The DSM-5 Section III Personality Disorder Criterion A in Relation to Both Pathological and General Personality Traits

Following the introduction of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), section III alternative model of personality disorder, much of the empirical attention has been directed toward testing the performance of Criterion B (i.e., pathological traits). Much mor...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Personality disorders 2020-05, Vol.11 (3), p.202-212
Hauptverfasser: Sleep, Chelsea E, Weiss, Brandon, Lynam, Donald R, Miller, Joshua D
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Following the introduction of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), section III alternative model of personality disorder, much of the empirical attention has been directed toward testing the performance of Criterion B (i.e., pathological traits). Much more recently, with the development of assessment tools related to Criterion A (i.e., personality impairment), a burgeoning literature base is forming for it as well. A closer look at the Criterion A component, however, reveals disagreements around its structure, discriminant validity, ability to distinguish between personality-based and nonpersonality-based forms of psychopathology, overlap between the two criteria, and incremental validity. The goal of the current study (N = 365 undergraduates) was to test Criterion A in relation to both pathological personality traits, as specified in the DSM-5, and general personality traits, as some scholars suggested that might be more appropriate. The results suggest that impairment domains overlap substantially with pathological and general traits, and these traits account for considerable variance in impairment domains. Most importantly, the findings suggest that general and pathological traits functioned in nearly identical ways, as evidenced by the similar relations that they evinced with traditional DSM-5 personality disorder constructs. In line with previous work, the present findings demonstrate limited discriminant validity among impairment domains and an inability to distinguish between Axis I and II symptoms. Further research on the alternative model of personality disorder is needed to test the necessity and sufficiency of its constituent components.
ISSN:1949-2715
1949-2723
DOI:10.1037/per0000383