Steffen Müller

Bio: Steffen Müller is an academic researcher from University of Kassel. The author has contributed to research in topics: Personality & Psychology. The author has an hindex of 3, co-authored 4 publications receiving 42 citations.

Development of a Short and ICD-11 Compatible Measure for DSM-5 Maladaptive Personality Traits Using Ant Colony Optimization Algorithms.

Abstract: While Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fifth edition (DSM-5) Section III and ICD-11 (International Classification of Diseases 11th-Revision) both allow for dimensional assessment of personality pathology, the models differ in the definition of maladaptive traits. In this study, we pursued the goal of developing a short and reliable assessment for maladaptive traits, which is compatible with both models, using the item pool of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). To this aim, we applied ant colony optimization algorithms in English- and German-speaking samples comprising a total N of 2,927. This procedure yielded a 34-item measure with a hierarchical latent structure including six maladaptive trait domains and 17 trait facets, the "Personality Inventory for DSM-5, Brief Form Plus" (PID5BF+). While latent structure, reliability, and criterion validity were ascertained in the original and in two separate validation samples (n = 849, n = 493) and the measure was able to discriminate personality disorders from other diagnoses in a clinical subsample, results suggest further modifications for capturing ICD-11 Anankastia.

A Common Metric for Self-Reported Severity of Personality Disorder

Abstract: Introduction: Dimensional models of personality disorders (PD) in the DSM-5 and ICD-11 share a focus on impairments in self and interpersonal functioning to represent the general features and severity of PD. This new perspective has led to the development of numerous measures for assessing individual differences in PD severity. While this improves choices for researchers and practitioners, it also poses the challenge of an increasing lack of standardization. Objective: The aim of this study is to establish a common metric across 6 widely used self-report measures of PD severity using item response theory models. Methods: 849 participants completed a survey including the Inventory of Personality Organization – 16-item version (IPO-16), the Level of Personality Functioning Scale – Brief Form 2.0, the Level of Personality Functioning Scale – Self-Report, the Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis – Structure Questionnaire Short Form, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 – Brief Form Plus and the Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder (SASPD). We fitted exploratory multidimensional graded response models and used bifactor rotation to extract a general factor across measures. Factor scores were linked to representative T scores using data from a representative survey of 2,502 participants who completed the IPO-16. Results: When using bifactor rotation in a 7-factor model, all items loaded positively on the general factor, and the general factor explained 65.5% of the common variance. With the exception of the SASPD, all measures provided highly discriminating items (factor loadings >0.70) for measuring the general factor and reached an acceptable reliability (>0.80) across a wide range of the latent continuum. We constructed a crosswalk table linking total scores of the 6 measures to each other and to representative T scores. Conclusions: Our results suggest that 6 different self-report measures of the severity of PD capture a strong common factor and can therefore be scaled along a single latent continuum. Our results may facilitate instrument-independent assessment of severity of PD and increase comparability across studies.

Die deutsche Version der Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF): Faktorenstruktur, konvergente Validität und Normwerte in der Allgemeinbevölkerung

