A psychometric analysis of five DSM-III categories

Preliminary studies of interdiagnostician agreement have shown that the DSM-III holds promise for improving diagnostic reliability. This study examined the characteristics of five DSM-III diagnostic categories (schizophrenia, mania and schizotypal, narcissistic and borderline personality disorders) with respect to three psychometric criteria. Examined were the specificity, syndrome association and internal consistency of the diagnostic criteria for these disorders. Results suggested that of the diagnostic categories examined, the criteria for schizophrenia performed best under empirical scrutiny, while criteria for borderline and narcissistic personality disorders were more problematic. Suggestions are made for subsequent investigations into the internal validity of DSM-III.     

Reliability of DSM-IV anxiety and mood disorders: implications for the classification of emotional disorders

The reliability of current and lifetime Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) anxiety and mood disorders was examined in 362 outpatients who underwent 2 independent administrations of the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for DSM-IV: Lifetime version (ADIS-IV-L). Good to excellent reliability was obtained for the majority of DSM-IV categories. For many disorders, a common source of unreliability was disagreements on whether constituent symptoms were sufficient in number, severity, or duration to meet. DSM-IV diagnostic criteria. These analyses also highlighted potential boundary problems for some disorders (e.g., generalized anxiety disorder and major depressive disorder). Analyses of ADIS-IV-L clinical ratings (0-8 scales) indicated favorable interrater agreement for the dimensional features of DSM-IV anxiety and mood disorders. The findings are discussed in regard to their implications for the classification of emotional disorders.     

Cultural considerations using the structured clinical interview for DSM-III for mood and anxiety disorders assessment

This paper focuses on the impact that culture has upon standardized or structured interviews. It briefly reviews how these interviews evolved from a primary research function, what they can teach us about clinical work, and the multiple ways that culture influences these supposedly objective instruments and the diagnoses which follow from their use. Although the use of structured interviews and standardized diagnostic criteria has been a major advance for the field in terms of reliability, care needs to be exercised when evaluating individuals from disparate cultural backgrounds.     

DSM-III and the revolution in the classification of mental illness

A revolution occurred within the psychiatric profession in the early 1980s that rapidly transformed the theory and practice of mental health in the United States. In a very short period of time, mental illnesses were transformed from broad, etiologically defined entities that were continuous with normality to symptom-based, categorical diseases. The third edition of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III) was responsible for this change. The paradigm shift in mental health diagnosis in the DSM-III was neither a product of growing scientific knowledge nor of increasing medicalization. Instead, its symptom-based diagnoses reflect a growing standardization of psychiatric diagnoses. This standardization was the product of many factors, including: (1) professional politics within the mental health community, (2) increased government involvement in mental health research and policymaking, (3) mounting pressure on psychiatrists from health insurers to demonstrate the effectiveness of their practices, and (4) the necessity of pharmaceutical companies to market their products to treat specific diseases. This article endeavors to explain the origins of DSM-III, the political struggles that generated it, and its long-term consequences for clinical diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders in the United States.     

Health anxiety disorders: a cognitive construal

The features of severe health anxiety, intense and persistent anxiety about one's present and future health, are described. In common with other anxiety disorders such as GAD, PTSD and OCD, the core of HAD is distressing, uncontrollable anxiety, and is classifiable as an Anxiety Disorder, Health Anxiety Disorder (HAD). The cognitive construal of HAD proposes that health anxiety is caused by catastrophic misinterpretations of the significance of sensations and/or changes in bodily functions and appearance (such as swellings, pain, loss of energy, dizzy spells). The nature, causes, triggers, persistence, assessment and treatment of HAD are reviewed, and the present status of the cognitive model is appraised. Suggestions are made for future research and clinical applications, and the need for incisive evaluations of the main premises of the model is emphasized.     

Personality and anxiety disorders: a review

In this article, we summarize research on how normal personality and personality disorder traits may relate to anxiety disorders as predisposing factors, complications, and results of common underlying etiologies. We outline important questions and how these may be addressed through future research using genetically informative longitudinal and other designs, including: Are high neuroticism/cluster C personality traits causally related to the development of anxiety disorders? To what extent does the state of having an anxiety disorder influence the assessment of personality traits? Do high neuroticism/personality disorder traits and anxiety disorders co-occur because of shared genetic and environmental determinants? And, do personality disorder traits add to the prediction of anxiety disorders when normal personality traits are taken into account?     

