (DPDI)-is available for its assessment based on the DSM-IV description of the construct.

AIMS

The purpose of this research was to evaluate a Swedish version of this measure (DPDI-Swe) in terms of its reliability, internal structure, and convergent validity using related variables from the DSM-IV criteria for depressive personality disorder (DPD) and the proposed DPD trait set for DSM-5.

METHODS

A non-clinical sample of 255 adults in southern Sweden completed a self-report package, which, in addition to DPD, included the assessment of self-esteem, optimism, hope, rumination, worry, depression, and anxiety. Quality of life was also measured.

RESULTS

Results indicated that the DPDI-Swe was internally consistent (α = 0.96). Exploratory factor analysis with oblique rotation yielded three components, together accounting for 48.21% of the variance in DPDI-Swe scores. There were strong positive associations between the DPDI-Swe and measures of depression, anxiety, rumination, and worry, and strong negative associations between the DPDI-Swe and measures of self-esteem, optimism, hope, and quality of life. These significant relationships remained, albeit slightly diminished, after statistically controlling for current depressed mood.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The DPDI-Swe appears to be a reliable and valid measure of DPD, and it is available for clinical and research use.

Mood and Global Symptom Changes among Psychotherapy Clients with Depressive Personality

The present study assessed the rate of depressive personality (DP), as measured by the self-report instrument depressive personality disorder inventory (DPDI), among 159 clients entering psychotherapy at an outpatient university clinic. The presenting clinical profile was evaluated for those with and without DP, including levels of depressed mood, other psychological symptoms, and global severity of psychopathology. Clients were followed naturalistically over the course of therapy, up to 40 weeks, and reassessed on these variables again after treatment. Results indicated that 44 percent of the sample qualified for DP prior to treatment, and these individuals had a comparatively more severe and complex presenting disposition than those without DP. Mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to examine between-groups changes on mood and global severity over time, with those with DP demonstrating larger reductions on both outcome variables, although still showing more symptoms after treatment, than those without DP. Only eleven percent of the sample continued to endorse DP following treatment. These findings suggest that in routine clinical situations, psychotherapy may benefit individuals with DP.

Affect regulation and Depressive Personality Disorder

Depressive Personality Disorder (DPD) has been under consideration for inclusion in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders since 1994; yet, few studies have been published that test whether those with DPD have affective experiences that are characterized exclusively by depression and negative affect. One hundred ninety-seven undergraduate students were interviewed for DPD and Borderline Personality Disorder with the Personality Disorder Interview for DSM-IV (Widiger, Mangine, Corbitt, Ellis, & Thomas, 1995), in order to control for frequently co-occurring BPD which is characterized by affective lability. Participants also were administered measures of affective lability, affective intensity, anxious and depressive states, and more trait-like manifestations of depression, anxiety, and anger. Results indicate that those with DPD may be described as having a mood state characterized by transitions from a baseline neutral mood to one of anxiety, with their experiences being more prominently depressed and dysphoric. They also have tendencies toward angry hostility, though they may not report frequent shifts from a baseline neutral mood to anger. Those with DPD also report intense, frequent experiences of depression and dysphoria, with many shifts between depression and anxiety.

Depressive Personality Disorder: A Comparison of Three Self-Report Measures

Depressive personality disorder (DPD) was included in the appendix of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition ( DSM-IV) for further study. Questions abound regarding this disorder in terms of its distinctiveness from extant diagnostic constructs and clinical significance.This study examines the interrelations between three assessments of DPD and their relations to pathological personality traits and disorders in a sample of undergraduates ( N = 182). The DPD indices evinced adequate convergence with each other (mean r = .60) and similar pathological personality profiles. The authors also tested the incremental validity of the DPD scores in relation to psychological functioning, after controlling for depressive symptoms and the DSM-IV personality disorders (PDs). The DPD scores manifested limited incremental validity, mainly in the form of predicting lower levels of positive affectivity. Our results suggest that this is not specific to DPD, however, as the official PDs also manifested limited incremental validity.

What should become of depressive personality disorder in DSM-V?