Abstract: Das alternative DSM-5-Modell der Personlichkeitsstorungen definiert als Kernmerkmal aller Personlichkeitsstorungen das Funktionsniveau der Personlichkeit, das wiederum uber Probleme mit dem Selbst (Selbstpathologie) und Probleme im zwischenmenschlichen Bereich (interpersonale Pathologie) operationalisiert wird. Als kurzes Selbstbeurteilungsverfahren zur Diagnostik des Funktionsniveaus der Personlichkeit ist die 12 Items umfassende Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF) von einer niederlandischen Arbeitsgruppe entwickelt worden. In dieser Studie wurde die deutsche Version der LPFS-BF erstmals an einer grosen und reprasentativen Allgemeinbevolkerungsstichprobe (n=2470) sowie einer zweiten nicht-klinischen Stichprobe (n=849) auf ihre Faktorenstruktur und konvergente Validitat hin psychometrisch evaluiert und auch normiert. In beiden Stichproben konnte mittels konfirmatorischer Faktorenanalyse die theoretisch postulierte und im Original empirisch bestatigte Zwei-Faktoren-Struktur (d. h. Selbst- und interpersonale Pathologie) mit akzeptabler Anpassungsgute repliziert werden. Die Reliabilitat der Gesamtskala sowie der beiden Subskalen (operationalisiert uber die interne Konsistenz) war in beiden Stichproben hoch (McDonalds ω durchweg≥0,83). Als Hinweis auf eine zufriedenstellende konvergente Validitat fanden sich hohe Korrelationen der deutschen Version der LPFS-BF mit anderen Verfahren zur Erfassung der Personlichkeitspathologie (r≥0,72). Der Zusammenhang mit aktueller psychischer Belastung war ahnlich hoch. In der Allgemeinbevolkerung lagen der Durchschnittswert (T50) der Gesamtskala der LPFS-BF bei 15 und T70 bei 33. Auch wenn psychometrische Analysen zur deutschen LPFS-BF bei Patienten mit psychischen Storungen, insbesondere jenen mit Personlichkeitsstorungen, ausstehen, kann das Verfahren aufgrund seiner Anwendungsokonomie zur orientierenden Erfassung des Funktionsniveaus der Personlichkeit mit den Dimensionen der Selbst- und interpersonalen Pathologie empfohlen werden.

[Levels of structural integration in adolescents and the relationship to later mental disorders - A longitudinal study].

Abstract: Zusammenfassung Fragestellung: Psychische Krankheiten manifestieren sich haufig bereits im Jugendalter Die Krankheitsverlaufe sind dabei aufgrund vielfaltiger Einflussfaktoren heterogen, remittie

Exploring the predictive validity of personality disorder criteria.

Abstract: We tested the predictive validity of personality disorder (PD) indicators at different levels of aggregation, ranging from general PD severity to PD syndrome scales to individual PD criteria. We compared the predictive validity of models on these levels based on interview data on all 78 DSM-IV PD criteria, by using 19 outcome scales in three different samples (N = 651, N = 552, and N = 1,277). We hypothesized that criteria of personality pathology yield a significant increase in predictive validity compared with scales that are aggregated at the syndrome- or general severity-level. We assessed out of sample performance of predictive models in a repeated cross-validation design using regularized linear regression and regression forest algorithms. We observed no significant difference in predictive performance between models trained at the item-level and models trained on scale-level data. We further tested the predictive performance of the trained linear models across samples on outcome measures shared between samples and inspected models for criteria-level information they relied on to make predictions. Our results suggest that little predictive variance is lost when interview items assessing DSM-IV PD criteria are aggregated to dimensional PD scales. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

International Assessment of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Traits: Toward a Common Nosology in DSM-5.1

Abstract: Introduction The DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) and the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders (PD) are largely commensurate and, when combined, they delineate 6 trait domains: negative affectivity, detachment, antagonism/dissociality, disinhibition, anankastia, and psychoticism. Objective The present study evaluated the international validity of a brief 36-item patient-report measure that portrays all 6 domains simultaneously including 18 primary subfacets. Methods We developed and employed a modified version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 - Brief Form Plus (PID5BF+). A total of 16,327 individuals were included, 2,347 of whom were patients. The expected 6-factor structure of facets was initially investigated in samples from Denmark (n = 584), Germany (n = 1,271), and the USA (n = 605) and subsequently replicated in both patient- and community samples from Italy, France, Switzerland, Belgium, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Poland, Czech Republic, the USA, and Brazil. Associations with interview-rated DSM-5 PD categories were also investigated. Results Findings generally supported the empirical soundness and international robustness of the 6 domains including meaningful associations with familiar interview-rated PD types. Conclusions The modified PID5BF+ may be employed internationally by clinicians and researchers for brief and reliable assessment of the 6 combined DSM-5 and ICD-11 domains, including 18 primary subfacets. This 6-domain framework may inform a future nosology for DSM-5.1 that is more reasonably aligned with the authoritative ICD-11 codes than the current DSM-5 AMPD model. The 36-item modified PID5BF+ scoring key is provided in online supplementary Appendix A see www.karger.com/doi/10.1159/000507589 (for all online suppl. material).

