Pathological personality traits can capture DSM–IV personality disorder types.

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua D. Miller ◽  
Lauren R. Few ◽  
Donald R. Lynam ◽  
James MacKillop
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits

scholarly journals Psychiatric, demographic and personality characteristics of elderly sex offenders

2002 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. FAZEL ◽  
T. HOPE ◽  
I. O’DONNELL ◽  
R. JACOBY
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Sex Offenders ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Morbidity ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Personality Factors ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Dsm Iv

Background. Psychiatric disorders are purported to play a role in the aetiology of violent crime, but evidence for their role in sexual offending is less clear. The authors investigated the prevalence of psychiatric morbidity and personality disorders in elderly incarcerated sex offenders compared with elderly non-sex offenders.Method. One hundred and one sex offenders and 102 non-sex offenders aged over 59 years were interviewed using standardized semi-structured interviews for psychiatric illness (the Geriatric Mental State) and the personality disorder (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV personality disorders). Data on demographic, offence and victim characteristics were collected.Results. Six per cent of the elderly sex offenders had a psychotic illness, 7% a DSM-IV major depressive episode and 33% a personality disorder; and 1% had dementia. These prevalence figures were not different from the elderly non-sex offenders interviewed in this study. Differences emerged at the level of personality traits with sex offenders having more schizoid, obsessive–compulsive, and avoidant traits, and fewer antisocial traits compared with non-sex offenders.Conclusions. Elderly sex offenders and non-sex-offenders have similar prevalence rates of mental illness. However, elderly sex offenders have increased schizoid, obsessive–compulsive, and avoidant personality traits, supporting the view that sex offending in the elderly is associated more with personality factors than mental illness or organic brain disease.

Relating DSM-5 section III personality traits to section II personality disorder diagnoses

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 647-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. C. Morey ◽  
K. T. Benson ◽  
A. E. Skodol
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Work Group ◽  
Taxonomic Structure ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
Dsm Iv

BackgroundThe DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group formulated a hybrid dimensional/categorical model that represented personality disorders as combinations of core impairments in personality functioning with specific configurations of problematic personality traits. Specific clusters of traits were selected to serve as indicators for six DSM categorical diagnoses to be retained in this system – antisocial, avoidant, borderline, narcissistic, obsessive–compulsive and schizotypal personality disorders. The goal of the current study was to describe the empirical relationships between the DSM-5 section III pathological traits and DSM-IV/DSM-5 section II personality disorder diagnoses.MethodData were obtained from a sample of 337 clinicians, each of whom rated one of his or her patients on all aspects of the DSM-IV and DSM-5 proposed alternative model. Regression models were constructed to examine trait–disorder relationships, and the incremental validity of core personality dysfunctions (i.e. criterion A features for each disorder) was examined in combination with the specified trait clusters.ResultsFindings suggested that the trait assignments specified by the Work Group tended to be substantially associated with corresponding DSM-IV concepts, and the criterion A features provided additional diagnostic information in all but one instance.ConclusionsAlthough the DSM-5 section III alternative model provided a substantially different taxonomic structure for personality disorders, the associations between this new approach and the traditional personality disorder concepts in DSM-5 section II make it possible to render traditional personality disorder concepts using alternative model traits in combination with core impairments in personality functioning.

DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder Dysfunctional Personality Traits as Predictors of Self-Reported Aggression in an Italian Sample of Consecutively Admitted, Personality-Disordered Psychotherapy Patients

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonella Somma ◽  
Robert F. Krueger ◽  
Kristian E. Markon ◽  
Valentina B. M. Alajmo ◽  
Emanuela Arlotta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Physical Aggression ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Axis Ii ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Scale Scores ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Personality Disordered

In order to assess the relationships between DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) maladaptive personality traits and self-reports of aggression, 508 Italian adult participants who met at least one DSM-IV Axis II/DSM-5 Section II personality disorder (PD) diagnosis were administered the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ). Analysis results showed that multiple regression results, PID-5 Hostility, Callousness, and Risk Taking trait scale scores explained a large amount of variance in AQ Physical Aggression (PA) scores. Moreover, PID-5 Hostility, Callousness, and Risk Taking explained more than 20% of the variance in the AQ Physical Aggression scale scores that was left unexplained by selected continuously scored DSM-IV Axis II/ DSM-5 Section II PDs, whereas SCID-II Paranoid, Narcissistic, Borderline, and Antisocial PDs added only 4% of variance to the amount of variance in AQ Physical Aggression scores that was already explained by the PID-5 trait scale scores.

