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

The predictive validity of the DSM-5 alternative model for borderline personality disorder: Associations with coping strategies, general distress, rumination, and suicidal ideation across one year

The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) characterizes borderline personality disorder (BPD) in part as a constellation of maladaptive personality trait facets including emotional lability, anxiousness, separation insecurity, depressivity, impulsivity, risk-taking, and hostility. Previous studies have supported the construct validity of AMPD-BPD; however, research examining its predictive validity in relation to theoretically and clinically relevant constructs remains needed. The present study investigates the longitudinal relationships between AMPD-BPD and general distress, rumination, and suicidal ideation, as well as adaptive and maladaptive coping targeted in Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) in a sample of participants with elevated BPD symptomology. We also examined if dysfunctional coping skill use at 9-month follow-up explained the relationship between baseline BPD traits and outcomes at 1-year. There were significant correlations between baseline trait BPD with dysfunctional coping skill use at 9-month follow-up and psychological distress and rumination at 1-year follow-up. Dysfunctional skill use exhibited a significant indirect effect in the association between trait BPD and rumination after 1 year. The findings of this study support the construct validity of AMPD-BPD that can inform treatment and research.

Reliability and validity of the Hungarian version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5)

Objectives and methods

In order to assess the internal consistency, fit indexes, test-retest reliability, and validity of the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) and its associations with age, gender, and education, 471 non-clinical (69,6% female; mean age: 37,63) and 314 clinical participants (69,7% female, mean age: 37,41) were administered the Hungarian translation of the PID-5, as well as the SCL-90-R and the SCID-II Personality Questionnaire.

Results

We found that; (a) temporal consistency of the Hungarian PID-5 was confirmed by one-month test-retest reliability analysis, (b) validity of the PID-5 instrument is acceptable in the clinical and the non-clinical sample as well, based on significant correlations with SCID-II and SCL-90-R, (c) PID-5 facets’ and domains’ associations with gender, age, and level of education are in accordance with previous findings.

Conclusion

These findings support that the Hungarian PID-5 is a reliable and valid instrument for both clinical and non-clinical populations.

Psychometric Properties of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 in a Romanian Community Sample

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) evaluates 25 maladaptive personality traits proposed in the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders. The questionnaire has been extensively investigated and validated in several languages. The current research sought to examine the psychometric properties of the instrument in a sample of nonclinical Romanian participants (N = 1276). Results indicated excellent internal consistency for the domain level, and very good reliability for the facet level. The assumption of unidimensionality was supported at both the domain and facet levels, apart from Risk Taking. Two domain scoring methods were also compared. One of them takes into consideration all the 25 lower order facets, whereas the other uses only 15 facets. Results show that mean differences across the two scoring methods were small, except for Disinhibition. Moreover, confirmatory factor analyses revealed slightly better fit indices for the model which uses 15 facets only. Lastly, the hierarchical structure of maladaptive personality traits was explored. Results are discussed in the light of previous literature.

Personality Disorders in the ICD-11: Spanish Validation of the PiCD and the SASPD in a Mixed Community and Clinical Sample

The International Classification of Diseases–11th revision (ICD-11) classification of personality disorders is the official diagnostic system that is used all over the world, and it has recently been renewed. However, as yet very few data are available on its performance. This study examines the Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (PiCD), which assesses the personality domains of the system, and the Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder (SASPD), which determines severity. The Spanish versions of the questionnaires were administered to a community (n = 2,522) and a clinical sample (n = 797). Internal consistency was adequate in the PiCD (α = .75 to .84) but less so in the SASPD (α = .64 and .73). Factor analyses suggested a unidimensional or bidimensional structure for severity, while revealing that the personality trait qualifiers are organized into four factors: negative affectivity, detachment, dissociality, and a bipolar domain of disinhibition–anankastia. The mutual relationships between traits and severity were analyzed, as well as the ability of the whole system to identify clinical subjects. Although further improvements are required, the results generally support the use of the PiCD and the SASPD and help substantiate the new ICD-11 taxonomy that underlies them.

A Brief but Comprehensive Review of Research on the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Both the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) and the chapter on personality disorders (PD) in the recent version of ICD-11 embody a shift from a categorical to a dimensional paradigm for the classification of PD. We describe these new models, summarize available measures, and provide a comprehensive review of research on the AMPD.

RECENT FINDINGS

A total of 237 publications on severity (criterion A) and maladaptive traits (criterion B) of the AMPD indicate (a) acceptable interrater reliability, (b) largely consistent latent structures, (c) substantial convergence with a range of theoretically and clinically relevant external measures, and (d) some evidence for incremental validity when controlling for categorical PD diagnoses. However, measures of criterion A and B are highly correlated, which poses conceptual challenges. The AMPD has stimulated extensive research with promising findings. We highlight open questions and provide recommendations for future research.