The General Factors of Personality Disorder, Psychopathology, and Personality

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Gillian A. McCabe ◽  
Joshua R. Oltmanns ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
The Self ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Direct Test ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A ◽  
P Factor ◽  
Occupational Dysfunction

There is considerable interest in the study of the general factors of personality disorder (g-PD), psychopathology (p factor), and personality (GFP). One prominent interpretation of the g-PD is that it is defined by the self-interpersonal impairments of Criterion A of the DSM-5 Section III. However, no study has directly tested this hypothesis as no prior g-PD study has included a measure of Criterion A. The current study provides a direct test of this hypothesis, along with comparing g-PD with the general factors of psychopathology and personality. Also extracted was a common general factor across all three domains. Suggested herein is that the g-PD, the p factor, and the GFP reflect the impairments (e.g., social and occupational dysfunction) that are secondary to the traits and disorders rather than the traits and/or disorders themselves.

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.

An evaluation of DSM–5 Section III personality disorder Criterion A (impairment) in accounting for psychopathology.

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (10) ◽  
pp. 1181-1191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chelsea E. Sleep ◽  
Donald R. Lynam ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger ◽  
Michael L. Crowe ◽  
Joshua D. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A

The DSM–5 section III personality disorder criterion a in relation to both pathological and general personality traits.

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 202-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chelsea E. Sleep ◽  
Brandon Weiss ◽  
Donald R. Lynam ◽  
Joshua D. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A

Difficulties with the conceptualization and assessment of Criterion A in the DSM–5 alternative model of personality disorder: A reply to Morey (2019).

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (10) ◽  
pp. 1200-1205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chelsea E. Sleep ◽  
Donald R. Lynam ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger ◽  
Michael L. Crowe ◽  
Joshua D. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Criterion A

scholarly journals General Factors of Psychopathology, Personality, and Personality Disorder: Across Domain Comparisons

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 581-589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua R. Oltmanns ◽  
Gregory T. Smith ◽  
Thomas F. Oltmanns ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Self Report ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Combined Model ◽  
General Factor Of Personality ◽  
Report Data ◽  
Self Report Data ◽  
P Factor

Three separate and distinct literatures exist investigating general factors of psychopathology (p factor), personality (general factor of personality, GFP), and personality disorder (g-PD). Surprisingly, there has been little to no investigation regarding the convergence of these three distinct general factors. In the present investigation, two studies were conducted examining the convergence of the p factor, GFP, and g-PD. In Study 1, a combined model extracting all three factors from self-report data simultaneously found high convergence. The findings for the g-PD and GFP were replicated in Study 2 using multimethod data, wherein the GFP and the g-PD were extracted from a community sample of 1,630 older adults and correlated with an index of maladaptivity. The present findings support the position that general factors of psychopathology, personality disorder, and personality are likely to entail a common individual differences continuum, which may impact on how these general factors are to be understood.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document