Development of a Short and ICD-11 Compatible Measure for DSM-5 Maladaptive Personality Traits Using Ant Colony Optimization Algorithms.

Abstract: While Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fifth edition (DSM-5) Section III and ICD-11 (International Classification of Diseases 11th-Revision) both allow for dimensional assessment of personality pathology, the models differ in the definition of maladaptive traits. In this study, we pursued the goal of developing a short and reliable assessment for maladaptive traits, which is compatible with both models, using the item pool of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). To this aim, we applied ant colony optimization algorithms in English- and German-speaking samples comprising a total N of 2,927. This procedure yielded a 34-item measure with a hierarchical latent structure including six maladaptive trait domains and 17 trait facets, the "Personality Inventory for DSM-5, Brief Form Plus" (PID5BF+). While latent structure, reliability, and criterion validity were ascertained in the original and in two separate validation samples (n = 849, n = 493) and the measure was able to discriminate personality disorders from other diagnoses in a clinical subsample, results suggest further modifications for capturing ICD-11 Anankastia.

A Common Metric for Self-Reported Severity of Personality Disorder

Abstract: Introduction: Dimensional models of personality disorders (PD) in the DSM-5 and ICD-11 share a focus on impairments in self and interpersonal functioning to represent the general features and severity of PD. This new perspective has led to the development of numerous measures for assessing individual differences in PD severity. While this improves choices for researchers and practitioners, it also poses the challenge of an increasing lack of standardization. Objective: The aim of this study is to establish a common metric across 6 widely used self-report measures of PD severity using item response theory models. Methods: 849 participants completed a survey including the Inventory of Personality Organization – 16-item version (IPO-16), the Level of Personality Functioning Scale – Brief Form 2.0, the Level of Personality Functioning Scale – Self-Report, the Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis – Structure Questionnaire Short Form, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 – Brief Form Plus and the Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder (SASPD). We fitted exploratory multidimensional graded response models and used bifactor rotation to extract a general factor across measures. Factor scores were linked to representative T scores using data from a representative survey of 2,502 participants who completed the IPO-16. Results: When using bifactor rotation in a 7-factor model, all items loaded positively on the general factor, and the general factor explained 65.5% of the common variance. With the exception of the SASPD, all measures provided highly discriminating items (factor loadings >0.70) for measuring the general factor and reached an acceptable reliability (>0.80) across a wide range of the latent continuum. We constructed a crosswalk table linking total scores of the 6 measures to each other and to representative T scores. Conclusions: Our results suggest that 6 different self-report measures of the severity of PD capture a strong common factor and can therefore be scaled along a single latent continuum. Our results may facilitate instrument-independent assessment of severity of PD and increase comparability across studies.

Development and initial evaluation of the ICD-11 personality disorder severity scale: PDS-ICD-11.

Abstract: Aim No measure has formally been developed to assess the published ICD-11 model of Personality Disorder (PD) severity. We therefore set out to develop and evaluate the 14-item Personality Disorder Severity ICD-11 (PDS-ICD-11) scale. Method A representative U.S. community sample (N = 428; 50.9% women) and a New Zealand mental health sample (N = 87; 61.5% women) completed the PDS-ICD-11 scale along with a series of established PD and impairment measures. Results Item response theory supported the unidimensionality of PDS-ICD-11 (median item loading of 0.68) and indicated that a PDS-ICD-11 score of 17.5 may serve as a benchmark for pronounced dysfunction. Correlation and regression analyses supported both criterion validity and incremental validity in predicting impairment and PD symptoms. The PDS-ICD-11 was particularly associated with measures of Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS), Global PD severity, and Borderline PD symptom score. A comparison between clinical individuals diagnosed with an ICD-11 PD vs. no PD supported diagnostic validity. Conclusion This initial construction study suggests that the PDS-ICD-11 constitutes a promising instrument that provides a quick impression of the severity of personality dysfunction according to the official ICD-11 PD guidelines. Clearly, more research is needed to corroborate its validity and utility. The PDS-ICD-11 scale is provided as online supporting information.