Demographic, Personality Trait and Personality Disorder Correlates of Aesthetic Motivation

2020 ◽  
pp. 027623662094291
Author(s):  
Adrian Furnham
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Personality Trait ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Openness To Experience ◽  
Factor Level ◽  
Future Directions

This study looked at personality and sub-clinical personality disorder correlates of self-rated motives for aesthetic motivation (AM). Two groups, totalling over 4000 adult British managers, completed three tests including a personality trait measure (HPI); a personality disorders measure (HDS), and a measure of their Motives and Values (MVPI) for Aestheticism and Culture. The two different groups had similar results, showing that for personality traits Inquisitiveness (Openness-to-Experience) and Sociability (Extraversion) were positively, and Adjustment (low Neuroticism) and Prudence (Conscientiousness) were negatively, related to AM. For personality disorder traits Imaginativeness (Schizotypy) and Colourful (Histrionic) were positively correlated with AM. Factor analysis confirmed the higher order classification of both traits and disorders. Regressions at the higher factor level suggested personality traits were more related to AM than disorder traits. Implications for the selection and management of aesthetic people are considered. Limitations and future directions are also noted.

Classification of Personality Disorder

1979 ◽  
Vol 135 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Tyrer ◽  
John Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Interview Schedule ◽  
Personality Variables ◽  
Current Classification ◽  
Personality Disordered

SummaryAn interview schedule was used to record the personality traits of 130 psychiatric patients, 65 with a primary clinical diagnosis of personality disorder and 65 with other diagnoses. The results were analysed by factor analysis and three types of cluster analysis. Factor analysis showed a similar structure of personality variables in both groups of patients, supporting the notion that personality disorders differ only in degree from the personalities of other psychiatric patients. Cluster analysis revealed five discrete categories; sociopathic, passive-dependent, anankastic, schizoid and a non-personality-disordered group. Of all the personality-disordered patients 63 per cent fell into the passive-dependent or sociopathic category. The results suggest that the current classification of personality disorder could be simplified.

scholarly journals MCMI-III Personality Disorders, Traits, and Profiles in Adult ADHD Outpatients

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 830-839
Author(s):  
Francesco Oliva ◽  
Chiara Mangiapane ◽  
Gabriele Nibbio ◽  
Alberto Portigliatti Pomeri ◽  
Giuseppe Maina
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Adult Adhd ◽  
Diagnostic Interview ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Personality Profiles ◽  
Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory ◽  
High Prevalence

Objective: To assess prevalence of personality traits and disorders according to Millon’s evolution-based model and to identify the most representative personality profiles among adult ADHD outpatients. Method: Personality traits and disorders were evaluated using the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory–III (MCMI-III) and an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) in a consecutive sample of adult ADHD outpatients ( N = 70) diagnosed by the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale–version 1.1 (ASRS-v1.1) and the Diagnostic Interview for ADHD in Adults (DIVA 2.0). Results: More than half of our sample (57.1%) showed at least one personality disorder (PD). The most prevalent PDs were paranoid, schizotypal and negativistic (18.6% for all three PDs), depressive (17.1%), and sadistic (11.4%). No patient had a borderline PD. The EFA identified three personality profiles (“sadistic-antisocial-negativistic,” “masochistic-depressive-dependent-avoidant,” and “antihistrionic-schizoid”). Conclusion: High prevalence of PDs among adult ADHD patients was confirmed. The personality profiles seemed to reflect the persistence of ADHD and related childhood comorbidities in adulthood.

Suggestions for a Framework for an Empirically Based Classification of Personality Disorder

1998 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
W John Livesley
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Emotional Dysregulation ◽  
Social Avoidance ◽  
Axis I ◽  
Definition Of

