), and Morey et al. Using a categorical approach, for example, does not mean that the expected traits will be present. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 10(2), 97-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/per0000307 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/per0000307 (2002). Donaldson, S. I., & Grant-Vallone, E. J. Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-IV-TR Axis II Disorders - Personality Questionnaire (SCID-II-PQ; First, Gibbon, Spitzer, Williams, & Benjamin, 1997First, M. B., Gibbon, M., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI): The development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10.
The development of the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders: An amalgam of science, pragmatism, and politics. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 148(1), 23-26. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.148.1.23 https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.148.1.23
Correlation strengths did not present a coherent pattern in Avoidant PD, Dependent PD, and Paranoid PD (higher values were identified in both clinical and community samples). Kinds versus continua: A review of psychometric approaches to uncover the structure of psychiatric constructs. Continuity between DSM-5 categorical criteria and traits criteria for borderline personality disorder.
The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 61(8), 489-494. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743716640756, Hopwood, C. J., Thomas, K. M., Markon, K. E., Wright, A. G., & Krueger, R. F. (2012). To do so, we used kappa statistic. Furthermore, in contrast to Watters et al. The dimensional model of PDs proposed for the ICD-11 excludes the categories of different kinds of PDs and operates on a dimensional description of severity levels (which are categorical, but regarding the same dimension and not independent elements) and trait qualifiers (Bach & First, 2018Bach, B., & First, M. B. A comparison of the DSM-5 section II and section III personality disorder structures.
Morey, L. C., & Skodol, A. E. (2013). https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329171500194 https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329171000165 https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329171100196 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57 https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2011.25.2.1 https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.155.12.1733 https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2005.19.3.2 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18235857 https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.19.2.110.62 https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329171100267 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743716640756 https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191113504984 https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329171500222 https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/o https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-0325 https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-4446200000 https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329170004399 https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329170003150 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6503 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1819.2003 https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2007.21.6.6 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.11.0 https://sabi.ufrgs.br/F/J8L4NCUGQHX79876 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019637632584 https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.58.6.59 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1994 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1908- https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy- https://doi.org/10.3109/16066359.2013.79 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pra.000043050 https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-44462000000300003, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.01.007, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1908-3, https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743716640756, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715001944, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190200, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019637632584, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291710001650, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1994.tb01566.x, https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191113504984, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291700043993, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291711001966, https://doi.org/10.3109/16066359.2013.793314, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6503_4, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291711002674, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291700031500, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715002226, https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pra.0000430502.78833.06, https://sabi.ufrgs.br/F/J8L4NCUGQHX798769YG9427PTL3R8C3HMXKSQDKYGJQVKLKVB1-42242?func=full-set-set&set_number=005570&set_entry=000024&format=999, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1819.2003.01159.x, https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2007.21.6.626, https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-03251-004, https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2011.25.2.136, https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:252895/datastream/PDF/view, https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.58.6.590, https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2005.19.3.262, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095736, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.11.005, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18235857/, https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.19.2.110.62628, https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.155.12.1733, This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. (1952). Psychological Medicine, 15(03), 651-659. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291700031500 https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329170003150 American Psychiatric Press. In order to obtain corresponding validity evidence between the two approaches, we expected Kappa's coefficients to be greater than .80, i.e., a percentage of agreement higher than 64% (McHugh, 2012McHugh, M. L. (2012). Annual Review of Psychology, 58(1), 227-257. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190200 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57 Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI): Validao de entrevista breve para diagnstico de transtornos mentais. ; Strickland, 2014Strickland, C. M. (2014). (2014).
Comparing criterion- and trait-based personality disorder diagnoses in DSM-5. Psychiatry Research, 216(3), 363-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.01.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014. (2011). Continuity between DSM-5 categorical criteria and traits criteria for borderline personality disorder. Anais da 8aMostra de Terapia Cognitivo-Comportamental, 67. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 90(2), 120-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1994.tb01566.x, McHugh, M. L. (2012). ; Torgersen et al., 2001Torgersen, S., Kringlen, E., & Cramer, V. (2001). Categories versus dimensions in personality and psychopathology: A quantitative review of taxometric research. It is hard to find a reliable pattern of association between this PD type and its corresponding traits from the dimensional model. ; Strickland, 2014Strickland, C. M. (2014). (1994). The correspondence found in the current study was mostly due to the high agreement among the negative cases (true negatives). ). [SCID-II-DSM-IV - structured clinical interview for personality disorders: Translation and use at DPA/IP/UFRJ]. Annual Review of Psychology, 58(1), 227-257. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190200, Skodol, A. E., Bender, D. S., Morey, L. C., Clark, L. A., Oldham, J. M., Alarcon, R. D., Krueger, R. F., Verheul, R., Bell, C. C., & Siever, L. J. : Teor. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:252895/datastream/PDF/view https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/o International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32(1), 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.11.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2008.11.0
Although the AMPD presents several advances in terms of describing personality pathology, it also regresses when proposing a categorical outcome. Psychiatry Research, 216(3), 363-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.01.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.
