A study of personality functioning across pre- and post-migration phases among sub-Saharan migrants in Tunisia

The Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) assesses the five pathological personality trait domains that comprise the descriptive core of the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD). The PID-5 five-domain factor structure is aligned with the AMPD and is reported as replicable across samples in the U.S., in other countries, and in different languages. In this study, the PID-5 factor structure is examined in two distinct racial groups within the U.S.-White Americans (WA) and Black Americans (BA). Student participants from four universities in the U.S. (N = 1,834)-composed of groups of WA (n = 1,274) and BA (n = 560)-were proportionally parsed into derivation and replication subsamples. The "traditional" PID-5 five-factor structure emerged for the WA group in the derivation subsample and was subsequently confirmed in the WA replication subsample. In the BA group derivation subsample, a single-factor solution emerged, which was also confirmed in the BA replication sample. This single-factor solution in the BA group reflects large shared covariation across all pathological personality domains, suggesting an undifferentiated, broadly based level of demoralization represented by the item pool of the PID-5. We argue that this structure can be construed as mirroring a racialized and prejudice-based living experience for many BAs in a predominantly non-Black society. Based on the results with the samples employed in the present study, we conclude that the PID-5 is not an equivalent measure of pathological personality traits across Black Americans and White Americans. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

IntroductionThe Alternative Model for Personality Disorders in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5 AMPD) requires the assessment of personality functioning (Criterion A), using the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS), and the presence of pathological personality traits (Criterion B), operationalized with the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Several studies have investigated the associations between the LPFS and the PID-5 personality traits as well as the normal-range personality traits of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality. The goal of the present study was to meta-analytically integrate the findings of these studies to examine the extent to which the LPFS is related to the PID-5 and FFM traits.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in the databases PsycINFO, Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for studies providing information about the correlations of the measures of the LPFS with versions of the PID-5 and/or measures of the FFM in adult samples. The bivariate correlations of scales measuring the LPFS with the measures of the PID-5 and FFM traits were meta-analytically pooled.ResultsData from 44 studies and 47 independent samples were identified and used in the analyses. The results showed medium-to-large weighted average correlations between the LPFS total score and the PID-5 traits, ranging from.44 (antagonism) to.64 (detachment). Overall, lower correlations were found between the LPFS and the FFM traits.DiscussionTentative explanations for these associations are discussed, and suggestions to reduce them—including potential modifications to one or both criteria—are presented.Systematic review registrationhttps://osf.io/49rs7, identifier doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/49RS7.

The factor structure of the Portuguese version of the personality inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5)

The DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) includes two main criteria, impairments in personality functioning (Criterion A) and the presence of maladaptive personality traits (Criterion B). The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) is the primary operationalization of the maladaptive trait framework characterized in Criterion B. This study sought to examine the temporal stability of the PID-5 across 1-year, as well as its concurrent and longitudinal associations with clinically relevant external criteria. We hypothesized the PID-5 would exhibit a high degree of rank-order stability over time, as well as positive associations with putatively negative clinical processes and negative associations with adaptive processes. Negative affectivity was expected to display a markedly consistent pattern of associations, and antagonism was expected to exhibit a more attenuated pattern. Participants with heightened borderline personality features completed the PID-5 and measures of emotional, cognitive, and behavioral processes, as well as psychiatric symptomology, at baseline (N = 107; M = 30.94, SD = 7.33; 51% women) and 1-year follow-up (N = 72). Rank-order stability (Pearson's r) and mean-level changes (Cohen's d) for the PID-5 domains and facets were calculated, along with bivariate correlations with outcomes. Results suggest high stability in terms of rank-order (median Pearson's r correlation of 0.74 for domains and 0.70 for facets), but small to moderate mean-level Cohen's d changes were common (Mdn = -0.56 for domains). Prospective associations with clinical criteria suggest domains and facets are predictive of important therapeutic change processes and outcomes in theoretically expected ways. Negative affectivity exhibited a consistent pattern of associations with outcomes (14/19 correlations > 0.30), and antagonism demonstrated the most attenuated pattern of associations (5/19 correlations > 0.30). Findings generally support the stability of AMPD maladaptive traits and provide further evidence for the model's clinical utility.