Background: The classification of personality disorder is one of the least satisfactory sections of contemporary psychiatric classification. Fundamental problems with current classifications include extensive diagnostic overlap, limited evidence of validity, and poor empirical support. Methods: Conceptual analysis and the results of empirical studies are used to propose a framework for organizing an empirically based classification. Results: First, personality disorder is a form of mental disorder and, therefore, should be classified as a single diagnostic entity on Axis I along with other mental disorders. A preliminary definition of personality disorder as a tripartite failure involving the self system, kinship relationships, and societal relationships is proposed. The evidence suggests that this definition can be translated into a reliable set of items. Second, the diagnosis of personality disorder should be separated from the assessment of clinically relevant personality traits. Given the consistent evidential support for a dimensional model of personality disorder, it is suggested that personality be coded on a set of trait dimensions selected to provide a systematic representation of the domain of behaviours represented by current diagnostic concepts. Third, given that personality traits are hierarchically organized, it is suggested that an axis for coding personality include basic or lower-order dimensions as the primary level of assessment and a few higher-order patterns to summarize information for some purposes. Conclusion: A preliminary list of 16 basic dispositional traits is proposed to describe the more specific components of personality disorder based, in part, on the convergence of evidence across studies: anxiousness, affective lability, callousness, cognitive dysregulation, compulsivity, conduct problems, insecure attachment, intimacy avoidance, narcissism, oppositionality, rejection, restricted expression, social avoidance, stimulus seeking, submissiveness, and suspiciousness. Three higher-order patterns were proposed: emotional dysregulation, dissocial behaviour, and inhibitedness, which may occur independently or in combination.

Machiavellianism and personality disorder: their relationship in the mirror of interpersonal attitudes

2014 ◽  
Vol 155 (40) ◽  
pp. 1584-1588
Author(s):  
András Láng
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Interpersonal Problems ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Callous Unemotional ◽  
Personality Dysfunction ◽  
Medium Strength

Introduction: Social and personality psychologists have described Machiavellianism as a pragmatic, callous-unemotional, exploitative and manipulative attitude towards others. Several former studies linked Machiavellian personality traits and interpersonal problems or personality dysfunction. Aim: The aim of this study was to reveal the connection between Machiavellianism and interpersonal problems that are characteristic of personality disorders. Method: 252 participants (146 females and 106 males, aged 32.46±5.39 years, mean±SD) filled out self-report measures of Machiavellianism and personality disorder related interpersonal problems. Results: There was a medium strength relationships between Machiavellianism and several interpersonal problems. Aggression and ambivalence proved to be significant predictors of Machiavellian personality traits. Conclusions: Results are discussed in relation to the patient–therapist bond. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(39), 1584–1588.

MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF PERCEIVED DYSFUNCTION RATINGS OF PERSONALITY DISORDER SYMPTOMS

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 595-606
Author(s):  
David C. Watson ◽  
Andrew J. Howell
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Multidimensional Scaling ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Social Impairment ◽  
Multivariate Techniques ◽  
Personal Distress ◽  
High Distress

Dysfunction in personality disorder symptoms was assessed using multivariate techniques to analyse lay judges' (N = 216) ratings of occupational impairment, social impairment, and personal distress. Factor analysis revealed that ratings of occupational impairment and social impairment loaded onto distinct factors. Personal distress ratings loaded onto two separate factors: high distress and low distress. Multidimensional scaling revealed two dimensions for overall dysfunction among personality disorders: severity of dysfunction and internalization-externalization. The dimensions were independence-dependence and severity of dysfunction for occupational impairment, interpersonal involvement and dominance-submission for social impairment, and internalization-externalization and severity for personal distress.

Personality and Ideology

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danny Osborne ◽  
Nicole Satherley ◽  
Chris G. Sibley
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Big Five ◽  
Personality Trait ◽  
Negative Relationship ◽  
Big Five Personality Traits ◽  
Openness To Experience ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Vast Literature ◽  
Political Conservatism ◽  
The Relationship

Research since the 1990s reveals that openness to experience—a personality trait that captures interest in novelty, creativity, unconventionalism, and open-mindedness—correlates negatively with political conservatism. This chapter summarizes this vast literature by meta-analyzing 232 unique samples (N = 575,691) that examine the relationship between the Big Five personality traits and conservatism. The results reveal that the negative relationship between openness to experience and conservatism (r = −.145) is nearly twice as big as the next strongest correlation between personality and ideology (namely, conscientiousness and conservatism; r = .076). The associations between personality traits and conservatism were, however, substantively larger in Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) countries than in non-WEIRD countries. The chapter concludes by reviewing recent longitudinal work demonstrating that openness to experience and conservatism are non-causally related. Collectively, the chapter shows that openness to experience is by far the strongest (negative) correlate of conservatism but that there is little evidence that this association is causal.