Personality traits in social phobia

2001 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 143-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Marteinsdottir ◽  
T. Furmark ◽  
M. Tillfors ◽  
M. Fredrikson ◽  
L. Ekselius
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Social Phobia ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Indirect Aggression ◽  
Normative Sample ◽  
Avoidant Personality Disorder ◽  
Co Morbidity ◽  
The Social ◽  
Axis I ◽  
Dsm Iv

SummaryThe purpose was to assess personality traits in subjects with a DSM-IV diagnosis of social phobia. Thirty-two subjects were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV for Axes I and II disorders (SCID I and II). Personality traits were assessed by means of the Karolinska Scales of Personality (KSP). Current and lifetime axis I co-morbidity was diagnosed in 28% and 53% of the subjects, respectively. In total, 59% had at least one personality disorder and 47% were diagnosed with an avoidant personality disorder.The social phobics scored significantly higher than a Swedish normative sample on the KSP measuring anxiety proneness, irritability, detachment, and indirect aggression but lower on the scales for socialisation and social desirability. The presence as compared to absence of avoidant personality disorder in the social phobics was associated with significantly higher psychic anxiety and inhibition of aggression. In addition, symptom severity was higher in social phobics with an avoidant personality disorder. Generally, the results support the view that social phobia and avoidant personality disorder reflect different aspects of a social anxiety spectrum.

Personality Disorders in the DSM-5: Proposed Revisions and Critiques

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Good
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Diagnostic Criteria ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Categorical Model ◽  
Dsm Iv

This article discusses the Personality and Personality Disorder Work Group's proposed changes for Personality Disorders in the DSM-5: (a) adoption of a hybrid dimensional-categorical model; (b) utilization of 6 personality disorder types instead of the previous 10 personality disorders; (c) addition of personality traits and facets to define personality disorders; (d) addition of a rating scale for levels of personality functioning; (e) revised diagnostic criteria; and (f) the collapsing of Axes I, II, and III. Also discussed are ways in which the DSM-5 proposals are reactions to criticisms of the DSM-IV-TR (APA, 2000) and criticisms of the proposed changes.

Personality disorder traits: Testing insight regarding presence of traits, impairment, and desire for change

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chelsea Sleep ◽  
Joanna Lamkin ◽  
Donald Lynam ◽  
William Keith Campbell ◽  
Josh Miller
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Measurement Scale ◽  
Actual Measurement ◽  
Reasonable Degree ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Personality Psychopathology ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits ◽  
Insight Into

Mixed findings exist as to whether personality pathology involves a critical lack of awareness and insight. Research questions about insight and awareness in personality pathology are typically assessed via comparing self and informant reports of traits. However, recent studies have measured insight by asking individuals to evaluate additional questions about impairment and desire to change. The present study uses a variety of approaches to examine these issues including investigations of convergence between self and informant reports (N = 197 dyads; correlations and comparisons of means) of personality psychopathology, desired trait levels, and perceptions of impairment. Convergence was observed between levels of self- and informant-reported traits, desired traits, and impairment. However, individuals rated themselves higher on pathological trait levels and impairment than did their informants. Furthermore, individuals with relatively higher pathological traits desired higher levels of these traits (but lower than their actual scores) than individuals with lower scores; on the actual measurement scale, however, these higher scorers rated their desired level below the neutral point. Overall, individuals with pathological personality traits possess a reasonable degree of insight into their actual trait levels and associated impairment.

Criterion A Scales: Convergent, Discriminant, and Structural Relationships

Assessment ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 107319112094716
Author(s):  
Gillian A. McCabe ◽  
Joshua R. Oltmanns ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
Alternative Measures ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits

The alternative model of personality disorder was created to address the apparent failings of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–Fourth edition–text revision personality disorder diagnostic categories and consists of Criterion A (i.e., personality functioning) and Criterion B (i.e., pathological personality traits). There are now four alternative measures of the Criterion A impairments but, perhaps surprisingly, no study has yet compared any one of them with any one of the other three. The current study assesses the convergent (and discriminant) validity of all four, as well as their structural relationship with the five-factor model (FFM), a widely accepted model for understanding the structure of normal and pathological personality traits. Exploratory structural equation modeling analyses of the Criterion A measures and FFM scales demonstrate that the Criterion A self-identity scale can be understood as a maladaptive variant of FFM neuroticism. Moreover, results indicate no appreciable discriminant validity in the assessment of the Criterion A impairments—the Criterion A scales correlated more highly within measures than across alternative measures, even when measuring the same construct. Implications of these findings for the conceptualization and assessment of Criterion A self and interpersonal impairments are discussed.

scholarly journals Personality Types and Personality Traits in DSM-5: Do They Really Match?

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (spe) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sérgio Eduardo Silva de Oliveira ◽  
Tiago Cunha de Oliveira ◽  
Denise Ruschel Bandeira ◽  
Robert Frank Krueger
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Diagnostic System ◽  
Personality Types ◽  
Categorical Approach ◽  
Brazilian Sample ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits

Abstract The alternative model of personality disorders introduced in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders provides a diagnostic system that is expected to correspond to the well-known categorical approach of personality disorder diagnoses. The current study aims to improve knowledge about the relationship between pathological personality traits and their corresponding personality types. A Brazilian sample of 1,162 people took part in this study. The results point to some level of continuity between the two models when the variables were treated as dimensional. Contrariwise, there is a lack of strong scientific evidence to justify the maintenance of the categorical approach. We recommend the exclusion of the categorical approach from personality disorder diagnosis systems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document