Comparison of alternative models for personality disorders

Area of Science:

• Psychiatry
• Psychology
• Mental Health

Background:

• The current categorical system for personality disorders (PDs) faces criticism.
• Alternative dimensional models for PDs have been developed.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine the construct validity of three PD models: Five-Factor Model (FFM), Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP), and DSM-IV.
• To compare the predictive utility of categorical versus dimensional PD representations.

Main Methods:

• Assessed antecedent, concurrent, and predictive markers of construct validity.
• Utilized data from the Collaborative Study of Personality Disorders (CLPS) sample.
• Compared dimensional models (including dimensionalized DSM-IV) against the conventional categorical diagnosis.

Main Results:

• All examined models demonstrated significant validity across various marker variables over time.
• Dimensional PD models consistently outperformed the categorical diagnosis in predicting external variables like suicidal gestures and hospitalizations.
• FFM facets did not enhance the validity of higher-order factors upon cross-validation, highlighting the importance of both stable traits and dynamic influences.

Conclusions:

• Results support a dimensional approach to understanding personality disorders.
• A dimensional representation should incorporate both stable personality traits and dynamic psychopathological processes.