Comparison of alternative models for personality disorders

@article{Morey2006ComparisonOA,
  title={Comparison of alternative models for personality disorders},
  author={Leslie C. Morey and Christopher James Hopwood and John G. Gunderson and Andrew E. Skodol and M Tracie Shea and Shirley Yen and Robert L. Stout and Mary C. Zanarini and Carlos M. Grilo and Charles A. Sanislow and Thomas H. McGlashan},
  journal={Psychological Medicine},
  year={2006},
  volume={37},
  pages={983 - 994}
}
Background. The categorical classification system for personality disorder (PD) has been frequently criticized and several alternative dimensional models have been proposed. Method. Antecedent, concurrent and predictive markers of construct validity were examined for three models of PDs: the Five-Factor Model (FFM), the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP) model and the DSM-IV in the Collaborative Study of Personality Disorders (CLPS) sample. Results. All models showed… 
Comparison of alternative models for personality disorders, II: 6-, 8- and 10-year follow-up
TLDR
Compared with previous findings, approaches that integrate normative traits and personality pathology proved to be most predictive, as the SNAP, a system that integrates normal and pathological traits, generally showed the largest validity coefficients overall.
Personality Disorders in DSM-5: Emerging Research on the Alternative Model
TLDR
An overview of the emerging research on this alternative model of personality disorders is provided, addressing each of the primary components of the model.
The twofold diagnosis of personality disorder: How do personality dysfunction and pathological traits increment each other at successive levels of the trait hierarchy?
TLDR
The results only partially supported the 2-component PD diagnosis, as traits and dysfunction appeared to have only limited incremental validity, and lower order traits were generally unable to outperform higher order components in predicting specific DSM-IV PDs.
Comparing factor analytic models of the DSM-IV personality disorders.
TLDR
This study explores the latent factor structure of the DSM (4th ed.; IV) PDs in a sample of 1200 psychiatric outpatients evaluated with the Structured Interview for DSM-IV PDs and finds the 10-factor model to be the strongest of all 3 models.
Categorical and Dimensional Conceptions of Personality Pathology in DSM-5: Toward a Model-Based Synthesis.
TLDR
Bifactor models fit the data effectively for all six PDs, and trait and symptom indicators both loaded appreciably on general factors reflecting cross-domain PD constructs, providing a principled, quantitative synthesis of categorical/interview and dimensional/self-report approaches to operationalizing and studying PDs.
Five-factor model of personality disorders: Spanish normative data and validation
The categorical approach of personality disorders (PD) has giv-en way to a dimensional paradigm. Within this, the Five-factor model (FFM) proposes theoretical hypotheses describing personality
Convergence between DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 Diagnostic Models for Personality Disorder: Evaluation of Strategies for Establishing Diagnostic Thresholds
TLDR
Results demonstrate that diagnostic rules could be derived that yielded appreciable correspondence between DSM-IV-TR and proposed DSM-5 PD diagnoses and represents the most comprehensive attempt to date to provide conceptual and empirical justification for diagnostic thresholds utilized within the DSM PDs.
The stability of personality traits in individuals with borderline personality disorder.
TLDR
The BPD group was less stable in terms of the ipsative configuration of FFM facet-level profiles than was the other PD group over time, pointing to the importance of personality trait instability in characterizing BPD.
Ten-year rank-order stability of personality traits and disorders in a clinical sample.
TLDR
The relatively lower stability of personality disorder symptoms may indicate important differences between pathological behaviors and relatively more stable self-attributed traits and imply that a full understanding of personality and personality pathology needs to take both traits and symptoms into account.
Personality Disorder Classification: Stuck in Neutral, How to Move Forward?
  • A. Skodol
  • Psychology
    Current Psychiatry Reports
  • 2014
TLDR
This article reviews factors that influenced the development of the new model and data to encourage and facilitate its use by clinicians and a way forward involving collaborative research on neurobiological and psychosocial processes, treatment planning, and outcomes.
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 66 REFERENCES
The representation of four personality disorders by the schedule for nonadaptive and adaptive personality dimensional model of personality.
TLDR
Results indicated that the dimensions of the SNAP model appear to have considerable promise in differentiating normal from abnormal personality, particularly in the propensity of individuals with PDs to manifest negative affects and interpersonal detachment.
Predicting dimensions of personality disorder from domains and facets of the Five-Factor Model.
TLDR
Use of the NEO-PI-R facets afforded substantial improvement over the Five-Factor Model domains in predicting interview-based ratings of DSM-IV personality disorder, such that the NEO facets and the SNAP scales demonstrated roughly equivalent levels of predictive power.
Borderline personality: traits and disorder.
TLDR
The results indicated that neuroticism best distinguished borderline and nonborderline patients, whereas the FFM as a whole captured a sizable proportion of the variance in the borderline diagnosis.
Using the five-factor model to represent the DSM-IV personality disorders: an expert consensus approach.
TLDR
The authors concluded that, with the possible exception of schizotypal PD, the DSM PDs can be understood from the dimensional perspective of the FFM.
A test of models of personality disorder configuration.
In this study, the authors examined the degrees to which various models of personality disorder (PD) configuration are consistent with the primary data sets from clinical and community samples
Dimensions and Categories: The "Big Five" Factors and the DSM Personality Disorders
TLDR
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.
Categorical and dimensional models of personality disorder.
TLDR
There is converging evidence that four major domains of personality are relevant to personality pathology: neuroticism/negative affectivity/emotional dysregulation; extraversion/positive emotionality; dissocial/antagonistic behavior; and constraint/compulsivity/conscientiousness.
Dimensional representations of DSM-IV personality disorders: relationships to functional impairment.
TLDR
Scores on dimensions of general personality functioning do not appear to be as strongly associated with functional impairment as the psychopathology of DSM personality disorder.
Representation of personality disorders in circumplex and five-factor space: explorations with a clinical sample
This study examined the relationship between DSM-III-R personality disorders and the interpersonal circumplex and Big Five models of personality traits. One hundred and two consecutive referrals for
The five-factor model and personality disorder empirical literature: A meta-analytic review.
...
1
2
3
4
5
...