ObjectiveThe classification of anorexia nervosa (AN) into subtypes is relevant due to their different symptomatology. However, subtypes (restricting type: AN-R; purging type: AN-P) differ also in terms of their personality functioning. Knowledge about these differences would allow for better treatment stratification. A pilot study indicated differences in structural abilities that can be assessed by the operationalized psychodynamic diagnosis (OPD) system. The aim of this study was therefore to systematically explore differences in personality functioning and personality between the two AN subtypes and bulimia nervosa (BN) using three personality (functioning) constructs.MethodsA total of N = 110 inpatients with AN-R (n = 28), AN-P (n = 40), or BN (n = 42) were recruited in three clinics for psychosomatic medicine. Assignment to the three groups was performed using a comprehensive questionnaire validated for diagnostic purposes (Munich-ED-Quest). Personality functioning was examined using OPD Structure Questionnaire (OPD-SQ), personality by using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5–Brief Form and Big Five Inventory-10. (M)ANOVAs were used to examine differences across eating disorder groups. In addition, correlation and regression analyses were conducted.ResultsWe observed differences on several sub- and main scales of the OPD-SQ. Whereas patients with BN showed the lowest levels, AN-R patients displayed the highest levels of personality functioning. On some sub- and main scales, such as “affect tolerance,” the subtypes of AN differed from BN, whereas on the scale “affect differentiation,” AN-R, differed from the other two groups. The total eating disorder pathology score of the Munich-ED-Quest best predicted overall personality structure [stand. β = 0.650; t(104) = 6.666; p < 0.001] and self-regulation [stand. β = 0.449; t(104) = 3.628; p < 0.001].DiscussionOur findings confirm most of the results of the pilot study. These findings can facilitate the development of stratified treatment approaches for eating disorders.

Introduction: The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) is a measure of the alternative model of personality disorders (PDs), proposed in Section III of the DSM-5, but the PID-5 has limited evidence of validity for use among older adults. This study examined the validity of the alternate model through associations with the 10 traditional PDs in DSM-5. It was hypothesized that the PID-5 would relate to the traditional PDs in patterns predicted by the alternate model. Method: Older adults (N = 202) completed the PID-5 and the Coolidge Axis II Inventory (CATI), a measurement of the 10 PDs. Results: Correlations were computed between the PID-5’s 25 facets and the CATI’s 10 PD scales. All facets were found to significantly (p < .001) and positively correlate with all 10 PD scales, with large effect sizes (> .30). Next, regressions were conducted, with the PID-5 facets predicting each PD scale. Overall, across the 10 regression analyses, the PID-5 facets accounted for significant variance in the CATI PD scales, ranging from 64% (Avoidant) to 71% (Obsessive-Compulsive). Discussion: Although some DSM-5 hypothesized facets were significant predictors, many unexpected significant relationships were also detected. Of the 10 PD models, seven models included more unpredicted significant traits than predicted ones; two models included more significant predicted traits than unpredicted ones; one model included an equal number of predicted and unpredicted significant traits. We found substantially more overlap between the PID-5 and CATI than anticipated in unpredicted directions, suggesting that the PID-5 has good specificity but lacks sensitivity.

In order to assess the internal consistency, factor structure, and ability to recover DSM-IV personality disorders (PDs) of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) scales, 710 Italian adult community dwelling volunteers were administered the Italian translation of the PID-5, as well as the Italian translation of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4+ (PDQ-4+). Cronbach's alpha values were >.70 for all PID-5 facet scales and greater than .90 for all PID-5 domain scales. Parallel analysis and confirmatory factor analysis supported the theoretical five-factor model of the PID-5 trait scales. Regression analyses showed that both PID-5 trait and domain scales explained a substantial amount of variance in the PDQ-4+ PD scales, with the exception of the Passive-Aggressive PD scale. When the PID-5 was administered to a second independent sample of 389 Italian adult community dwelling volunteers, the basic psychometric properties of the scale were replicated. In this second sample, the PID-5 trait and domain scales proved to be significant predictors of psychopathy measures. As a whole, the results of the present study support the hypothesis that the PID-5 is a reliable instrument which is able to recover DSM-IV PDs, as well as to capture personality pathology that is not included in the DSM-IV (namely, psychopathy).

BackgroundContemporary approaches to personality pathology increasingly emphasize dimensional models, a shift reflected in recent diagnostic frameworks such as the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) and the ICD-11. Aligned with this perspective, the Bright and Dark Personality Inventory (BDPI), grounded in the five-factor model, was developed to dimensionally assess both general (“General 5”) and maladaptive (“Dark 5”) personality domains. This study focused on maladaptive personality traits and examined the incremental utility of the BDPI’s Dark 5 in identifying personality disorder (PD) tendencies in a nonclinical Korean sample.MethodsA total of 1,017 South Korean adults completed the BDPI, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 – Short Form (PID-5-SF), and the Self-report Standardized Assessment of Personality Abbreviated Scale (SAPAS-SR). To examine convergent and incremental validity, we conducted Pearson correlations, squared semi-partial correlations, and hierarchical logistic regression analyses. In addition, independent samples t-tests were performed to assess group differences between individuals with and without PD tendencies.ResultsThe Dark 5 domains showed strong convergence with corresponding PID-5-SF traits, supporting their convergent validity. Negative Affectivity, Detachment, and Attention Difficulty predicted PD tendencies beyond the PID-5-SF, increasing explained variance by 9.7%. Egocentrism and Psychoticism contributed no unique variance, possibly due to suppression. Attention Difficulty, which includes obsessiveness, may partially reflect Anankastia-related traits.ConclusionThe BDPI’s Dark 5 may offer complementary value to existing trait-based assessments by capturing additional expressions of maladaptive personality traits. Further research should validate these findings in clinical populations and explore the measurement of Anankastia-relevant constructs.