Depressive personality disorder (DPD) has been under consideration for inclusion in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders for many years. The wealth of empirical studies on the validity of DPD has raised many questions about the validity of the DPD construct and its measures. This article specifically reviews studies on the validity of that construct and how it is measured. Although the evidence supports the idea that DPD is a viable diagnostic category, there remain significant challenges to its assessment. These findings are discussed in the context of some potential changes that may occur in the classification and diagnosis of personality disorders in DSM-V.

Comparison of prototypic cases of depressive personality disorder and dysthymic disorder

Although depressive personality disorder (DPD) was included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) appendix as a proposed category needing further research, there are concerns that it overlaps excessively with dysthymic disorder (DD). The purpose of this investigation was to identify the characteristic features of representative patients with DPD and patients with DD, and to determine whether they could be distinguished by their symptoms. Two matched samples of psychologists (n=57, n=48) identified a prototypic patient with DPD or DD, provided demographic and treatment information about the patient, and rated the patient's symptoms on a series of mood and personality disorder symptoms taken from the DSM-IV and the literature. When composite descriptions were constructed using the highest rated symptoms, there was considerable overlap in symptoms of identified DPD and DD patients. The DSM-IV research criteria for DPD provided the best description of the DPD patients; however, there was a high degree of correlation between DPD and DD criteria sets. There was also considerable comorbidity, with the majority of the patients in both groups meeting criteria for DPD and DD. However, there was a significant difference in comorbid diagnoses (and other differences in family history, outcome, and treatment history that failed to reach the more stringent level of statistical significance, i.e., p<.001) suggesting that there may be some important differences between DPD and DD. Nevertheless, the symptom ratings imply blurred boundaries between DPD and DD, suggesting the need for clearer differentiation between the two disorders or the need to adopt an alternative model of classification.

Depressive personality disorder, dysthymia, and their relationship to perfectionism

This paper reports the results of two studies in a nonclinical (n=105) and primary care outpatient sample (n=110), in which Depressive Personality Disorder (DPD), Dysthymia, and depression were assessed for their distinctive relationship with perfectionism. Results from both studies found that self-reported DPD, Dysthymia, and depressive symptoms were all intercorrelated, and that DPD, Dysthymia, and depressive symptoms were correlated with three dimensions of perfectionism-Concern over Mistakes, Doubts about Actions, and Parental Criticism. In the nonclinical sample, variance in measures of DPD was predicted by measures of perfectionism after controlling for depression and Dysthymia symptoms. A similar pattern of findings was observed in the primary care sample. This relationship with perfectionism did not occur when Dysthymia or depressive symptoms were predicted. Nevertheless, much of the variance in measures of DPD, Dysthymia, and depressive symptoms is associated with each other and not perfectionism. It is concluded that a common factor or set of factors underlies these disorders, but that DPD may be more strongly related to perfectionism than Dysthymia and depression. As a common factor(s) is identified, measures of DPD and Dysthymia may be refined, thereby increasing the discriminant validity of their measures.

Measuring shame and guilt by self-report questionnaires: a validation study

Quantitative assessment of shame and guilt using self-report questionnaires can help to understand the role of these emotions in various mental disorders. However, shame and guilt measures have predominantly been tested among healthy subjects that usually show low levels of guilt and shame. Thus, little is known about the comparative validity of different shame and guilt questionnaires in a population of shame- and guilt-prone persons with mental illness as compared to healthy subjects. This study used the Test of Self-Conscious Affect (TOSCA-3), the Personal Feelings Questionnaire (PFQ-2) and the Experiential Shame Scale (ESS) among 60 women with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and 60 healthy women. Intercorrelations of shame-proneness, guilt-proneness and state shame as well as their correlations with self-efficacy, empowerment, state and trait-anxiety, experiential avoidance, depression, and general psychopathology were assessed. In both groups, shame-proneness was moderately related to guilt-proneness, both as assessed by the TOSCA-3 and the PFQ-2. For the TOSCA-3, among healthy subjects shame-proneness was significantly correlated with other constructs while guilt-proneness was not. This difference turned largely insignificant among women with BPD. For the PFQ-2, shame- and guilt-proneness showed similar correlational patterns with other constructs in both groups. The guilt-proneness scale of the TOSCA-3 showed poor internal consistency. State shame (ESS) was strongly related to state anxiety in both groups, and its correlations with other constructs were similar to state anxiety. The discriminant validity of the TOSCA-3 to distinguish between shame- and guilt-proneness may be diminished in clinical samples. The measure of state shame (ESS) showed a large overlap with state anxiety.

