Use of the TAT in the Assessment of DSM-IV Cluster B Personality Disorders

The Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale (SCORS), developed by Westen, Lohr, Silk, Kerber, and Goodrich (1985), is a diagnostic instrument used to assess an array of psychological functioning by using clinical narratives such as the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT; Murray, 1943) stories. This study investigated the utility of the SCORS to differentiate between Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) antisocial personality disorder (ANPD), borderline personality disorder (BPD), narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), and Cluster C personality disorder (CPD). A sample of 58 patients was separated into four groups: ANPD (n = 9), BPD (n = 21; 18 with a primary BPD diagnosis and 3 with prominent borderline traits who met 4 of the 5 DSM-IV criteria necessary for a BPD diagnosis), NPD (n = 16; 8 with a primary NPD diagnosis and 8 with prominent narcissistic traits who met 4 of the 5 DSM-IV criteria necessary for a NPD diagnosis), and CPD (n = 12). These groups were then compared on the 8 SCORS variables by using 5 TAT cards (1, 2, 3BM, 4, and 13MF). Spearman-Brown correction for 2-way mixed effects model of reliability for the 8 SCORS variables ranged from .70 to .95. The results of categorical and dimensional analyses indicate that (a) the SCORS variables can be used to differentiate ANPD, BPD, and NPD; (b) the BPD group scored significantly lower (greater maladjustment) than did the CPD group on certain variables; (c) the BPD group scored significantly lower (greater maladjustment) than did the NPD group on all 8 SCORS variables; (d) the ANPD group scored significantly lower than did the NPD group on certain variables; (e) certain variables were found to be empirically related to the total number of DSM-IV ANPD, BPD, and NPD criteria; and (f) certain variables were found to be empirically related to Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) personality disorder scales. The results of this study are discussed in terms of clinical utility, conceptual, and theoretical implications.     

Predicting DSM-IV Cluster B Personality Disorder Criteria From MMPI-2 and Rorschach Data: A Test of Incremental Validity

Despite their frequent conjoint clinical use, the incremental validity of Rorschach (Rorschach, 1921/1942) and MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1943) data has not been adequately established, nor has any study to date explored the incremental validity of these tests for predicting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) personality disorders (PDs). In a reanalysis of existing data, we used select Rorschach variables and the MMPI PD scales to predict DSM-IV antisocial, borderline, histrionic, and narcissistic PD criteria in a sample of treatment-seeking outpatients. The correlational findings revealed a limited relation between Rorschach and MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) variables, with only 5 of 30 correlations reaching significance (p < .05). Hierarchical regression analyses showed that both the MMPI and Rorschach data add incrementally in the prediction of DSM-IV borderline and narcissistic PD total criteria scores. The findings were less clear for the incremental value of Rorschach and MMPI-2 data in predicting the total number of DSM-IV histrionic PD criteria, which were best predicted by Rorschach data, and antisocial PD criteria, which were best predicted by MMPI-2 data. In addition to providing evidence of the incremental validity of Rorschach data, these findings also shed light on the psychological characteristics of the DSM-IV Cluster B PDs.     

The assessment of ambitious-narcissistic character style with three projective tests: the Early Memories, TAT, and Rorschach

This study describes the construction of scales designed to assess ambitious-narcissistic character style on three projective tests: the Early Memories, TAT, and Rorschach. The main aim of the study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of these scales. A secondary aim was to demonstrate the feasibility of assessing particular character styles with projective tests commonly available to clinicians and researchers. Forty male college students volunteered as subjects. The overall reliability of the three projective scales was found to be acceptable. The scales were then tested for validity in two ways. First, they were intercorrelated and found to show a pattern suggesting a common dimensionality. Secondly, the scales were found to successfully differentiate subjects rated by clinically-trained raters as ambitious-narcissistic in style from those subjects rated as non-ambitious-narcissistic.     

Personality disorder and Axis I psychopathology: the problematic boundary of Axis I and Axis II

The confusion of personality disorders with Axis I disorders can be traced in part to inadequacies of assessment instruments and diagnostic criterion sets. However, it also reflects the absence of adequate conceptualization. If Axis I continues to include early onset, chronic impairments that characterize everyday functioning, then there is unlikely to be a clear or meaningful distinction. Inherent and unique to personality disorders is that they concern a person's sense of self and identity. They are disorders of everyday functioning. Personality disorders have an early onset, characterize everyday functioning, and relate closely to personality functioning evident within the general population; Axis I disorders, in contrast, have an onset throughout adult life, are episodic, and are readily distinguishable from normal personality functioning.     