The self-assessment of resilience and anxiety: psychometric properties

This report describes the psychometric properties of the Self-Assessment of Resilience and Anxiety (SARA) scale within the context of a study of kava for generalized anxiety. This eight-item, patient-rated scale includes questions designed to measure calmness, mental clarity, confidence, physical well being, sociability, and resilience. The SARA scale was administered during a clinical trial of kava versus placebo in 38 subjects diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Validation of the SARA scale was assessed against the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Penn State Worry Questionnaire, Sheehan Disability Scale, Arizona Sexual Experience scale, and Clinical Global Impression of Illness Improvement scale. Good test-retest reliability, internal consistency, convergent validity, and sensitivity to treatment were identified, and factor analyses revealed a three-factor internal structure. The SARA scale was responsive to symptom change over time and correlated with comparable GAD symptom measures. The SARA scale demonstrates solid psychometric properties and may serve as a reliable and valid measure in the use of kava or related medicinal herbs.     

Comparing borderline definitions: DSM-III borderline and schizotypal personality disorders

Compared the two types of borderline disorder formally defined by DSM-III, borderline personality disorder and schizotypal personality disorder, at the diagnostic category and individual criterion level. Unlike previous research in this area, which has focused on inpatient and outpatient populations, the sample was a psychometrically defined, nonpatient sample including Ss meeting DSM-III criteria for each disorder. The results indicated that the two diagnostic categories each define a type of borderline with distinctive combinations of features. Perceptual and cognitive distortion, however, seem to be present in both and define an area of overlap between the two disorders. The implications of these findings for the revision of the SPD diagnostic criteria in DSM-III-R are discussed, and the theoretical separation of two subtypes of borderline personality is affirmed.     

The MCMI provides a good assessment of DSM-III disorders: the MCMI-II will prove even better

Although the arguments that Widiger, Williams, Spitzer and Frances muster in their appraisal of MCMI-DSM-III relationships appear compelling, the study employed to furnish empirical support for their thesis may be seriously flawed and the item content approach they propose as a validation model is judged logically and psychometrically deficient. A rejoinder with supportive data are presented to demonstrate both the substantive parallels and the clinical concordance that exist between MCMI and DSM-III criteria. On the basis of theory development and ongoing research, a new MCMI-II assessment instrument will be forthcoming. A brief summary of this updated inventory's rationale and empirical grounding is provided.     

Classical fear conditioning in the anxiety disorders: a meta-analysis

Fear conditioning represents the process by which a neutral stimulus comes to evoke fear following its repeated pairing with an aversive stimulus. Although fear conditioning has long been considered a central pathogenic mechanism in anxiety disorders, studies employing lab-based conditioning paradigms provide inconsistent support for this idea. A quantitative review of 20 such studies, representing fear-learning scores for 453 anxiety patients and 455 healthy controls, was conducted to verify the aggregated result of this literature and to assess the moderating influences of study characteristics. Results point to modest increases in both acquisition of fear learning and conditioned responding during extinction among anxiety patients. Importantly, these patient-control differences are not apparent when looking at discrimination studies alone and primarily emerge from studies employing simple, single-cue paradigms where only danger cues are presented and no inhibition of fear to safety cues is required.     

The liebowitz social anxiety scale as a self-report instrument: a preliminary psychometric analysis

The Liebowitz social anxiety scale (LSAS) is a commonly used clinician-administered instrument. The present study reports on the properties of a self-report version of the LSAS (LSAS-SR). About 175 participants diagnosed with social phobia participated in the study. The LSAS-SR showed overall good psychometric properties as indicated by the results of test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and convergent and discriminant validity. Furthermore, the scale was sensitive to treatment change. The construct validity of the LSAS-SR, however, remains to be further explored. These findings support the utility of the LSAS-SR, which has the advantage of saving valuable clinician time compared to the clinician-administered version.     

MMPI scales for DSM-III personality disorders: their derivation and correlates

Scales tapping the dimensions of personality disorder as represented in the DSM-III were derived using a combined rational/empirical strategy. The final version of the scales demonstrated both content validity as well as internal consistency. Correlations between the derived scales and between these scales and the original MMPI clinical scales were generally found to be in the expected direction providing preliminary evidence of criterion related validity. It is suggested that the derived scales may represent an advance toward the reliable assessment of DSM-III personality constructs.     

The social phobia and anxiety inventory: psychometric properties in a Spanish sample

This study is a validation of the Spanish version of the Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory using a nonclinical sample (198 participants) and a clinical sample (72 participants with social phobia). The factor structure and concurrent validity with Fear of Negative Evaluation and Social Avoidance and Distress scales were analyzed. The Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory demonstrated good concurrent validity, showing statistically significant relationships with Fear of Negative Evaluation and Social Avoidance and Distress. Results confirmed the rationale for the division of the SPAI into two subscales. Results also demonstrated the utility of the Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory for differentiating between a nonclinical sample and participants with a social phobia, and its adequate reliability.     

