scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Plate tectonics in the classification of personality disorder: shifting to a dimensional model.

01 Feb 2007-American Psychologist (American Psychological Association)-Vol. 62, Iss: 2, pp 71-83
TL;DR: It may be time to consider a shift to a dimensional classification of personality disorder that would help address the failures of the existing diagnostic categories as well as contribute to an integration of the psychiatric diagnostic manual with psychology's research on general personality structure.
Abstract: The diagnostic categories of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders were developed in the spirit of a traditional medical model that considers mental disorders to be qualitatively distinct conditions (see, e.g., American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Work is now beginning on the fifth edition of this influential diagnostic manual. It is perhaps time to consider a fundamental shift in how psychopathology is conceptualized and diagnosed. More specifically, it may be time to consider a shift to a dimensional classification of personality disorder that would help address the failures of the existing diagnostic categories as well as contribute to an integration of the psychiatric diagnostic manual with psychology's research on general personality structure.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is found that common mental disorders are strongly linked to personality and have similar trait profiles, and greater attention to these constructs can significantly benefit psychopathology research and clinical practice.
Abstract: We performed a quantitative review of associations between the higher order personality traits in the Big Three and Big Five models (i.e., neuroticism, extraversion, disinhibition, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness) and specific depressive, anxiety, and substance use disorders (SUD) in adults. This approach resulted in 66 meta-analyses. The review included 175 studies published from 1980 to 2007, which yielded 851 effect sizes. For a given analysis, the number of studies ranged from three to 63 (total sample size ranged from 1,076 to 75,229). All diagnostic groups were high on neuroticism (mean Cohen's d = 1.65) and low on conscientiousness (mean d = -1.01). Many disorders also showed low extraversion, with the largest effect sizes for dysthymic disorder (d = -1.47) and social phobia (d = -1.31). Disinhibition was linked to only a few conditions, including SUD (d = 0.72). Finally, agreeableness and openness were largely unrelated to the analyzed diagnoses. Two conditions showed particularly distinct profiles: SUD, which was less related to neuroticism but more elevated on disinhibition and disagreeableness, and specific phobia, which displayed weaker links to all traits. Moderator analyses indicated that epidemiologic samples produced smaller effects than patient samples and that Eysenck's inventories showed weaker associations than NEO scales. In sum, we found that common mental disorders are strongly linked to personality and have similar trait profiles. Neuroticism was the strongest correlate across the board, but several other traits showed substantial effects independent of neuroticism. Greater attention to these constructs can significantly benefit psychopathology research and clinical practice.

2,003 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The HiTOP promises to improve research and clinical practice by addressing the aforementioned shortcomings of traditional nosologies and provides an effective way to summarize and convey information on risk factors, etiology, pathophysiology, phenomenology, illness course, and treatment response.
Abstract: The reliability and validity of traditional taxonomies are limited by arbitrary boundaries between psychopathology and normality, often unclear boundaries between disorders, frequent disorder co-occurrence, heterogeneity within disorders, and diagnostic instability. These taxonomies went beyond evidence available on the structure of psychopathology and were shaped by a variety of other considerations, which may explain the aforementioned shortcomings. The Hierarchical Taxonomy Of Psychopathology (HiTOP) model has emerged as a research effort to address these problems. It constructs psychopathological syndromes and their components/subtypes based on the observed covariation of symptoms, grouping related symptoms together and thus reducing heterogeneity. It also combines co-occurring syndromes into spectra, thereby mapping out comorbidity. Moreover, it characterizes these phenomena dimensionally, which addresses boundary problems and diagnostic instability. Here, we review the development of the HiTOP and the relevant evidence. The new classification already covers most forms of psychopathology. Dimensional measures have been developed to assess many of the identified components, syndromes, and spectra. Several domains of this model are ready for clinical and research applications. The HiTOP promises to improve research and clinical practice by addressing the aforementioned shortcomings of traditional nosologies. It also provides an effective way to summarize and convey information on risk factors, etiology, pathophysiology, phenomenology, illness course, and treatment response. This can greatly improve the utility of the diagnosis of mental disorders. The new classification remains a work in progress. However, it is developing rapidly and is poised to advance mental health research and care significantly as the relevant science matures. (PsycINFO Database Record

1,635 citations


Cites background from "Plate tectonics in the classificati..."

  • ...O’Connor (2005) reanalyzed 33 such studies and found four dimensions, which he coordinated with the prominent five-factor model (FFM) of personality....

    [...]

  • ...For example, the FFF assesses maladaptive variants of 30 traits included within the FFM. Factor analyses of the FFF produced a five-dimensional structure that reflects neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness....

    [...]

  • ...Specifically, internalizing dimensions were drawn from nonredundant scales of the IMAS, IDAS, PID-5, PAI, and FFM-PD (Crego & Widiger, 2016; Hopwood et al., 2013; Watson et al., 2012)....

    [...]

  • ...These variants are elaborated in the Five-Factor Model Personality Disorder (FFM-PD; Widiger, Lynam, Miller, & Oltmanns, 2012) scales and the Five Factor Form (FFF; Rojas & Widiger, 2014)....

    [...]