Psychometric evaluation of the symptom checklist (SCL-90) in psychiatric inpatients

The factorial validity, temporal stability and discriminatory power of the Symptom Checklist (SCL-90) were investigated in a heterogeneous sample of short-stay psychiatric inpatients (n=437). Results from a confirmatory factorial approach suggested a reduced dimensionality for the SCL-90 rather than supporting the 10 or 9 a priori symptom dimensions. From exploratory factor analyses 4 clinically interpretable and moderately intercorrelated dimensions emerged: depression, hostile-suspiciousness, somatization and phobic anxiety. Internal consistency and temporal stability coefficients of these 4 subscales and of the global scale were satisfactory. SCL-90 discriminated poorly between different clinical groups. However, the scale quite successfully discriminated patients from healthy subjects from the general population. It is concluded that SCL-90 might be a valuable instrument for the detection of potential psychiatric cases in the general population.     

Incremental validity of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 and symptom checklist-90-revised with mental health inpatients

This study evaluated the incremental validity of scores from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) in a sample of mental health inpatients originally published by Archer, Griffin, and Aiduk (1995). The incremental validity of scores from the SCL-90-R primary symptom dimensions and MMPI-2 Clinical, Content, and Restructured Clinical scales was assessed in a sample of 544 mental health inpatients using conceptually related items from the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) as criteria. A series of hierarchical multiple regressions indicated that scores from the SCL-90-R primary symptom dimensions exhibited limited incremental validity (Mdn DeltaR(2) = .01, range = 0-.01), whereas scores from MMPI-2 scales contributed additional information in the prediction of ratings on all but one BPRS item (Mdn DeltaR( 2) = .08, range = .04-.12).     

On the Comparison of TAT and Free Speech Techniques in Personality Assessment

Schnurr, Rosenberg, and Oxman (1992) recently compared the free speech samples and Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) responses of 95 normal adults. They concluded that the two techniques are not interchangeable, and that the TAT, which proved superior in the prediction of individual differences, may be preferable to free speech instructions for eliciting data in content analytic studies. We disagree with both conclusions. Various forms of narrative speech samples may be highly correlated, so long as psychologically meaningful, well-validated, and higher order content categories are used. The use of first-order content categories is less likely to contribute to the study of personality.     

Concordance of the MCMI-II, the MMPI, and Axis I discharge diagnosis in psychiatric inpatients.

Discriminant functions of the MMPI and the MCMI-II were compared in a sample of 166 hospitalized psychiatric patients with discharge diagnoses of affective disorder (63), schizophrenia (26), substance abuse (35), and other disorders (42). Of special interest was the comparative diagnostic utility of the two instruments in regards to DSM-III-R Axis I diagnoses. Both tests performed reasonably well in the discriminant function analyses; however, the MCMI-II achieved a somewhat superior overall hit rate with this sample of inpatients (79% to 68%). This difference was tied to greater accuracy of the MCMI-II for identifying the affective disorders group.     

The Validity of the Rorschach and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: Results from Meta-Analyses

Results from meta-analyses have been widely cited to defend the validity of the Rorschach. However, the meta-analyses have been flawed. For example, one meta-analysis included results that were obtained by calculating correlations but not results that were obtained by conducting t tests or analyses of variance. When we reanalyzed the data from the most widely cited meta-analysis (Parker, Hanson, & Hunsley, 1988), we found that for confirmatory studies (also called convergent-validity studies), the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) explained 23% to 30% of the variance, whereas the Rorschach explained only 8% to 13% of the variance. These results indicate that the Rorschach is not as valid as the MMPI.     

Comorbidity of DSM-IV Personality Disorders in unipolar and bipolar affective disorders: a comparative study

The aim of this study was to compare the prevalence of Personality Disorders assessed by Structured Clinical Interview for Axis-II in 155 inpatients diagnosed with Unipolar Disorder vs inpatients with Bipolar Disorder (39). The most frequent Axis II diagnoses among Unipolar inpatients were Borderline (31.6%), Dependent (25.2%), and Obsessive-Compulsive (14.2%) Personality Disorders. Among Bipolar inpatients, the most prevalent personality disorders were Borderline (41%), Narcissistic (20.5%), Dependent (12.8%), and Histrionic disorders (10.3%). Using chi squared analysis, few differences in distribution emerged between the two groups: Unipolar patients had more recurrent Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder than Bipolar patients (chi(1)2=6.24, p<.005). Comorbid Narcissistic Personality Disorder was significantly more frequent in the Bipolar than in the Unipolar group (chi(1)2=6.34, P<.01). Considering the three clusters (DSM-IV classification), there was a significant difference between the groups, Cluster C (fearful, avoidant) diagnoses being more frequent in the Unipolar than in the Bipolar group (48.4% vs 20.5%, respectively). Cluster B (dramatic, emotionally erratic) diagnoses were found more frequently in patients with Bipolar Disorders (71.8% vs 45.2% in Unipolar patients, chi(2)2=10.1, p<.006). The differences in the distribution and prevalence of Personality Disorders between the two patient groups are discussed.     