Empirical clusters of DSM-III personality disorders in violent offenders

Violent male offenders in a maximum security hospital and special units in prisons (N = 164) were interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III Axis II disorders (SCID-II). Cluster analysis of the personality disorder criteria sets identified six diagnostic patterns: (1) antisocial-narcissistic; (2) paranoid-antisocial; (3) borderline-antisocial-passive-aggressive; (4) borderline; (5) compulsive-borderline; and (6) schizoid. Offenders in the first three groups had more extensive criminal careers, and most were identified as psychopaths by the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R). These Groups also had more frequent lifetime histories of substance abuse. A history of affective and anxiety disorders was more common in Groups 3 and 5, and almost two thirds of Group 2 had a history of psychotic disorder. The results emphasize that dangerous offenders are heterogeneous in personality pathology. They also suggest that personality disorder among violent offenders is more commonly represented by recurring patterns of covarying traits than by single categorical entities proposed in the DSM classification.     

The convergent and discriminant validity of the MCMI as a measure of the DSM-III personality disorders

The personality scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI) were constructed and validated to measure the typology developed by Millon (1981). The ability of the MCMI to measure the DSM-III personality disorders has not yet been empirically evaluated. The current study found better convergent validity for the DSM-III personality disorders that are consistent with Millon's typology (i.e., the avoidant and the dependent) than for the disorders that are inconsistent (i.e., the antisocial and the passive-aggressive). However, the results may reflect some advantages Millon's typology might have over the DSM-III. The discriminant validity of all four scales was limited, due in part to the overlap among the MCMI scales and the DSM-III personality disorders. We discuss implications of the results for the revision of the MCMI and the DSM-III.     

Toward a clinically-oriented model of anxiety disorders

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) model of psychopathology has generally been the accepted standard in North America for understanding and diagnosing psychological disorders for over half a century. This classification model, particularly since DSM-III, has been formulated around the goals of aiding diagnosis, enhancing communication among professionals, fostering psychopathology research and informing treatment. However, all classification systems are inherently dependent on the purpose for the classification. In this paper, an argument is made for a clinically-relevant diagnostic system of mental disorders to support a primary goal of informing treatment. Several lines of research are examined, including studies on diagnostic reliability, dimensional vs categorical nature of anxiety disorders, co-morbidity, and psychotherapeutic and pharmacological treatment outcome as they relate to current and proposed diagnostic models of anxiety disorders. Based on the evidence, suggestions are made for revising diagnostic models of anxiety, and key lines of future research are proposed.     

Establishing a trait anxiety threshold that signals likelihood of anxiety disorders

Abstract

Evidence suggests that the State Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety (STICSA) may be a more pure measure of anxiety than other commonly used scales. Further, the STICSA has excellent psychometric properties in both clinical and nonclinical samples. The present study aimed to extend the utility of the STICSA – Trait version by identifying a cut-off score that could differentiate a group of clinically diagnosed anxiety disorder patients (n=398) from a group of student controls (n =439). Two receiver operating characteristic curve analyses indicated cut-off scores of 43 (sensitivity=.73, specificity=.74, classification accuracy=.74) and 40 (sensitivity=.80, specificity=.67, classification accuracy=.73), respectively. In a large community sample (n =6685), a score of 43 identified 11.5% of individuals as probable cases of clinical anxiety, while a score of 40 identified 17.0% of individuals as probable cases of clinical anxiety. As a result of differences in sensitivity and specificity, the present findings suggest a cut-off score of 43 is optimal to identify probable cases of clinical anxiety, while a cut-off score of 40 is optimal to screen for the possible presence of anxiety disorders.     

Memory bias for threatening information in anxiety and anxiety disorders: a meta-analytic review

Although some theories suggest that anxious individuals selectively remember threatening stimuli, findings remain contradictory despite a considerable amount of research. A quantitative integration of 165 studies with 9,046 participants (clinical and nonclinical samples) examined whether a memory bias exists and which moderator variables influence its magnitude. Implicit memory bias was investigated in lexical decision/stimulus identification and word-stem completion paradigms; explicit memory bias was investigated in recognition and recall paradigms. Overall, effect sizes showed no significant impact of anxiety on implicit memory and recognition. Analyses indicated a memory bias for recall, whose magnitude depended on experimental study procedures like the encoding procedure or retention interval. Anxiety influenced recollection of previous experiences; anxious individuals favored threat-related information. Across all paradigms, clinical status was not significantly linked to effect sizes, indicating no qualitative difference in information processing between anxiety patients and high-anxious persons. The large discrepancy between study effects in recall and recognition indicates that future research is needed to identify moderator variables for avoidant and preferred remembering.