The Role of the DSM-5 Personality Trait Model in Moving Toward a Quantitative and Empirically Based Approach to Classifying Personality and Psychopathology

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 477-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert F. Krueger ◽  
Kristian E. Markon
Keyword(s):  
Dsm 5 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 114-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takakuni Suzuki ◽  
Susan C. South ◽  
Douglas B. Samuel ◽  
Aidan G. C. Wright ◽  
Matthew M. Yalch ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Bastiaens ◽  
Dirk Smits ◽  
Laurence Claes

We report on two individuals presenting for treatment as part of everyday clinical practice, comparing their pathological personality traits through the lens of the ICD-11 trait qualifiers and the DSM-5 Section III personality trait model. We compare higher order pathological personality domains and lower order pathological personality trait facets of patient M (diagnosed with borderline personality traits according to DSM-5 Section II), and patient L (diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive personality traits according to DSM-5 Section II) with normative data and with each other. Findings highlight the clinical utility of a ICD-11/DSM-5 combined view, including: (1) the Disinhibition/Anankastia personality domain distinction as advocated in the ICD-11 model, (2) the Psychoticism personality domain as conceptualized in the DSM-5 Section III personality trait model, as well as (3) the use of lower order personality trait facets within each higher order personality domain.


2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (9) ◽  
pp. 1879-1890 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. F. Krueger ◽  
J. Derringer ◽  
K. E. Markon ◽  
D. Watson ◽  
A. E. Skodol

BackgroundDSM-IV-TR suggests that clinicians should assess clinically relevant personality traits that do not necessarily constitute a formal personality disorder (PD), and should note these traits on Axis II, but DSM-IV-TR does not provide a trait model to guide the clinician. Our goal was to provide a provisional trait model and a preliminary corresponding assessment instrument, in our roles as members of the DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Workgroup and workgroup advisors.MethodAn initial list of specific traits and domains (broader groups of traits) was derived from DSM-5 literature reviews and workgroup deliberations, with a focus on capturing maladaptive personality characteristics deemed clinically salient, including those related to the criteria for DSM-IV-TR PDs. The model and instrument were then developed iteratively using data from community samples of treatment-seeking participants. The analytic approach relied on tools of modern psychometrics (e.g. item response theory models).ResultsA total of 25 reliably measured core elements of personality description emerged that, together, delineate five broad domains of maladaptive personality variation: negative affect, detachment, antagonism, disinhibition, and psychoticism.ConclusionsWe developed a maladaptive personality trait model and corresponding instrument as a step on the path toward helping users of DSM-5 assess traits that may or may not constitute a formal PD. The inventory we developed is reprinted in its entirety in the Supplementary online material, with the goal of encouraging additional refinement and development by other investigators prior to the finalization of DSM-5. Continuing discussion should focus on various options for integrating personality traits into DSM-5.


Author(s):  
Beatriz Thadani ◽  
Ana M. Pérez-García ◽  
José Bermúdez

Abstract: Quality of life in patients with borderline personality disorder: The mediating role of life satisfaction. Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a mental illness characterized by a pattern of instability in relationships, moods and behavior. Using two groups of women (clinical or diagnosed with BPD, N = 138; and control, with no physical or mental illness, N = 124) this study analyzed the differences between pathological personality traits, measured by the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 and different domains of quality of life (SF-36 and the WHODAS 2.0) as well as the mediating role of life satisfaction in personality traits and quality of life. Differences were found between the groups in pathological personality and quality of life. Moreover, many SF-36 dimensions were partially mediated by life satisfaction in both groups. Therefore, new treatments for BPD may include developing life satisfaction, palliating the effects of this disorder on quality of life, reducing its impact on day-to-day tasks.Resumen: El trastorno de personalidad límite (TPL) se caracteriza por inestabilidad en las relaciones, el humor y la conducta. Se analizaron en dos grupos de mujeres (clínico o con TPL, N = 138; y control, sin enfermedad física o mental, N = 124) las diferencias en rasgos patológicos de personalidad (evaluados con el Personality Inventory for DSM-5) y diferentes dominios de calidad de vida (SF-36 y WHODAS 2.0), así como el papel mediador de la satisfacción vital en las relaciones entre personalidad y calidad de vida. Se encontraron diferencias entre los grupos en personalidad patológica y calidad de vida. Además, varias dimensiones de calidad de vida del SF-36 estaban mediadas parcialmente por la satisfacción vital en ambos grupos. Por tanto, los tratamientos del TPL podrían incluir el desarrollo de satisfacción vital para paliar sus efectos en la calidad de vida de los que lo padecen, reduciendo su impacto en las tareas del día a día.


2014 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 1547-1557 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia I. M. Silva ◽  
Catarina I. M. Martins ◽  
Erik Höglund ◽  
Hans Magnus Gjøen ◽  
Øyvind Øverli

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marissa Jennings

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.


SLEEP ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 825-832 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vivek Pillai ◽  
Philip Cheng ◽  
David A. Kalmbach ◽  
Timothy Roehrs ◽  
Thomas Roth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Scrimpshire ◽  
Marcia Lensges

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to study how the interplay of the emotion of fear and the personality trait of resilience affect time to reemployment after job termination. The authors carried out the research by extending affective events theory (AET) beyond the workplace.Design/methodology/approachThis paper is a conceptual paper intended to lay the groundwork for future analysis in the areas of fear and resilience, specifically in the time after job termination.FindingsThe paper suggests that fear is a natural response to job termination, and there are two responses to fear: one of action to rid oneself of fear (“fight or flight”) and one of paralysis, in which an individual remains in a fear state. The authors put forth that one's level of resilience is a factor in determining time to reemployment.Originality/valueWhile there are numerous studies on the role emotions play in the workplace and in particular, the role of fear about potentially getting fired, there are few, if any, studies on the role of fear after losing a job. The authors feel this is a warranted area of study as fear can have both positive and negative responses. The authors also contend that a major diver of these fear responses is an individual's level of resilience, and this can be a significant predictor of the individual's time to reemployment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document