Multidimensional perfectionism and the DSM-5 personality traits

Encouraging further research on the dimensional assessment of personality disorders (PDs), Section III of the DSM-5 introduced a hybrid model for the assessment of six PDs employing self-reports on 25 maladaptive personality traits (“DSM-5 personality traits”). Following suggestions that multidimensional perfectionism is an important characteristic across various personality disorders (Ayearst, Flett, & Hewitt, 2012), the present study investigated how personal (self-oriented) and interpersonal (other-oriented and socially prescribed) forms of perfectionism predicted the DSM-5 personality traits in a sample of 311 university students. Multiple regressions (controlling for the overlap between the different forms of perfectionism) showed that socially prescribed perfectionism positively predicted the traits defining schizotypal, borderline, avoidant, and obsessive-compulsive PD; other-oriented perfectionism positively predicted the traits defining narcissistic PD; and both socially prescribed and other-oriented perfectionism positively predicted the traits defining antisocial PD. In contrast, self-oriented perfectionism positively predicted only one of the four traits defining obsessive-compulsive PD (rigid perfectionism). Showing that multidimensional perfectionism predicted all DSM-5 traits defining the personality disorders of Section III, the findings suggest that future DSM-5 updates may profit from including interpersonal aspects of perfectionism as a diagnostic criterion.     

An interpersonal analysis of pathological personality traits in DSM-5

The proposed changes to the personality disorder section of the Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.) places an increased focus on interpersonal impairment as one of the defining features of personality psychopathology. In addition, a proposed trait model has been offered to provide a means of capturing phenotypic variation on the expression of personality disorder. In this study, the authors subject the proposed DSM-5 traits to interpersonal analysis using the inventory of interpersonal problems-circumplex scales via the structural summary method for circumplex data. DSM-5 traits were consistently associated with generalized interpersonal dysfunction suggesting that they are maladaptive in nature, the majority of traits demonstrated discriminant validity with prototypical and differentiated interpersonal problem profiles, and conformed well to a priori hypothesized associations. These results are discussed in the context of the DSM-5 proposal and contemporary interpersonal theory, with a particular focus on potential areas for expansion of the DSM-5 trait model.     

Reconceptualizing personality pathology in DSM-5: limitations in evidence for eliminating dependent personality disorder and other DSM-IV syndromes

The DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Workgroup proposed that five DSM-IV personality disorders be eliminated as formal diagnostic categories (paranoid, schizoid, histrionic, narcissistic, and dependent), because these syndromes purportedly have low clinical utility and minimal evidence for validity. Scrutiny of studies cited in support of this proposal reveals difficulties in three areas: (1) Inadequate information regarding parameters of the literature search; (2) Mixed empirical support for proposed changes; and (3) Selective attention to certain disorders and not others. Review of validity and clinical utility data related to dependent personality disorder indicates that evidence regarding this syndrome does not differ from that of syndromes proposed for retention in DSM-5. Limitations in the research base cited by the workgroup illuminates gaps in the personality disorder literature, and may serve as a starting point for systematic research on personality pathology so that adequate empirical data are available to decide which syndromes to retain, revise, or remove in future versions of the diagnostic manual.     

Dimensions of DSM-IV personality disorders and life-success

This study examined associations between dimensional representations of DSM-IV personality disorders and life-success in a community sample of 304 men at age 48. Measures included a standardized social interview and the SCID-II for assessment of personality disorders. The identified indicators of life-success were factor-analyzed resulting in two moderately correlated components representing "status and wealth" and "successful intimate relationships." Avoidant, obsessivecompulsive, and narcissistic dimensional scores were positively associated with "status and wealth." Inverse relationships were found between dependent, schizotypal, schizoid, and adult antisocial personality disorder dimensions and this domain of life-success. Avoidant, schizoid, and borderline personality disorder dimensions were negatively associated with "successful intimate relationships." The findings suggest that although most personality disorders are associated with impaired psychosocial functioning and life-failure, some personality disorder traits (even if considered as pathological) can contribute positively to one important aspect of life-success: status and wealth.     

