Journal ArticleDOI
Plate tectonics in the classification of personality disorder: shifting to a dimensional model.
TLDR
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.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
The distinction between symptoms and traits in the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP).
Colin G. DeYoung,Michael Chmielewski,Lee Anna Clark,David M. Condon,Roman Kotov,Robert F. Krueger,Donald R. Lynam,Kristian E. Markon,Joshua D. Miller,Stephanie N. Mullins-Sweatt,Douglas B. Samuel,Martin Sellbom,Susan C. South,Katherine M. Thomas,David Watson,Ashley L. Watts,Thomas A. Widiger,Aidan G. C. Wright,HiTOP Normal Personality Workgroup +18 more
TL;DR: It is proposed that the only systematic difference between symptoms and traits in HiTOP is one of time frame, which has the consequence that almost every HiTOP dimension can be assessed as either a trait or a symptom dimension, by adjusting the framing of the assessment.
Journal ArticleDOI
The Relationship Between Psychopathology and a Hierarchical Model of Normal Personality Traits: Evidence From a Psychiatric Patient Sample.
TL;DR: New results relating to the differentiation of several forms of psychopathology not included in earlier analyses are presented, bolstering the argument for the use of FFM personality traits in characterizing and differentiating psychiatric diagnostic groups.
Journal ArticleDOI
An Integrative Conceptual Framework for Assessing Personality and Personality Pathology
TL;DR: In this paper, a framework for jointly conceptualizing personality and personality pathology is presented, which is a contribution to the ongoing debate over the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-5.
Journal ArticleDOI
The Five-Factor Personality Inventory for ICD-11: A facet-level assessment of the ICD-11 trait model.
TL;DR: The Five-Factor Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (FFiCD), a new 121-item, 20-facet, self-report measure of the I CD-11 mal Adaptive personality domains at the facet level, may be a useful instrument for clinicians and researchers interested in a more specific assessment of maladaptive personality according to the dimensional I CDD-11 personality disorder model.
Journal ArticleDOI
The Role of Interpersonal Influence in Counterbalancing Psychopathic Personality Trait Facets at Work
Nora Schütte,Gerhard Blickle,Rachel E. Frieder,Andreas Wihler,Florian Schnitzler,Janis Maximilian Heupel,Ingo Zettler +6 more
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the relation of self-centered impulsivity and fearless dominance with interpersonally directed counterproductive work behavior (CWB-I) and contextual performance (CP).
References
More filters
Journal Article
[Affective disorders in the fourth edition of the classification of mental disorders prepared by the American Psychiatric Association -- diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders].
Journal ArticleDOI
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Lee J. Cronbach,Paul E. Meehl +1 more
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.