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.     

The DSM-III-R Categorical Personality Disorder Diagnoses: A Critique and an Alternative

Thepurpose of this article is to review the Diagnostic andStatistica1 Manual ofMental Disorders (DSM-III-R; American Psychiatric Association, 1987) categorical diagnosis of personality disorders and to provide an alternative. The results from a variety of studies indicate that the categorical distinctions provided in DSM-ZII-R lack empirical support and that a dimensional model of classification would provide more reliable and valid assessments of personality disorder. The arguments favoring the categorical model--familiarity, tradition, simplicity, ease, and consistency with clinical decisions-are also addressed An alternative approach based on the five-factor model of personality is presented. Two concerns regarding this model are the relevance of the openness-to-experience dimension and the differentiation of abnormality from normality, but neither concern is problematic when personality disorders are understood to be maladaptive variants of normal personality traits.     

DSM-III-R personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality: an empirical comparison.

The relationship between the five-factor model (FFM) of personality and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (rev. 3rd ed.; DSM-III-R) personality disorders was examined in a sample of 54 psychiatric outpatients. Correlations between raw scores on the NEO-Personality Inventory (NEO-PI) and the number of DSM-III-R personality disorder symptoms rated present using a semistructured interview were computed. In addition, correlations between NEO-PI scores and scores on two self-report personality disorder inventories were also examined to determine which results replicated across instruments. Results indicated that the FFM personality dimensions of Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Agreeableness were most apparent in the DSM-III-R conceptualizations of the personality disorders.     

Current status of the scientific study of the personality disorders: an overview of epidemiological, longitudinal, experimental psychopathology, and neurobehavioral perspectives

Research on the nature and development of personality disorders has grown immensely over the past thirty years. A selective summary overview is given of the current status of the scientific study of the personality disorders from several perspectives, including the epidemiological, longitudinal, experimental psychopathology, and neurobehavioral perspectives. From this research, we now know that approximately 10 percent of the general population suffer from a diagnosable personality disorder. Moreover, contrary to nearly a century of theory and clinical pedagogy, modern longitudinal studies clearly suggest that personality disorders decrease in severity over time. The mechanisms by which this change occurs are not understood at present, though it is not likely that change in underlying normal personality systems drives the change in personality disorder. The methods of the experimental psychopathology laboratory, including neuroimaging approaches, are being brought to bear on the nature of personality disorders in efforts to relate neurobiological and neurocognitive functions to personality disorder symptomatology. A model that links personality disorder feature development to underlying, interacting brain-based neurobehavioral systems is reviewed in brief. Current issues and findings illustrative of these developments are given using borderline personality disorder as an exemplar. Finally, areas of intersection between psychoanalytic treatment approaches and the growing science of personality disorder are highlighted.     

Sex bias in the diagnosis of personality disorders: an evaluation of the DSM-IV criteria.

This study considered whether the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) is biased against women by requiring less dysfunction for the personality disorders that are more commonly diagnosed in women (e.g., histrionic). Clinicians estimated the extent of social dysfunction, occupational dysfunction, and personal distress suggested by each of the diagnostic criteria for 6 personality disorders. The results failed to suggest a bias against women, as there was no difference in the overall level of dysfunction associated with the female-typed personality disorder diagnostic criteria (fewer criteria are also required for the male-typed diagnoses). However, the considerable variation in dysfunction across disorders and criteria, and the minimal degree of impairment implied by some of the diagnostic criteria, also raise more general issues that should perhaps be addressed in future editions of the diagnostic manual.     

Personality and psychopathology in an impulsive aggressive college sample

Certain personality traits have been associated with impulsive aggression in both college and community samples, primarily irritability, anger/hostility, and impulsivity. The literature regarding the psychopathology associated with impulsive aggression is relatively sparse and strongly emphasizes DSM‐IV‐TR [APA, 2000] Axis II personality disorders, although some comorbidity with Axis I clinical disorders has been reported. The current study compares impulsive aggressive (IA) college students with their non‐aggressive peers on several self‐report measures of personality and psychopathology. Personality results were as predicted, with IAs scoring higher than controls on measures of impulsivity and aggression. Additionally, the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI), which was given for exploratory purposes, revealed a unique pattern of psychopathic traits in impulsive aggression that contained key differences from the callous‐unemotional profile seen in premeditated aggression. Contrary to our hypothesis that a specific pattern of psychopathology (personality disorders, bipolar disorder, and adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) would emerge for impulsive aggression, IAs scored significantly higher than controls on nearly every clinical scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Somatic Complaints, Anxiety, Anxiety‐Related Disorders, Depression, Mania, Schizophrenia, Borderline Features, Antisocial Features, Alcohol Problems, and Drug Problems), indicating a global elevation of psychopathology. In conclusion, while the personality traits and behaviors that characterize impulsive aggression are relatively consistent across individuals, its associated psychopathology is unexpectedly variable. Aggr. Behav. 00:1–10, 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Pathological gambling and personality disorders: an exploratory study with the IPDE

This article describes the most frequent personality disorders related to pathological gambling. Participants included 50 pathological gamblers assessed with the IPDE, and 50 normative subjects from the general population with the same demographic features (age, sex, and socioeconomic level). Thirty-two percent of the clinical sample (vs. the 8% of the normative sample) showed at least one personality disorder. The most prevalent disorders were Borderline (16%), followed by Antisocial, Paranoid, Narcissistic, and Non-specified (8% each). Gamblers with personality disorders presented an average of 1.5 disorders and they reported higher gambling severity and more severe symptoms of anxiety, depression and alcohol abuse. The implications of this study for clinical practice and research are discussed.     