  • ...Disinhibited externalizing dimensions were drawn from the ESI and supplemented from the FFM-PD (Crego & Widiger, 2016)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: There is growing evidence that neuroticism is a psychological trait of profound public health significance, a robust correlate and predictor of many different mental and physical disorders, comorbidity among them, and the frequency of mental and general health service use.
Abstract: The personality trait of neuroticism refers to relatively stable tendencies to respond with negative emotions to threat, frustration, or loss. Individuals in the population vary markedly on this trait, ranging from frequent and intense emotional reactions to minor challenges to little emotional reaction even in the face of significant difficulties. Although not widely appreciated, there is growing evidence that neuroticism is a psychological trait of profound public health significance. Neuroticism is a robust correlate and predictor of many different mental and physical disorders, comorbidity among them, and the frequency of mental and general health service use. Indeed, neuroticism apparently is a predictor of the quality and longevity of our lives. Achieving a full understanding of the nature and origins of neuroticism, and the mechanisms through which neuroticism is linked to mental and physical disorders, should be a top priority for research. Knowing why neuroticism predicts such a wide variety of seemingly diverse outcomes should lead to improved understanding of commonalities among those outcomes and improved strategies for preventing them.

1,412 citations


Cites background from "Plate tectonics in the classificati..."

  • ...For example, it has been suggested that mental health clinicians routinely administer a five-factor personality scale to determine if more extensive assessments of personality disorders related to neuroticism and other traits should be conducted (Widiger & Trull, 2007)....

    [...]

  • ...…of the taxonomy of personality disorders in DSM-V have been proposed that could make the definitions of personality disorders more consonant with either three or five-factor models of personality that include the trait of neuroticism (McCrae, Lockenhoff, & Costa, 2005; Widiger & Trull, 2007)....

    [...]

01 Jan 2000
TL;DR: “As a boy and then as an adult, I never lost my wonder at the personality that was Einstein.”
Abstract: 在翟象俊主编的《大学英语》第2册第5单元中,有这样一个句子:“As a boy and then as an adult, I never lost my wonder at the personality that was Einstein.”教参中指出“the personality that was Einstein”应理解为“the personality which was the most striking characteristic of Einstein”,该句译为“作为一个孩子,到后来作为一个成人,我一直对爱因斯坦的个性惊叹不已”。很明显,在这里译者把“personality”理解为“个性,人格”,但本人认为应译为“人物,名人”更妥。“personality”可作“个性,人格”讲,但它还有另外一个重要意思。在陆谷孙主编的《英汉大词典》(1993年版)中,“personality”第3条释义为:“个人,人物,名人”:“appoint a personality to lead a campaign,派一个人去领导一场运动”。“a personality in the news,新闻人物”。在...

1,096 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Pathological Narcissism Inventory is a 52-item self-report measure assessing 7 dimensions of pathological narcissism spanning problems with narcissistic grandiosity and narcissistic vulnerability and exhibited significant associations with parasuicidal behavior, suicide attempts, homicidal ideation, and several aspects of psychotherapy utilization.
Abstract: The construct of narcissism is inconsistently defined across clinical theory, social-personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Two problems were identified that impede integration of research and clinical findings regarding narcissistic personality pathology: (a) ambiguity regarding the assessment of pathological narcissism vs. normal narcissism and (b) insufficient scope of existing narcissism measures. Four studies are presented documenting the initial derivation and validation of the Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI). The PNI is a 52-item self-report measure assessing 7 dimensions of pathological narcissism spanning problems with narcissistic grandiosity (Entitlement Rage, Exploitativeness, Grandiose Fantasy, Self-sacrificing Self-enhancement) and narcissistic vulnerability (Contingent Self-esteem, Hiding the Self, Devaluing). The PNI structure was validated via confirmatory factor analysis. The PNI correlated negatively with self-esteem and empathy, and positively with shame, interpersonal distress, aggression, and borderline personality organization. Grandiose PNI scales were associated with vindictive, domineering, intrusive, and overly-nurturant interpersonal problems, and vulnerable PNI scales were associated with cold, socially avoidant, and exploitable interpersonal problems. In a small clinical sample, PNI scales exhibited significant associations with parasuicidal behavior, suicide attempts, homicidal ideation, and several aspects of psychotherapy utilization.

987 citations


Cites background from "Plate tectonics in the classificati..."

  • ...In light of the increasing interest in dimensional models and measures of psychopathology (e.g., Krueger & Markon, 2006; Widiger & Trull, 2007), the goal of the present research was to develop a multidimensional self-report measure of pathological narcissism that assessed the construct’s full range…...

    [...]

References
More filters
Reference EntryDOI
11 Jun 2013

113,134 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The present interpretation of construct validity is not "official" and deals with some areas where the Committee would probably not be unanimous, but the present writers are solely responsible for this attempt to explain the concept and elaborate its implications.
Abstract: Validation of psychological tests has not yet been adequately conceptualized, as the APA Committee on Psychological Tests learned when it undertook (1950-54) to specify what qualities should be investigated before a test is published. In order to make coherent recommendations the Committee found it necessary to distinguish four types of validity, established by different types of research and requiring different interpretation. The chief innovation in the Committee's report was the term construct validity.[2] This idea was first formulated by a subcommittee (Meehl and R. C. Challman) studying how proposed recommendations would apply to projective techniques, and later modified and clarified by the entire Committee (Bordin, Challman, Conrad, Humphreys, Super, and the present writers). The statements agreed upon by the Committee (and by committees of two other associations) were published in the Technical Recommendations (59). The present interpretation of construct validity is not "official" and deals with some areas where the Committee would probably not be unanimous. The present writers are solely responsible for this attempt to explain the concept and elaborate its implications.

9,935 citations


"Plate tectonics in the classificati..." refers methods in this paper

  • ...Their work is analogous to the construct validation article of Cronbach and Meehl (1955) that has been equally influential within psychology....

    [...]