) recommendation of adjusting the traits specified for each PD in order to increase AMPD discriminant validity, we would suggest abandoning the categorical approach of AMPD. The sample was composed of 1,162 participants, recruited mainly via social media. SCID II interviews and the SCID Screen questionnaire as diagnostic tools for personality disorders in DSMIIIR. A comparison of the DSM-5 section II and section III personality disorder structures. Psychological Medicine, 46(3), 647-655. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715002226 https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329171500222 [SCID-II-DSM-IV - structured clinical interview for personality disorders: Translation and use at DPA/IP/UFRJ]. Thus, clinicians must pay thorough attention to the paradigm they are using to describe people's personality. ). In order to facilitate a smooth transition between these models (from categorical to dimensional), the AMPD was built as a hybrid model, which allows clinicians to identify a specific personality type (categorical approach) by matching the patient's profile traits (dimensional approach) with the prototypical profiles of the specific PD types. .30) with the construct from the second block. Assessment and diagnosis of personality disorder: Perennial issues and an emerging reconceptualization.
); and (3) regarding the unexpected correlation between some traits and PDs - for example, Hopwood et al. (2014). World Health Organization.). The reliability and validity of discrete and continuous measures of psychopathology: A quantitative review. ) for Narcissistic PD. ; Warren & South, 2009Warren, J. I., & South, S. C. (2009). ) presented a meta-analytic review of studies involving the association between the PDs maintained in the AMPD and their proposed corresponding facets. Comparing criterion- and trait-based personality disorder diagnoses in DSM-5. The internal consistence coefficient measured by Kuder-Richardson method (KD-20) in the current study was KD-20 = .78. ). American Psychiatric Association. (2012Hopwood, C. J., Thomas, K. M., Markon, K. E., Wright, A. G., & Krueger, R. F. (2012).
Journal of Personality Disorders, 19(3), 262-282. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2005.19.3.262, Widiger, T. A. Relating DSM-5 section III personality traits to section II personality disorder diagnoses. A validity study of a psychiatric screening questionnaire (SRQ-20) in primary care in the city of Sao Paulo.
; Watters et al., 2019Watters, C. A., Bagby, R. M., & Sellbom, M. (2019). According to our hierarchical linear regression analyses, significant percentages of the variances of all of the PDs were accounted for by their specified traits.
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 65(7), 948-958. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.v65n0711 https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.v65n0711 Our interest in this bivariate approach is to examine if the traits that were proposed to belong to specific PD types are really correlated. Psychological Medicine, 41(6), 1151-1163. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291710001650, Haslam, N., Holland, E., & Kuppens, P. (2012). ; Skodol et al., 2011Skodol, A. E., Bender, D. S., Morey, L. C., Clark, L. A., Oldham, J. M., Alarcon, R. D., Krueger, R. F., Verheul, R., Bell, C. C., & Siever, L. J.
Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 10(2), 97-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/per0000307 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/per0000307 A. Prevalence, correlates, and disability of personality disorders in the United States: Results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. ). (2014). Warren, J. I., & South, S. C. (2009). A validity study of a psychiatric screening questionnaire (SRQ-20) in primary care in the city of Sao Paulo.
The main goal of this study was to increase our knowledge about the relationship between the categorical and dimensional models of personality pathology. We found 227 (19.5%) people from the total sample that presented with high scores in a single PD. Widiger, T. A., & Simonsen, E. (2005). Bach, B., & First, M. B.
The cut-off points for the diagnostic decisions were established as follows: (1) for the Section II approach, we ranked the community sample in 100 equal parts in relation to the summed score for each PD type, and we used the 95th percentile as the cut-off point. (1995). We highlight Narcissistic and Passive-Aggressive PDs, for which non-specified traits provided a higher level of incremental information than specified traits. Melo, N. M. M., & Rang, B. P. (2010, September).
This expectation of 100% is based on the AMPD diagnostic system, which indicates that those traits must be present for the diagnosis of these PD categories.
The internal consistence coefficients estimated by KD-20 in the current study ranged from .52 (Obsessive-Compulsive and Schizoid PDs) to .85 (Borderline PD). The results are shown in Table 3. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155(12), 1733-1739. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.155.12.1733 https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.155.12.1733 (2006). Journal of Personality Disorders, 21(6), 626-637. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2007.21.6.626, Warren, J. I., & South, S. C. (2009). World Health Organization. In Table 2, it is also possible to observe many clinically relevant correlation coefficients between PDs and non-expected pathological personality traits. Validating the Personality Inventory for DSM-5: A trait-based model of personality disorders [Masters thesis]. Psychological Medicine, 46(3), 647-655. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715002226 https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329171500222 We also counted on a snowball sampling procedure (Goodman, 1961Goodman, L. A. Although we have a very small sample size for each group, the results generally outline a failure of correspondence between the two models for PD diagnoses.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 123(2), 398-405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0036481 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0036481 American Psychiatric Association. American Psychiatric Association. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. B. W., & Benjamin, L. S. (1997). Nonetheless, the correlation coefficients are highly diversified among the studies, varying in three core aspects: (1) regarding the expected correlation between specific traits with their corresponding PD - for example, Anderson et al. To verify the improvements in the explained variance, we exchanged the variables in the blocks (the first block with the non-proposed traits and the second block with the proposed traits).