A Rorschach Study of Narcissism Defense,and Aggression in Borderline,Narcissistic, and Cluster C Personality Disorders

We examined the differences between narcissism, mode of defense, and level of aggression on the Rorschach. We also investigated differences in borderline, narcissistic, and Cluster C personality disorders by examining responses to Rorschach content variables. The Lerner Defense Scale (P. Lerner & H. Lerner, 1980), the aggressive content section of the Holt (1977) method for assessing primary process manifestations, a modified version of Exner's (1986a) Egocentricity Index, Wagner's (1965) exhibitionistic M score, and grandiosity were scored on the Rorschach protocols of 17 borderline, I7 narcissistic, and 17 Cluster C personality disorders. Borderlines were found to employ primitive defensive structures to a greater degree and severity, show more intense and overall aggression as welt as more responses on the three forms of aggression in the Holt method, and have higher levels of grandiosity. Narcissists evinced significantly higher levels of egocentricity than borderlines and higher levels of idealization than the Cluster C group. Convergent validity was found on the measures of defense and aggression, which showed a strong relationship between primitive aggression and primitive defense.     

Dimensional personality traits and the prediction of DSM-IV personality disorder symptom counts in a nonclinical sample

The third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III; APA, 1980) set forth a categorical system of personality psychopathology that is composed of discrete personality disorders (PDs), each with a distinct set of diagnostic criteria. Although this system is widely accepted and highly influential, alternative dimensional approaches to capturing personality psychopathology have been proposed. Three dimensional models of personality have garnered particular attention-the Five-Factor Model (FFM; Costa & McCrae, 1992), the Seven-Factor Psychobiological Model of Temperament and Character (Seven-Factor Model; Cloninger, Svrakic, & Przybeck, 1993); and the 18-factor model of personality pathology (18-factor model; Livesley, 1986). Although the personality traits from each of these models has been examined in relation to the ten personality disorders in the DSM-IV, no study has examined the comparative and incremental validity of these models in predicting PD symptoms for these ten disorders. Using self-report instruments that measure these models and the ten DSM-IV PDs, correlation and linear regression analyses indicate that traits from all three models had statistically significant associations with PD symptom counts. Hierarchical regressions revealed that the 18-factor model had incremental predictive validity over the FFM and Seven-Fac-tor Model in predicting symptom counts for all ten DSM-IV PDs. The FFM had incremental predictive validity over the Seven-Factor Model model for all ten disorders and the Seven-Factor was able to add incremental predictive validity over the 18-factor model for five of the ten PDs and for eight of the ten disorders relative to the FFM.     

核心人际图式改变、人格改变与症状缓解的关系:个案研究

本研究旨在通过一例抑郁症病例的52次心理治疗和效果评估说明核心人际图式改变、人格改变与症状缓解的关系。核心人际图式采用自编我的感受问卷测量,人格改变采用SWAP-200测量,症状采用OQ45.2测量。结果:核心人际图式的变化伴随着临床上可观察的人格改变、症状缓解及当事人总体功能和心理健康水平的提高。症状缓解主要体现为主观困扰的降低,但在社会功能和人际关系质量上改变不明显。结论:核心人际图式、人格障碍轮廓和症状缓解具有共变关系。     

External Validation of Bifactor Model of ADHD: Explaining Heterogeneity in Psychiatric Comorbidity,Cognitive Control,and Personality Trait Profiles Within DSM-IV ADHD

The current paper provides external validation of the bifactor model of ADHD by examining associations between ADHD latent factor/profile scores and external validation indices. 548 children (321 boys; 302 with ADHD), 6 to 18 years old, recruited from the community participated in a comprehensive diagnostic procedure. Mothers completed the Child Behavior Checklist, Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire, and California Q-Sort. Children completed the Stop and Trail-Making Task. Specific inattention was associated with depression/withdrawal, slower cognitive task performance, introversion, agreeableness, and high reactive control; specific hyperactivity-impulsivity was associated with rule-breaking/aggressive behavior, social problems, errors during set-shifting, extraversion, disagreeableness, and low reactive control. It is concluded that the bifactor model provides better explanation of heterogeneity within ADHD than DSM-IV ADHD symptom counts or subtypes.