Personality traits in the DSM-5

Recent advances in personality research coupled with a broad acknowledgment of the limitations of the representation of personality pathology in the third and fourth editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III and DSM-IV) have positioned personality science to influence the shape of personality assessment in the fifth edition (DSM-5). Representing normative personality with well-validated traits that are broad, normally distributed, theoretically integrative, and distinct from personality disorder constructs would take optimal advantage of this opportunity. The assessment of normative traits would also link a large body of personality research with the practice of clinical diagnosis and would encourage clinicians to consider every patient's personality regardless of his or her diagnosis. Furthermore, conceptualizing personality traits and disorders separately would promote more careful clinical consideration of the functional severity and specific symptom constellations among personality disorders. Based on these considerations I argue that Five-factor model personality traits should be assessed separately from personality disorders in the DSM-5.     

Self-reported personality traits and disorders (DSM-IV) and risk of criminal recidivism: a prospective study

Assessment and management of criminal offenders require valid methods to recognize personality psychopathology and other risk and protective factors for recidivism. We prospectively explored the association between dimensional and categorical measures of personality disorder (PD) measured with the DSM-IV and ICD-10 Personality Questionnaire (DIP-Q, Ottosson et al., 1995) and registered reconvictions in adult offenders. One hundred and sixty-eight offenders consecutively referred for pre-sentencing forensic psychiatric evaluation in Sweden during 1995-1996 completed DIP-Q self-reports. The subjects received different types of sanctions and were followed for an average of 36 months after release from prison, discharge from a forensic psychiatric hospital, or onset of nondetaining sentences. Age-adjusted odds ratios revealed a 4.8 times higher risk for any recidivism and a 3.7 times higher risk for violent recidivism among subjects whose self-reports suggested a categorical diagnosis of antisocial PD as compared to offenders without antisocial PD. The remaining nine categorical DSM-IV PD diagnoses were not significantly related to recidivism. In dimensional analyses, each additional antisocial and schizoid PD symptom endorsed by participants at baseline increased the risk for violent reoffending. Our results suggest a relationship between self-reported behavioral instability and interpersonal dysfunction captured primarily by DSM-IV antisocial and schizoid PD constructs, and criminal re-offending also in a multi-problem sample of identified offenders.     

The association of affiliation and achievement personality styles with DSM-IV personality disorders

Investigators from theoretically diverse backgrounds have long described two personality styles associated with depression. The affiliation style describes individuals with interpersonal concerns; the achievement style describes individuals who have concerns with personal failure. Although primarily related to risk for depression, there has also been recognition that extreme forms of these styles are related to personality disorders (PDs). The current study examines the relation between the DSM-IV PDs and the two personality styles, assessing the latter using two approaches: (a) dependency/self-criticism (Blatt, 1974) and (b) sociotropy/autonomy (Beck, 1983). Results show that whereas the achievement style is associated with most PDs (except for the histrionic and dependent PDs), the affiliation style is associated only with histrionic, dependent, and depressive PDs. Controlling for shared PD variance leaves only two associations, affiliation with dependent PD and achievement with narcissistic PD. Results are discussed in the context of current efforts to capture personality psychopathology within a comprehensive dimensional framework.     

A critique of the proposed prototype rating system for personality disorders in DSM-5

The DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders (PDs) Work Group has recommended a reformulation of the PD section, one component of which is a replacement of specified operational criteria with a prototype matching dimensional rating system. The Work Group indicated that prototype ratings have been demonstrated to have good interrater reliability. No study was cited to support this statement, and a review of the reliability literature does not support this claim. The one study that directly compared the reliability of prototype and DSM-IV criteria counting approaches found the DSM-IV approach was much more reliably applied. The Work Group cited 2 studies supporting the validity of the prototype matching approach, one of which had significant methodological limitations and the other changed the a priori threshold on the PD prototype dimensional rating scale to categorize patients into PD positive and negative groups. The Work Group also cited 2 studies suggesting that prototype matching approaches are preferred by clinicians. Several studies have raised concerns about the adequacy of psychiatric diagnostic evaluations conducted in routine clinical practice thereby raising questions about the value of studies of clinicians' preferences in comparing different diagnostic practices. In conclusion, if the prototype matching dimensional approach described in the DSM-5 draft proposal is adopted, then it will have been adopted with essentially no empirical support demonstrating improved reliability or validity. In fact, there is evidence that reliability will be worse than the DSM-IV approach.     

