Normative and maladaptive personality trait models of mood, psychotic, and substance use disorders
The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) is a questionnaire developed to assess the five domains represented in the alternative model for personality disorders proposed in Section III of the DSM-5. This study examined the ability of the PID-5 to distinguish between different mental disorders compared to a questionnaire measure of the five-factor model (FFM) of normative personality. The study included the administration of the PID-5 and Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R), a measure of the FFM, to treatment-seeking individuals with Depressive, Bipolar, Psychotic, and Alcohol Use Disorders (AUD). Diagnostic groups were compared at the domain level of PID-5 and NEO PI-R, with sex and age as covariates. The main findings on the PID-5 included higher Detachment scores for Bipolar and Depressive Disorders than Psychotic and AUDs, lower Psychoticism/higher Disinhibition scores for the AUD group compared to all other groups, and lower Negative Affect for the Psychotic Disorders versus AUD group. On the NEO PI-R, the AUD diagnostic group was associated with lower Conscientiousness and Agreeableness scores compared to all other groups, and lower Neuroticism scores than the Bipolar and Depressive groups. Group pairwise comparisons did not appear to show many differences between the PID-5 and NEO PI-R. The results suggest that the alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders may have clinical utility in distinguishing personality profiles between diagnostic groups. These findings emphasize the importance of additional research on the capacity of maladaptive personality to contribute to the assessment of differential diagnoses.
KeywordsFive Factor Model NEO PID-5 Psychopathology DSM-5
Funding for parts of the data collection were received from the University of Minnesota Press and a grant from the McLaughlin Centre for Molecular Medicine.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
Laura M. Heath, Lauren Drvaric, Christian S. Hendershot, Lena C. Quilty and R. Michael Bagby declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Research Ethics Board of CAMH and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Clarke, D. E., Narrow, W. E., Regier, D. A., Kuramoto, S. J., Kupfer, D. J., Kuhl, E. A., et al. (2013). DSM-5 field trials in the United States and Canada, part I: Study design, sampling strategy, implementation, and analytic approaches. American Journal of Psychiatry, 170, 43–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Costa Jr., P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
- First, M. B., & Gibbon, M. (2004). The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV axis I disorders (SCID-I) and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II disorders (SCID-II). In M. J. Hilsenroth, D. L. Segal, & M. Hersen (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook of psychological assessment. Volume 2, Personality assessment (pp. 138–140). Hoboken, NH: John Wiley & Sons, Inc..Google Scholar
- First, M. B., Spitzer, R. L., Gibbon, M., & Williams, J. B. W. (1996). Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV axis I disorders. New York, NY: NY State Psychiatric Institute.Google Scholar
- Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Watson, D., & Skodol, A. E. (2013). The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5)-Adult (Full Version). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.Google Scholar
- Narrow, W. E., Clarke, D. E., Kuramoto, S. J., Kraemer, H. C., Kupfer, D. J., Greiner, L., & Regier, D. A. (2013). DSM-5 field trials in the United States and Canada, Part III: development and reliability testing of a cross-cutting symptom assessment for DSM-5. American Journal of Psychiatry, 170, 71–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Regier, D. A., Narrow, W. E., Clarke, D. E., Kraemer, H. C., Kuramoto, S. J., Kuhl, E. A., & Kupfer, D. J. (2013). DSM-5 field trials in the United States and Canada, part II: Test-retest reliability of selected categorical diagnoses. American Journal of Psychiatry, 170, 59–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sleep, C. E., Hyatt, C. S., Lamkin, J., Maples-Keller, J. L., & Miller, J. D. (2017). Examining the relations among the DSM-5 alternative model of personality, the five-factor model, and externalizing and internalizing behavior. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, & Treatment. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000240.