Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder

2012 ◽  
pp. 565-581
Author(s):  
Jack Samuels ◽  
Paul T. Costa
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Positive Emotions ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder ◽  
Over Time

Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) has been described in the clinical literature for over 100 years. Although the specific traits included in the construct have changed over time, there is remarkable consistency in the core concept. OCPD is clinically significant, given its relatively high prevalence in the community, its frequent co-occurrence with mood disorders, anxiety disorders, especially obsessive-compulsive disorder, and eating disorders, and treatment challenges. Although OCPD can be quite severe, it is generally less impairing than other personality disorders in the clinic, and it has not been found to be strongly related to functional impairment in the community. OCPD has excellent construct validity, but concerns have been raised about the stability over time and the reliability of assessment. OCPD may be alternatively construed dimensionally, with high conscientiousness as an important feature. Like other personality disorders, OCPD is better understood and described in terms of a combination of traits or facets rather than as reflecting a single domain of personality. In this regard, a number of studies illuminate the contribution of high neuroticism, low openness to actions and values, low agreeableness, and low extraversion facets of warmth and positive emotions. Finally, there are many advantages to tying personality disorders, and especially OCPD, to established dimensions of general personality because a great deal is already known about the dimensions of the Five-Factor Model.

Personality adjectives in British and American English from 1800-2010. How to trace back historical trends in personality.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Steppan
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
American English ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Historical Trends ◽  
Trace Back ◽  
Google Books ◽  
Personality Description ◽  
Over Time

Background: Historic shifts in personality cannot easily be quantified, particularly before the existence of standardized personality tests. However, the historical corpus of a language can give insights into how writers of an era described their contemporaries. The archive of Google books can be used to quantify the relative frequency of personality describing adjectives in British and American English at least since 1800. The aim of the study is to describe trends in adjective use over time with respect to the Five Factor Model (FFM) and common personality disorders (PD’s). Methods: A list of 435 English personality adjectives was available for which FFM-factor loadings exist. Google ngram viewer was used to extract the usage of these adjectives over time. Applying the ’prototype’ approach these adjectives are also indicative of common personality disorders. Results: Over time personality adjectives in total have become more frequently used reaching a maximum in the 1970s for American English and the 2000’s for British English. Regardless of this trend, Openness, Conscientiousness and Neuroticism have risen over time in both corpora. In terms of personality disorder prototypes more obsessive-compulsive and narcissistic (particularly for American English) features of personality have become salient during the second half of the 20th Century. Discussion: These results suggest that there are secular trends in personality description over time. The question whether or not the collective of writers accurately describes their contemporaries cannot be answered unequivocally, however the results show trends, which personality characteristics mattered most to different generations.

Personality Pathology in OCD

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael G. Wheaton ◽  
Anthony Pinto
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Clinical Course ◽  
Personality Pathology ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder ◽  
The Impact

This chapter reviews the literature on personality pathology in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). It begins by comparing and contrasting OCD with obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD). These two conditions have a longstanding yet frequently misunderstood relationship. Though they share some overlapping features, recent research has established OCD and OCPD as distinct conditions. Even so, OCD and OCPD frequently cooccur. The chapter reviews the literature on comorbidity and the impact of OCPD on the clinical course and treatment of OCD, including evidence that OCPD may complicate OCD treatment. It also describes other personality disorders observed in OCD. Finally, it describes recent advances in the conceptualization of personality disorders, including dimensional approaches, and concludes with directions for future research.

Tools & Resources: Impairment and Disability Web Sites

1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 5-6
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Interpersonal Relationships ◽  
Web Sites ◽  
Outpatient Psychotherapy ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Not Otherwise Specified ◽  
Cluster B Personality Disorders ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
And Behavior

Abstract Personality disorders are enduring patterns of inner experience and behavior that deviate markedly from those expected by the individual's culture; these inflexible and pervasive patterns reflect issues with cognition, affectivity, interpersonal functioning and impulse control, and lead to clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fourth Edition, defines two specific personality disorders, in addition to an eleventh condition, Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified. Cluster A personality disorders include paranoid, schizoid, and schizotypal personalities; of these, Paranoid Personality Disorder probably is most common in the legal arena. Cluster B personality disorders include antisocial, borderline, histrionic, and narcissistic personality. Such people may suffer from frantic efforts to avoid perceived abandonment, patterns of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships, an identity disturbance, and impulsivity. Legal issues that involve individuals with cluster B personality disorders often involve determination of causation of the person's problems, assessment of claims of harassment, and assessment of the person's fitness for employment. Cluster C personality disorders include avoidant, dependent, and obsessive-compulsive personality. Two case histories illustrate some of the complexities of assessing impairment in workers with personality disorders, including drug abuse, hospitalizations, and inpatient and outpatient psychotherapy.

scholarly journals Comparison of alternative models for personality disorders

2006 ◽  
Vol 37 (7) ◽  
pp. 983-994 ◽  
Author(s):  
LESLIE C. MOREY ◽  
CHRISTOPHER J. HOPWOOD ◽  
JOHN G. GUNDERSON ◽  
ANDREW E. SKODOL ◽  
M. TRACIE SHEA ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Collaborative Study ◽  
Validation Data ◽  
Categorical Diagnosis ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Dimensional Models ◽  
Marker Variables ◽  
Over Time

Background. The categorical classification system for personality disorder (PD) has been frequently criticized and several alternative dimensional models have been proposed.Method. Antecedent, concurrent and predictive markers of construct validity were examined for three models of PDs: the Five-Factor Model (FFM), the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP) model and the DSM-IV in the Collaborative Study of Personality Disorders (CLPS) sample.Results. All models showed substantial validity across a variety of marker variables over time. Dimensional models (including dimensionalized DSM-IV) consistently outperformed the conventional categorical diagnosis in predicting external variables, such as subsequent suicidal gestures and hospitalizations. FFM facets failed to improve upon the validity of higher-order factors upon cross-validation. Data demonstrated the importance of both stable trait and dynamic psychopathological influences in predicting external criteria over time.Conclusions. The results support a dimensional representation of PDs that assesses both stable traits and dynamic processes.

Personality Disorders as Collections of Traits

2019 ◽  
pp. 40-70
Author(s):  
Joshua D. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
General Model ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Empirical Relations ◽  
Expert Ratings

This chapter argues that personality disorders can and should be understood as collections of basic personality traits from a general model of personality, namely the five-factor model (FFM). It reviews evidence for the convergence of FFM personality disorder profiles across multiple approaches—expert ratings (i.e., researchers and clinicians) and empirical relations. It discusses how to score the personality disorders from the FFM and provides evidence for the convergent, discriminant, and construct validity of this approach. The chapter also demonstrates how the new alternative model for personality disorders can be embedded within the more established and robust FFM literature.

Working with Personality Disorders in an Integrated Care Setting

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Feinstein ◽  
Joseph V. Connelly
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Integrated Care ◽  
Care Pathway ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Care Team ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Medical Settings ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder ◽  
The Impact

Patients with personality disorders are common in primary care and medical settings. They can elicit intense problematic reactions from the members of an integrated care team, which can affect the team’s evaluation, diagnoses, diagnostic testing, medical orders, medications, laboratory tests, treatments, recommendations, and referrals. The four most common and challenging personality disorders are borderline personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. This chapter reviews the classification, epidemiology, biological basis, psychosocial formulation, and co-occurring mental health disorders associated with these personality disorders. A personality disorder schema is presented for managing these difficult patients. The impact these patients can have on the integrated care team is described. A care pathway is outlined that can be used for management, brief treatment, and referral for treatment to a personality disorder specialist.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document