A General Factor of Personality (GFP) in the Personality Disorders: Three Studies of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology — Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ)

Toward an Integrated Model of Pathological Personality Traits: Common Hierarchical Structure of the PID-5 and the DAPP-BQ

A dimensional classification seems to be the next move in the personality disorders field. However, it is not clear whether there is one dimensional model or many, or whether the currently available dimensional instruments measure the same traits. To help clarify these issues, the authors administered the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP-BQ) to 414 psychiatric outpatients. Factor analyses showed that a common hierarchical structure underlies both instruments, even if each one measures slightly different aspects of it. Disattenuated correlations indicated that, at the lower order level, two thirds of the PID-5 and DAPP-BQ facets measure essentially the same traits, although the pairings were not exactly as predicted. Among higher order domains, only PID Negative Affectivity and Detachment converged unambiguously with DAPP Emotional Dysregulation and Inhibition. Overall, the PID-5 and the DAPP-BQ reflect, with small divergences, one and the same structure of pathological personality traits.

Traits across the personality hierarchy differentially relate to positive and negative affect: Evidence for the predictive validity of empirically derived meta-traits

There is increasing interest in the construct validity of higher-order domains of the Big Five personality traits. A total of 831 persons from the Swiss population completed the International Personality Item Pool and an adaptation of the Positive and Negative Affect Scales. Using Goldberg's bass-ackwards method, we found evidence for the general factor of personality (GFP) and the two meta-traits of positive emotionality (blend of low neuroticism and high extraversion) and constraint (blend of high agreeableness and conscientiousness). In association with positive affect, the explanatory power of the GFP (r = 0.43) and positive emotionality (r = 0.37) was largely superior to extraversion (r = 0.24), conscientiousness (r = 0.18), agreeableness (r = 0.09) and openness (r = 0.04), although not neuroticism (r = -0.34). In association with negative affect, neuroticism (r = 0.41), the GFP (r = -0.36) and positive emotionality (r = -0.35) were the most powerful single predictors. We conclude that the higher-order structure of personality is best explained by the meta-traits of positive emotionality and constraint, which correspond closely to the well-established superfactors of internalizing and externalizing. We further demonstrate that these have substantial criterion validity when broad positive and negative affect is the outcome of interest. These findings help to relate Big Five meta-traits to pathological personality. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Diagnostic Agreement Between Clinicians and Clients: The Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the SWAP-200 and MCMI-III Personality Disorder Scales

A particularly controversial aspect in the field of personality assessment is the use of self-report measures, versus clinicians' evaluations, for diagnosing personality disorder (PD). No studies have systematically documented the agreement between these sources for the entire array of DSM-5 PDs using comprehensive measures and experienced clinicians' judgments. The present work fills this gap by indexing the agreement between patients' self-descriptions and clinicians' judgments, relying on standardized and thorough PD instruments. The Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure-200 (SWAP-200; Westen & Shedler, 1999a, 1999b) and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (Millon, Davis, & Millon, 1997) were both completed in a clinical series of 56 adult outpatients. Analyses highlighted moderate correlations between the two measures for the 10 DSM-5 PDs (Mdn = .35). Agreement was highest for psychological features that are more easily observable by the clinicians. Furthermore, results revealed problematic discriminant validity between the two instruments.

Does unstable mood increase risk of suicide? Theory, research and practice

BACKGROUND

Suicide represents a substantial problem, with significant societal and personal impact. The identification of factors influencing suicide risk is an important step in preventing self-harming behaviour. In this article the authors explore whether emotional instability increases risk of suicide, beyond that of mood intensity.

METHOD

This article provides a summary of existing theory and indirect evidence in support of an association between emotional instability and suicidality. A systematic literature search (Embase, Medline, PsychInfo) was carried out on literature conducted up to October, 2011. Meta-analysis was used to assess the strength of the proposed association.

RESULTS

The systematic search identified 20 journal articles meeting the inclusion criteria, including retrospective questionnaire design studies and research conducted across several time-points. Meta-analysis revealed a moderate association, which remained statistically significant even when only including studies conducted over multiple time-points. This effect was attenuated, but remained significant, when controlling for study selection bias.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective questionnaire studies failed to adequately control for mood level. Little is still currently understood about the types of emotional instability (e.g., dysoria, anxiety) most associated with suicidality.

CONCLUSIONS

Future avenues of investigation include micro- to macro-longitudinal research and the differentiation of emotion subtypes and instability metrics. Momentary assessment techniques may help to detect subtle fluctuations in mood leading to more effective and immediate intervention. Psychosocial intervention strategies for treating unstable emotions are discussed.

Emotion and Behavior: A General Factor of Personality From the EAS Temperament Survey and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire

The mothers of 603 pairs of 3- to 13-year-old twins in Korea completed the Emotionality, Activity, Sociability (EAS) Temperament Survey and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in reference to their twins. Principal factor analysis of the seven scales comprising these measures yielded a general factor on which all the scales had moderate to large loadings. Univariate behavioral genetic analyses showed that individual differences on this general factor could best be accounted for by additive genetic and non-shared environmental effects, with a heritability of 53%. The results strengthen the construct validity of the general factor of personality (GFP) by extracting this higher-order dimension from disparate measures, and have implications regarding social desirability criticisms applied to the GFP theory.