Using DSM axis II information to predict outcome in short-term individual psychotherapy

The present study considered three methods of using DSM Axis II information to examine the effect of personality disorder on outcome in two forms of short-term, individual psychotherapy (interpretive and supportive). The first method involved examining whether the presence of any personality disorder influenced treatment outcome. The second method involved examining the effect of the number of personality disorders on outcome. The third involved examining outcome for specific personality disorders. The study found that a diagnosis of any personality disorder did not influence the outcome of therapy. In contrast, the number of personality disorders was significantly related to outcome at post-therapy and at 12-month follow-up. The findings indicated that a greater number of personality disorders was associated with less favorable outcome across both forms of therapy. This supports the notion that personality pathology is more severe when it involves a greater number of personality disorders. In an exploratory set of analyses, the study also found some evidence of differences in outcome for specific personality disorders.     

Dimensions and categories: the "big five" factors and the DSM personality disorders

The five-factor model of personality, which has been widely studied in personality psychology, has been hypothesized to have specific relevance for DSM-defined personality disorders. To evaluate hypothesized relationships of the five-factor model of personality to personality disorders, 144 patients with personality disorders (diagnosed via a structured interview) completed an inventory to assess the five-factor model. Results indicated that the majority of the personality disorders can be differentiated in theoretically predictable ways using the five-factor model of personality. However, while the personality disorders as a whole appear to be differentiable from normal personality functioning on the five factors, the patterns are quite similar across the disorders, a finding that may provide some insight into the general nature of personality pathology but may also suggest problems with discriminant validity. Third, it does not appear that considering disorders as special combinations of features (as might be expected in some categorical models) is more informative than considering them as the sum of certain features (as might be expected in a dimensional model).     

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.     

Recollections of conflict with parents and family support in the personality disorders

This study examined the relationships between personality disorders and retrospective reports of family support and conflict with parents. Participants were 798 United States Air Force recruits who were participating in a larger program of research on the peer assessment of personality disorders. Correlational analyses revealed consistent but modest associations between personality disorder features and both measures of family adversity. Borderline, antisocial, and paranoid features maintained small, unique associations after controlling for the general component of personality disorder. Further analyses, however, showed that differences among the correlations between personality disorder traits and family adversity measures account for little explained variance. In general, it does not appear that individual personality disorders have unique relations with retrospective reports of family adversity. Instead, the relation between personality disorders and family adversity seems to depend on a component common to all personality disorders.     

Motivation for treatment in patients with personality disorders

The primary objective of the present study is to investigate the association between DSM-IV personality disorders and motivation for treatment in a large sample of patients admitting for a variety of psychotherapeutic programs (n = 1083). Second, we examine whether and to what extent this association is accounted for by other relevant patient variables (i.e., demographics, subjective distress, and treatment history). We developed a brief questionnaire to measure the motivation for treatment: the Motivation for Treatment Questionnaire (MTQ-8). The MTQ-8 consists of two subscales, i.e., Need for help and Readiness to change. The results show that patients with various personality disorders were significantly more motivated for treatment than those without. No differences across specific personality disorders were apparent. The association between personality disorders and motivation for treatment appeared to be partly accounted for by the level of symptom distress. It is concluded that, among treatment-seeking patients, personality disorders are associated with motivation for treatment and this association can best be understood by the higher symptom distress in patients with personality disorders as compared to those without personality disorders.     

Treatment rejecting and treatment seeking personality disorders: Type R and Type S

An important distinguishing feature of one group of personality disorders is the wish of the sufferer to seek treatment. For another group this wish is rarely entertained. Although there is some variation between different types of personality disorder the wish to change is not confined to any one diagnostic category. A useful subclassification of personality disorders is therefore into Type R (treatment rejecting) and Type S (treatment seeking) personality disorders, and these are defined operationally. The classification of 68 personality disordered patients on the caseload of an assertive community team using a simple scale showed a 3 to 1 ratio between Type R and Type S personality disorders with Cluster C personality disorders being significantly more likely to be Type S, and paranoid and schizoid (Cluster A) personality disorders significantly more likely to be Type R than others. It is suggested that this typology is useful for those contemplating treatment with those who have personality disorders.     

