Search

Abstract. Identity difficulties have been associated with various psychiatric conditions and are considered a central issue in personality pathology. Following the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders, measures of self- and interpersonal functioning have been developed. Although these measures were intended to be separate ratings of self-other deficits, only a global rating was obtained. Moreover, these measures fall short in bridging the gap between developmental and clinical identity work. To capture both adaptive and disturbed identity dimensions, Kaufman et al. (2015) developed the Self-Concept and Identity Measure (SCIM) that assesses consolidated identity, disturbed identity, and lack of identity. Using two-wave longitudinal data (2,150 adolescents; 54.2% girls; age range = 12–19), this study investigated the factor structure and reliability of the Dutch SCIM, its measurement invariance across time, its longitudinal measurement invariance across gender and age groups, and associations of the SCIM with identity synthesis and confusion, Big-Five personality traits, and borderline personality disorder features. Consolidated identity scores were positively related to identity synthesis and adaptive Big-Five traits, whereas negatively related to identity confusion, neuroticism, and borderline features. Opposite associations were obtained for disturbed identity and lack of identity scores. The Dutch SCIM appeared to produce valid and reliable scores and seemed suited to assess longitudinal identity functioning in Belgian adolescents.

Individual differences in identity development are commonly captured by identity statuses, representing combinations of high and/or low scores on identity exploration and commitment processes. Although identity impairment is considered a potential diagnostic criterion of all personality disorders (PDs) in Section III of DSM-5, studies that relate identity processes or statuses to PDs are limited. The current study examined associations between identity processes and statuses, and dimensionally measured PDs among 343 Belgian emerging adults (71.4% female; Mage = 22.73, SD = 2.85, age range = 18–30). Stepwise cluster analysis on the identity processes revealed six identity statuses: achievement, foreclosure, searching moratorium, troubled diffusion, carefree diffusion, and an undifferentiated status. Generally, commitment making and identification with commitment were negatively associated with PDs, whereas ruminative exploration was positively related to PDs. Individuals in troubled and carefree diffusion statuses reported the highest mean scores on PD symptomatology, whereas individuals in achievement and foreclosure statuses reported the lowest mean PD scores. The present findings suggest that individuals who appear unable to settle on identifying-defining commitments are prone to the highest levels of PD symptomatology. ispartof: European Journal Of Developmental Psychology vol:18 issue:1 pages:75-95 status: published

We report on two individuals presenting for treatment as part of everyday clinical practice, comparing their pathological personality traits through the lens of the ICD-11 trait qualifiers and the DSM-5 Section III personality trait model. We compare higher order pathological personality domains and lower order pathological personality trait facets of patient M (diagnosed with borderline personality traits according to DSM-5 Section II), and patient L (diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive personality traits according to DSM-5 Section II) with normative data and with each other. Findings highlight the clinical utility of a ICD-11/DSM-5 combined view, including: (1) the Disinhibition/Anankastia personality domain distinction as advocated in the ICD-11 model, (2) the Psychoticism personality domain as conceptualized in the DSM-5 Section III personality trait model, as well as (3) the use of lower order personality trait facets within each higher order personality domain. This article is part of the research topic: "ICD-11 Personality Disorders: Utility and Implications of the New Model" ispartof: Frontiers In Psychiatry vol:12 pages:1-6 ispartof: location:Switzerland status: Published online