Disentangling depressive personality disorder from avoidant, borderline, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders

Several studies have found that 3 personality disorders (PDs) tend to share moderate rates of comorbidity with depressive PD: avoidant, borderline, and obsessive-compulsive. This study sought to evaluate the diagnostic criteria of each disorder in an effort to understand where areas of overlap may occur and to modify criteria sets where reasonable to reduce any degree of overlap. One thousand two hundred psychiatric outpatients were interviewed with the Structured Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders. The highest degree of comorbidity was observed between avoidant PD and depressive PD. Logistic regression analyses indicated that 2 criteria-avoidant criterion 5 and depressive criterion 2-could be removed from the diagnostic criteria sets and reduce the rates of overlap by as much as 15%. A factor analysis of the criteria of all 4 PDs indicated that there is a common clustering of many of the symptoms of avoidant, borderline, depressive, and obsessive-compulsive PDs and that borderline symptoms tend to cluster together most consistently. Avoidant and obsessive-compulsive personality symptoms clustered in ways that may reflect a problem of how to engage with others, suggestive of an approach-avoidance conflict. Depressive PD symptoms clustered in a way suggestive of problems with anger that is directed toward oneself and others. The factor analysis results suggest that an organization of symptoms around themes of conflict may provide useful ways of understanding the personality patterns of these 4 disorders.

Depressive personality and dysthymia: evaluating symptom and syndrome overlap

BACKGROUND

Depressive Personality (DP) is being evaluated for future inclusion in DSM. One recurring issue has been conceptual and empirical redundancy with Dysthymia (i.e., Dysthymic Disorder; DD).

METHODS

The symptom and syndrome overlap of DP and DD were tested in a clinical sample (N = 125) using both self-report and clinician ratings.

RESULTS

Confirmatory factor analyses of the DP and DD symptoms indicated that models which separate these two syndromes had a better fit than a model in which all symptoms were classified together, particularly for the clinician-rated data. At the same time, the syndromes were highly correlated. Binary diagnostic analysis showed that over 80% of the individuals meeting criteria for DP also met criteria for DD. As predicted, the best fit was obtained when the 'psychological' symptoms of DD-- low self-esteem and feelings of hopelessness-- were allowed to be part of both syndromes, and 82% of patients who met criteria for both DP and DD endorsed these two symptoms.

LIMITATIONS

Clinical ratings rather than structured diagnostic interviews were used. As well, some models required modification to improve fit.

CONCLUSIONS

Depressive personality traits can be empirically separated from DD symptoms, but including DP as a categorical diagnosis would lead to a high degree of diagnostic overlap. Much of this overlap is due to sharing psychological features in common. Revisions in the diagnostic system should find a way to incorporate depressive personality traits without insisting that they be diagnosed in a categorical manner.

Functional health status and its relationship to depressive personality disorder, dysthymia, and major depression: preliminary findings

Controversy continues on the extent to which depressive personality disorder (DPD) and dysthymic disorder (DYST) may be differentiated. Although affective disorders often are accompanied by changes in functional health status, to date no study has examined how functional health associated with affective disorders may assist in differentiating the two disorders. In this study, we hypothesized that measures of DPD would have fewer correlations with functional health status than would measures of DYST and major depressive disorder (MDD). African American women (n=110) completed questionnaires that assessed for depressive disorders, somatic concerns, and physical health. Measures of DPD, DYST, and MDD were all significantly correlated with functional health status. When symptoms of MDD were controlled, DYST was more associated with functional health status than was a DSM-IV measure of DPD, although a self-report measure of DPD--the Depressive Personality Disorder Inventory [DPDI; Huprich et al., 1996: J Clin Psychol 52:152-159]--remained significantly correlated with functional health status. When symptoms of DYST were controlled, DSM-IV symptoms of DPD were not strongly associated with functional health status, although measures of MDD and the DPDI were correlated with functional health status. We concluded that despite the overlap in depressive symptoms and functional health status, DPD may be less associated with functional health status in a primary care population than DYST and MDD. Implications for the assessment of DPD are provided.