Opinions of personality disorder experts regarding the DSM-IV personality disorders classification system

OBJECTIVE: To survey the opinions of personality disorder (PD) experts on possible revisions in the classification system for PDs in the DSM-V. METHOD: Four hundred members of two international associations, the Association for Research on Personality Disorders, and the International Society for the Study of Personality Disorders, were asked to take a 78-item web survey. RESULTS: Of the experts who completed the survey (N = 96), 74% felt that the DSM-IV's categorical system of PD diagnosis should be replaced. Eighty percent felt that PDs are better conceived of as personality dimensions or illness spectra, than as categories. The most frequently endorsed alternative system for PDs was a mixed system of categories and dimensions. Most experts preferred the PDs to remain on Axis II. Only 31.3% wanted the term, "Borderline Personality Disorder," retained in the DSM-V. CONCLUSIONS: A clear majority of the PD experts were dissatisfied with the current diagnostic system for PDs.     

Contributions from personality- and psychodynamically oriented assessment to the development of the DSM-5 personality disorders

Advances in personality assessment over the past 20 years have notably influenced the proposed assessment and classification of personality disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed. [DSM-5]). However, a considerable body of personality assessment and psychodynamically oriented assessment research has significant relevance to the way in which personality disorders are evaluated that appears to have gone unrecognized in the current proposals for DSM-5. In this article, I discuss the ways in which some of these 2 bodies of literature can and should inform the DSM-5 so that the diagnostic nomenclature can be more scientifically and comprehensively informed and consequently improve the clinical utility of a diagnostic system in need of considerable revision.     

Moral nature of the DSM-IV Cluster B personality disorders

Moral considerations do not appear to play a large role in discussions of the DSM-IV personality disorders and debates about their empirical validity. Yet philosophical analysis reveals that the Cluster B personality disorders, in particular, may in fact be moral rather than clinical conditions. This finding has serious consequences for how they should be treated and by whom.     

Genetic and environmental contributions to the co-occurrence of depressive personality disorder and DSM-IV personality disorders

One of the main controversies with regard to depressive personality disorder (DPD) concerns the co-occurrence with the established DSM-IV personality disorders (PDs). The main aim of this study was to examine to what extent DPD and the DSM-IV PDs share genetic and environmental risk factors, using multivariate twin modeling. The DSM-IV Structured Interview for Personality was applied to 2,794 young adult twins. Paranoid PD from Cluster A, borderline PD from Cluster B, and all three PDs from Cluster C were independently and significantly associated with DPD in multiple regression analysis. The genetic correlations between DPD and the other PDs were strong (.53-.83), while the environmental correlations were moderate (.36-.40). Close to 50% of the total variance in DPD was disorder specific. However, only 5% was due to disorder-specific genetic factors, indicating that a substantial part of the genetic vulnerability to DPD also increases the vulnerability to other PDs.     

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.     

The longitudinal relationship of personality traits and disorders

Personality disorders are presumed to be stable because of underlying stable and maladaptive personality traits, but while previous research has demonstrated a link between personality traits and personality disorders cross-sectionally, personality disorders and personality traits have not been linked longitudinally. This study explores the extent to which relevant personality traits are stable in individuals diagnosed with 4 personality disorders (schizotypal, borderline, avoidant, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders) and examines the assumption that these personality disorders are stable by virtue of stable personality traits. This assumption was tested via the estimation of a series of latent longitudinal models that evaluated whether changes in relevant personality traits lead to subsequent changes in personality disorders. In addition to offering large consistency estimates for personality traits and personality disorders, the results demonstrate significant cross-lagged relationships between trait change and later disorder change for 3 of the 4 personality disorders studied.     