Introduction: The DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) and the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders (PD) are largely commensurate and, when combined, they delineate 6 trait domains: negative affectivity, detachment, antagonism/dissociality, disinhibition, anankastia, and psychoticism. Objective: The present study evaluated the international validity of a brief 36-item patient-report measure that portrays all 6 domains simultaneously including 18 primary subfacets. Methods: We developed and employed a modified version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 – Brief Form Plus (PID5BF+). A total of 16,327 individuals were included, 2,347 of whom were patients. The expected 6-factor structure of facets was initially investigated in samples from Denmark (n = 584), Germany (n = 1,271), and the USA (n = 605) and subsequently replicated in both patient- and community samples from Italy, France, Switzerland, Belgium, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Poland, Czech Republic, the USA, and Brazil. Associations with interview-rated DSM-5 PD categories were also investigated. Results: Findings generally supported the empirical soundness and international robustness of the 6 domains including meaningful associations with familiar interview-rated PD types. Conclusions: The modified PID5BF+ may be employed internationally by clinicians and researchers for brief and reliable assessment of the 6 combined DSM-5 and ICD-11 domains, including 18 primary subfacets. This 6-domain framework may inform a future nosology for DSM-5.1 that is more reasonably aligned with the authoritative ICD-11 codes than the current DSM-5 AMPD model. The 36-item modified PID5BF+ scoring key is provided in online supplementary Appendix A see www.karger.com/doi/10.1159/000507589 (for all online suppl. material).

We investigated the relation between subjective cognitive biases measured with the Dutch Davos Assessment of Cognitive Biases (DACOBS-NL) and (1) the presence of a psychotic versus nonpsychotic psychiatric disorder, (2) the current dose of antipsychotic medication and current psychotic symptoms, and (3) the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) Psychoticism personality trait. Results showed that DACOBS-NL subjective cognitive biases (1) were equally present in patients diagnosed with nonpsychotic disorders compared with patients with a psychotic disorder, (2) could not be explained by the current dose of antipsychotic medication, nor by current psychotic symptoms, and (3) significantly correlated with all PID-5 Personality domains. Moreover, in predicting membership of the psychotic versus nonpsychotic psychiatric disorder group, the addition of the PID-5 domains in step 2 rendered the contribution of the DACOBS-NL subjective cognitive biases in step 1 nonsignificant. Further research is needed to clarify the interplay between cognitive biases and aberrant salience in the prediction of psychotic disorders.

Based on the widely used Penn State Worry Questionnaire for trait worry, a scale was developed to measure the level of worry experienced during the past 24 h. This instrument, the Penn State Worry Questionnaire—Past Day (PSWQ-PD), was administered to a student sample and two clinical samples. The PSWQ-PD demonstrated high internal consistency, good convergent validity and adequate test-retest reliability. A confirmatory factor analysis revealed that a unifactorial solution provided the best fit. Moreover, it was shown that the PSWQ-PD is a more state-like worry measure than the original PSWQ. The PSWQ-PD is a promising, brief tool for daily worry assessment, which is apt for frequent administration.

The factor structure and the convergent validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), a self-report questionnaire designed to measure personality pathology as advocated in the fifth edition, Section III of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ( DSM-5), are already demonstrated in general population samples, but need replication in clinical samples. In 240 Flemish inpatients, we examined the factor structure of the PID-5 by means of exploratory structural equation modeling. Additionally, we investigated differences in PID-5 higher order domain scores according to gender, age and educational level, and explored convergent and discriminant validity by relating the PID-5 with the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology—Basic Questionnaire and by comparing PID-5 scores of inpatients with and without a DSM-IV categorical personality disorder diagnosis. Our results confirmed the original five-factor structure of the PID-5. The reliability and the convergent and discriminant validity of the PID-5 proved to be adequate. Implications for future research are discussed.

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5; Krueger et al., 2012) is a dimensional self-report questionnaire designed to measure personality pathology according to the criterion B of the DSM-5 Section III personality model. In the current issue of DSM, this dimensional Section III personality model co-exists with the Section II categorical personality model derived from DSM-IV-TR. Therefore, investigation of the inter-relatedness of both models across populations and languages is warranted. In this study, we first examined the factor structure and reliability of the PID-5 in a Flemish community sample (N=509) by means of exploratory structural equation modeling and alpha coefficients. Next, we investigated the predictive ability of section III personality traits in relation to section II personality disorders through correlations and stepwise regression analyses. Results revealed a five factor solution for the PID-5, with adequate reliability of the facet scales. The variance in Section II personality disorders could be predicted by their theoretically comprising Section III personality traits, but additional Section III personality traits augmented this prediction. Based on current results, we discuss the Section II personality disorder conceptualization and the Section III personality disorder operationalization. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.