Predicting smoking and nicotine dependence from the DSM–5 alternative model for personality pathology.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra L. Halberstadt ◽  
Carillon J. Skrzynski ◽  
Aidan G. C. Wright ◽  
Kasey G. Creswell
Keyword(s):  
Nicotine Dependence ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Dsm 5

scholarly journals Maladaptive traits = normal range traits + personality dysfunction

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leslie C. Morey ◽  
Evan Good ◽  
Christopher James Hopwood
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Potential Utility ◽  
Normal Range ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Personality Dysfunction ◽  
The Relationship

Objective: The DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders distinguishes core personality dysfunction common to all personality pathology from maladaptive traits that are specific variants of disorder. Previous research shows convergence between maladaptive and normal range trait domains as well as substantial correlations between maladaptive traits and core dysfunctions, leading some to conclude that personality traits and dysfunction are redundant. This study sought to examine the potential utility of the concept of core dysfunctions as a means of clarifying the nature of the relationship between maladaptive and normal-range traits. Method: Three non-clinical samples (n=178, 307, and 1,008) were evaluated for personality dysfunction, maladaptive traits, and normal-range traits and normative traits using different measures. Results: Results indicate that: (1) normal trait domains and core dysfunction contribute independently to understanding maladaptive traits; (2) the correlation of a normal trait domain with its putative maladaptive equivalent is consistently accounted for in part by core dysfunction; and (3) the multi-trait multi-method matrices of normal and maladaptive personality trait domains demonstrate appreciable discriminant validity problems that are clarified by a consideration of core dysfunction. Conclusion: These results suggest that maladaptive traits reflect the distinguishable contributions of core personality dysfunction (problems) and normal range personality traits (person).

The DSM’s Reconnection to Psychoanalytic Theory through the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders

2019 ◽  
Vol 67 (6) ◽  
pp. 1023-1045 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam P. Natoli
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Psychoanalytic Theory ◽  
Diagnostic System ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual ◽  
Current Systems

Often believed to have Kraepelinian origins, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—5th Edition (DSM-5) defines personality disorders using a categorical, hierarchical taxonomic system. This system possesses many long-standing problems for clinical practice, including a large assortment of symptom combinations that contribute to problematic heterogeneity and likely impair diagnostic validity. The DSM diagnostic system was at one time heavily influenced by psychoanalytic theory (Shorter 2005). A desire for greater theoretical neutrality then encouraged a shift away from psychoanalytic theory, resulting in the problematic atheoretical model of personality pathology introduced in DSM-III (1980) and still used today. The Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD), introduced in DSM-5 (2013), is an attempt to reconcile many of the categorical model’s issues and directly parallels primary themes that characterize psychoanalytic models of personality. After a review of the historical development of DSM, three current systems for diagnosing personality pathology—the DSM-5’s categorical model (2013), its AMPD (2013), and the Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual (2nd ed.; Alliance of Psychoanalytic Organizations 2017) are compared. The comparison illustrates how the AMPD brings psychoanalytic theory back into the DSM system and acknowledges the implications of a more psychoanalytic DSM.

Examining the Contribution of Perfectionistic Traits to the Construct Validity of the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Azad Hemmati ◽  
Brandon Weiss ◽  
Atefeh Mirani ◽  
Farzin Rezaei ◽  
Joshua D. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Large Sample ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Do So

Scholars of perfectionism have proposed significant modifications to DSM-5's alternative model of personality disorders (AMPD), such that (1) perfectionism be expanded beyond the inclusion of a singular trait—rigid perfectionism—and (2) perfectionistic traits be specified as trait descriptors of personality disorders (PDs) other than obsessive-compulsive PD. In this study, we evaluate these proposals by examining the degree to which (a) perfectionistic traits are already instantiated in Section II and Section III models of personality pathology; and (b) perfectionistic traits meaningfully augment the construct validity of AMPD PDs. We conducted these approaches in a large sample (N =3D 435) from an Iranian undergraduate population that is atypically found in the literature. Results showed that perfectionistic traits are already fairly well instantiated in Section III Criterion B. Perfectionistic traits minimally improved the construct validity of OCPD, but did not meaningfully do so for other PDs. Future investigation into the clinical utility of perfectionistic traits is needed.

Assessment of Pathological Traits in DSM-5 Personality Disorders By the DAPP-BQ: How Do These Traits Relate to the Six Personality Disorder Types of the Alternative Model?

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Han Berghuis ◽  
Theo J. M. Ingenhoven ◽  
Paul T. van der Heijden ◽  
Gina M. P. Rossi ◽  
Chris K. W. Schotte
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Dimensional Assessment

The six personality disorder (PD) types in DSM-5 section III are intended to resemble their DSM-IV/DSM-5 section II PD counterparts, but are now described by the level of personality functioning (criterion A) and an assigned trait profile (criterion B). However, concerns have been raised about the validity of these PD types. The present study examined the continuity between the DSM-IV/DSM-5 section II PDs and the corresponding trait profiles of the six DSM-5 section III PDs in a sample of 350 Dutch psychiatric patients. Facets of the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology—Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ) were presumed as representations (proxies) of the DSM-5 section III traits. Correlational patterns between the DAPP-BQ and the six PDs were consistent with previous research between DAPP-BQ and DSM-IV PDs. Moreover, DAPP-BQ proxies were able to predict the six selected PDs. However, the assigned trait profile for each PD didn't fully match the corresponding PD.

scholarly journals Predicting problematic alcohol use with the DSM–5 alternative model of personality pathology.

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kasey G. Creswell ◽  
Rachel L. Bachrach ◽  
Aidan G. C. Wright ◽  
Anthony Pinto ◽  
Emily Ansell
Keyword(s):  
Alcohol Use ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Problematic Alcohol ◽  
Problematic Alcohol Use

scholarly journals The Association between DSM-5 Personality Pathology Traits and Violence

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marissa Jennings
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Dimensional Model ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Categorical Model ◽  
Trait Model ◽  
The Many

The recently published DSM-5 included a dimensional model of personality pathology, which includes pathological traits. This model is a response to the many criticisms and problems documented with the traditional categorical modal of personality disorders. To date, numerous studies have demonstrated that the trait model is more valid and reliable than the traditional categorical model (Krueger and Markon 2013). This study expands research on the trait model by assessing the association between the DSM-5 traits and propensity for, or attitudes about, violence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document