Deriving an empirical structure of personality pathology for DSM-5

The DSM-IV model of personality disorders is composed of trait sets arranged into 10 theoretically distinct, polythetically assessed categories, with little regard for how the traits comprising these disorders are interrelated and structured. Research since the publication of DSM-III has shown that this model is untenable. The question is not whether this model needs revision; rather, the question is how to move from the existing DSM-IV framework to a model better connected with data. Empirically-based models of personality trait variation provide a starting point for DSM-5, and ongoing research will be used to delineate further the empirical structure of personality traits in the pathological range. The ultimate goal is to frame future DSMs in a way that is maximally useful for clinicians as well as researchers. It is also critical to understand that the DSM-5 is intended to be a living document that will facilitate novel inquiry and clinical applications, as opposed to a document designed to promote and perpetuate a fixed set of constructs. Thus, we view a proposed trait system as a first step on a path to a well-validated, clinically-useful structure.     

Evaluation of the SCID-II personality disorder traits for DSM-IV: coherence, discrimination, relations with general personality traits, and functional impairment

The utility of the DSM personality disorder (PD) system remains a concern. The strategy employed represents one approach designed to evaluate and improve the diagnostic efficiency of the SCID-II PDs. Using a sample of 203 patients, SCID-II PD items-based on the criterion sets of the 10 DSM-IV PDs-were evaluated with respect to (a) convergent validity; (b) divergent validity; (c) relation to general personality traits; and (d) association with functional impairment. Only Borderline PD items were satisfactory on all four evaluation criteria. Histrionic and Obsessive-Compulsive PD items met criteria for convergent and divergent validity and relation to personality dimensions of the Five-Factor Model of Personality (FFM) but were not related to functional impairment, suggesting they might be reconsidered as disorders. Schizotypal PD items met three of the four criteria but showed no relation to FFM dimensions, suggesting that it may be a candidate for reassignment to Axis I.     

A simplified technique for scoring DSM-IV personality disorders with the Five-Factor Model

The current study compares the use of two alternative methodologies for using the Five-Factor Model (FFM) to assess personality disorders (PDs). Across two clinical samples, a technique using the simple sum of selected FFM facets is compared with a previously used prototype matching technique. The results demonstrate that the more easily calculated counts perform as well as the similarity scores that are generated by the prototype matching technique. Optimal diagnostic thresholds for the FFM PD counts are computed for identifying patients who meet diagnostic criteria for a specific PD. These threshold scores demonstrate good sensitivity in receiver operating characteristics analyses, suggesting their usefulness for screening purposes. Given the ease of this scoring procedure, the FFM count technique has obvious clinical utility.     

Rates of personality disorders in substance abusers: a comparison between DSM-III-R and DSM-IV

The publication of the DSM-IV represents the first revision in 7 years to the DSM-III-R diagnostic criteria. The purpose of the current study is to evaluate the impact of changes to the Axis II criteria on diagnostic rates in a substance abusing population. We interviewed 370 patients entering treatment using a modified version of the SCID-II, which allowed for the diagnosis of both DSM-III-R and DSM-IV Axis II diagnoses. Prevalence rates for each Axis II disorder are given, as well as kappa statistics showing diagnostic agreement between the two systems. The results of this study indicate good rates of diagnostic agreement between the two systems with a few notable exceptions. Poor rates of diagnostic agreement were obtained for the histrionic and dependent diagnostic categories. No single diagnostic change appears to be responsible for the prevalence rate differences between the two systems.     

The DSM-5 dimensional model of personality disorder: rationale and empirical support

Ideally, a dimensional model of normal and abnormal personality functioning within the forthcoming DSM-5 would represent a common ground among the existing alternative models and would be consistent with the substantial body of empirical research that has accumulated on such models. The DSM-5 Work Group had the opportunity to make an historic step toward the integration of the normal personality traits researched within psychology with the personality disorders of psychiatry. They chose instead to construct a cumbersome six-dimensional model of personality disorder that excludes normal personality traits, is inconsistent with the preponderance of the research, and is distinguished explicitly from the predominant dimensional model of general personality structure.