Assessing personality disorders using a systematic clinical interview: evaluation of an alternative to structured interviews

The aim of this study was to assess interrater reliability and provide initial data bearing on the validity of a method of assessing personality disorders (PDs) that does not presume that patients can accurately self-report personality pathology. In a sample of 24 outpatients, two clinician-judges independently applied the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure-200 (SWAP-200; Westen & Shedler, 1999a, 2000), a 200-item Q-sort procedure for assessing personality pathology, to data from the Clinical Diagnostic Interview (Westen, 2002), a systematic clinical interview that mirrors and standardizes methods used by experienced clinicians to diagnose personality. In 16 of the 24 cases, the treating clinician also independently described the patient using the SWAP-200 Q-sort, based on longitudinal knowledge of the patient over the course of treatment, blind to the interview data. Interrater reliability was uniformly high, with median correlations between interviewers at r > .80. Interviewer-treating clinician correlations were also high, with median convergent validity coefficients at r > .80. Diagnostic overlap (discriminant validity) was moderate for dimensional DSM-IV diagnoses, reflecting extensive comorbidity among disorders, but minimal for empirically derived diagnoses identified in prior research. Treating clinicians' dimensional PD diagnoses using this method also strongly predicted interviewer-rated measures of adaptive functioning. The findings provide preliminary support for the reliability and validity of an alternative to structured interviews for diagnosing personality pathology, and suggest that the way to improve validity of personality diagnosis may not be to minimize clinical inference but to quantify it using psychometric instruments.     

Aktuelle Entwicklungslinien in der Pers?nlichkeitsforschung im Jugendalter

Personality disorders in juveniles are still a controversially discussed topic. The aim of this paper is to describe the recent trend in personality research in adolescence and to outline perspectives in research and assessment. Recent study results have pointed out that personality disorders in juveniles can be reliably assessed with diagnostic instruments that have been developed for adults. At the same time there is a lack of specific instruments that can represent the characteristics during adolescence and that can differentiate personality disorders from youth crises. As some personality disorder dimensions also describe unstable developmental criteria we will focus separately on this differential diagnosis and meaning of stable versus transient personality characteristics in youth. The prevalence of personality disorders seems to be higher in adolescence than in adulthood. The stability, however, is comparable in adolescence and adulthood. Psychopathy as a subtype of the antisocial personality disorder ?C that can also be assessed in juveniles ?C will be discussed regarding its core and behavioral dimensions as well as primary and secondary subtypes. Furthermore, we discuss forensic issues when assessing personality disorders with respect to criminal responsibility. Overall we can show that more diagnostic longitudinal studies are essential in order to clarify under which conditions personality disorders develop, which factors influence its course and which interventions can change them.     

Longitudinal studies of personality disorders: four lessons from personality psychology

The three longitudinal projects described in this special section of the Journal of Personality Disorders raise a number of intriguing questions concerning the natural history of personality disorders and offer more than their share of surprises. In addition, they underscore several valuable lessons derived from the literature on normal-range personality traits. Drawing in part from the writings of the American trait psychologist Gordon Allport, I describe four such lessons: (1) change and continuity of personality traits and disorders can and do coexist, (2) the covariation among personality traits helps to account for the "comorbidity" among personality disorders, (3) personality traits and disorders influence how individuals interpret life events, and (4) personality traits must be distinguished from behavioral adaptations to these traits. These lessons remind us that the science of personality disorders must be informed by the basic science of personality.     

Charting the future of axis II

Although there is general agreement that personality disorders are best conceptualized dimensionally, reflecting continuity with normal personality types, personality disorder traits, and personality disorders themselves, categorical systems continue to be utilized for clinical diagnostic purposes. The arguments for and against each approach are reviewed, and a proposal is presented for DSM-V that involves elements of both.     

Attitudes of clinical psychologists towards clients with personality disorders

Previous studies have found that a variety of mental health professionals hold negative attitudes towards clients diagnosed with a personality disorder. These negative attitudes may lead to clients receiving a lower quality of service. Specialist training has been found to improve attitudes towards personality disorders but no empirical studies in Australia have examined this among clinical psychologists. In this study, the attitudes of 81 clinical psychologists towards clients with personality disorders were examined. We were specifically interested in investigating the relationship between recency of specialist training and clinician's attitudes as well as the influence of percentage of personality disorder clients on the clinician's caseload. Results demonstrated that both recency of specialist training and percentage of clients seen were associated with more positive attitudes; however, a higher caseload of clients with personality disorders was the most important predictor of positive attitudes. The implication is that recent participation in specialist training for personality disorders appears to be valuable in improving clinician's attitudes but that more positive attitudes are associated with seeing a greater number of individuals with personality disorders.     

Publication trends in individual DSM personality disorders: 1971–2015

Growth in personality disorder research has been documented by previous authors up to 1995. The aim of the present study was to extend this by examining publications rates for individual DSM personality disorders over the period 1971–2005, and making projections to 2015 based on these data. It was found that personality disorder research has grown in absolute terms, and as a proportion of overall psychopathology research. Research output is dominated by borderline personality disorder, with strong publication rates in other conditions such as antisocial and schizotypal personality disorders. In contrast, several personality disorders such as schizoid and paranoid personality disorder have failed to attract research interest. Based on current projections, there is expected to be no research output in 2015 for schizoid personality disorder. It was found that the rate of publications for personality disorders was not influenced by the publication of the last three revisions of the DSM diagnostic criteria. Several potential explanations such as the difficulty in conducting certain types of personality disorder research, and the validity of the current DSM diagnostic taxonomy are discussed.