ICD-11 and DSM-5 personality trait domains capture categorical personality disorders: Finding a common ground

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 425-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Bach ◽  
Martin Sellbom ◽  
Mathias Skjernov ◽  
Erik Simonsen
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Domain Models

Objective: The five personality disorder trait domains in the proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition are comparable in terms of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism/Dissociality and Disinhibition. However, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model includes a separate domain of Anankastia, whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition model includes an additional domain of Psychoticism. This study examined associations of International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domains, simultaneously, with categorical personality disorders. Method: Psychiatric outpatients ( N = 226) were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders Interview and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition trait domain scores were obtained using pertinent scoring algorithms for the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Associations between categorical personality disorders and trait domains were examined using correlation and multiple regression analyses. Results: Both the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition domain models showed relevant continuity with categorical personality disorders and captured a substantial amount of their information. As expected, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model was superior in capturing obsessive–compulsive personality disorder, whereas the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition model was superior in capturing schizotypal personality disorder. Conclusion: These preliminary findings suggest that little information is ‘lost’ in a transition to trait domain models and potentially adds to narrowing the gap between Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition and the proposed International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition model. Accordingly, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th edition and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition domain models may be used to delineate one another as well as features of familiar categorical personality disorder types. A preliminary category-to-domain ‘cross walk’ is provided in the article.

A New Look at Personality Disorders Treatments

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. S506-S506
Author(s):  
S. Neves ◽  
J. Tudela
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Primary Treatment ◽  
Adjunctive Treatment ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Sociocultural Change ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Competing Interest

IntroductionMental illness develops and is inseparable from the sociocultural context. The Disturbances may exhibit different symptoms in different cultures. In personality disorders, there is a pathological expansion of normal traits that often demonstrate a sociocultural change. The quality of life of these patients can improve with certain treatments, which appears to be relevant to be achieved.MethodSearch on Pubmed and Medline for original research or review articles published in English or Portuguese in the last 10 years. It used a combination of terms: “personality”, “treatment”, “personality disorder”, “borderline”, “antissocial”, “pharmacotherapy”, and other named personality disorders.Objectives/AimSearch the evidence base and the new perspectives for the effective treatment of personality disorders.ResultsThe same personality traits may be adaptive or non-adaptive in different contexts. So, without changing these characteristics, patients can learn to use them more effectively. In other words, although the therapy did not change the personality traits, it can be modified in the way they affect the behavioral expression.ConclusionsPsychological or psychosocial intervention is recommended as the primary treatment for borderline personality disorder and pharmacotherapy is only advised as an adjunctive treatment. The amount of research about the underlying, abnormal, psychological or biological processes leading to the manifestation of a disordered personality is increasing, which could lead to more effective interventions.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

Personality Disorders

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yosefa A. Ehrlich ◽  
Amir Garakani ◽  
Stephanie R Pavlos ◽  
Larry Siever
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Diagnostic Criteria ◽  
Early Adulthood ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Clinical Population ◽  
Organizational System ◽  
Medical Disorders

Personality can be defined as an organizational system of self that shapes the manner in which a person interacts with his or her environment. Personality traits develop in adolescence or early adulthood and are thought to be shaped by early childhood experiences and enduring throughout a lifetime. Personality traits that prevent an individual from being able to function in society or that cause significant distress are diagnosed as personality disorders. A thorough history is needed to rule out other psychiatric and medical disorders. This chapter reviews the diagnostic criteria, differential diagnosis, comorbidity, prevalence, etiology (including genetics and neurobiology), prognosis, and treatment of paranoid, schizoid, schizotypal, borderline, antisocial, narcissistic, histrionic, avoidant, obsessive-compulsive, and dependent personality disorders. A discussion of the relevance of personality disorders to primary care practices and approaches to managing such patients is also included. Tables describe the diagnostic criteria of each personality disorder. Figures illustrate the prevalence of personality disorders in the general and psychiatric populations; schizotypal personality disorder in the community, general population, and clinical population; childhood trauma in individuals with personality disorder; and comorbid disorders in individuals with borderline personality disorder. A model of brain processing in borderline personality disorder is also featured. This chapter contains 5 highly rendered figures, 10 tables, 230 references, and 5 MCQs.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document