Effects of different types of instruction on the Scores of PID-5 profile

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) assesses traits relevant for diagnosing personality disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5). We examined the PID-5 in relation to the Big-Three and Big-Five personality traits in outpatient and community adult samples. Domain-level analyses revealed that PID-5 Negative Affectivity correlated strongly with Neuroticism, and PID-5 Antagonism and Disinhibition correlated strongly negatively with Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, respectively; Antagonism and Disinhibition also were both linked strongly to Big-Three trait Disinhibition. PID-5 Detachment related strongly to personality, including Extraversion/Positive Temperament, but did not show its expected specificity to this factor. Finally, PID-5 Psychoticism correlated only modestly with Openness. Facet-level analyses indicated that some PID-5 scales demonstrated replicable deviations from their DSM-5 model placements. We discuss implications of these data for the DSM-5 model of personality disorder, and for integrating it with well-established structures of normal personality.

Assessment of protocol validity is essential for structured personality tests used in clinical decision making. Measures of inconsistent responding allow researchers and clinicians to identify random or careless response patterns that compromise an accurate interpretation of test results. Keeley and colleagues (2016) developed an Inconsistency scale (INC) for the widely used Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5; Krueger, Derringer, Markon, Watson, & Skodol. 2012. Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5. Psychological Medicine, 42(9), 1879–1890.). The INC produced highly promising results in initial validation studies, and the current study provides a series of additional tests of the adaptability of the INC item pairs across different populations, translations, and versions of the PID-5. Study 1 examines the diagnostic utility of a shortened version of the original INC scale (INC-S) that can be used with the 100-item version of the PID-5; optimum cut scores are identified for this short form adaptation. Study 2 cross-validates the INC-S and compares diagnostic utility to the INC in a sample that completed the full PID-5. Study 3 examines the diagnostic utility of the INC and INC-S using a German translation of the PID-5 with undergraduates and clinical patients. Overall, these validation studies provide robust support for the INC and INC-S scales to discriminate random-generated versus real PID-5 protocols.

Introduction: The interpersonal circumplex model measures interpersonal dysfunction along two axes (communion and agency), resulting in eight unhealthy patterns: Domineering, Vindictive, Cold, Socially Avoidant, Nonassertive, Exploitable, Overly Nurturant, and Intrusive. It is unclear how the circumplex model applies to older adults and their unique biopsychosocial contexts. This study examined relationships between the circumplex and personality disorder features, using the Alternative Model of Personality Disorder’s (AMPD) personality functioning and pathological personality trait constructs. Method: Older adults (N = 202) completed the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems-Short Circumplex (IIP-SC), the Levels of Personality Functioning Scale-Self-Report (LPFS-SR), and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) to measure pathological personality traits. Results: Correlations were computed between the IIP-SC’s eight circumplex scales with the LPFS-SR’s four personality functioning domains and with the PID-5’s five domains. All circumplex scales significantly (p < .001) and positively correlated with all LPFS-SR and PID-5 domains, with large effect sizes (> .45). Next, regressions were conducted, with the LPFS-SR and PID-5 domains predicting each IIP-SC scale. Across the eight regressions, the AMPD constructs accounted for significant variance in the IIP-SC scales, ranging from 38% (Nonassertive) to 64% (Domineering and Cold). Discussion: Significant overlap between the interpersonal circumplex and the AMPD was demonstrated, but patterns are distinct from previous research among younger adults. The circumplex was limited in its relation to the AMPD’s personality functioning, but the pathological personality trait model was well represented through the circumplex. Results indicate that the circumplex may have some validity among older adults and warrants further investigation.

To assess how the maladaptive personality domains and facets that were included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) Alternative Model of Personality Disorders relate to adult attachment styles, 480 Italian nonclinical adults were administered the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Attachment Style Questionnaire (ASQ). To evaluate the uniqueness of the associations between the PID-5 scales and the ASQ scales, the participants were also administered the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Multiple regression analyses showed that the ASQ scales significantly predicted both PID-5 domain scales and BFI scales; however, the relationships were different both qualitatively and quantitatively. With the exception of the PID-5 risk taking scale (adjusted R(2) = 0.02), all other PID-5 trait scales were significantly predicted by the ASQ scales, median adjusted R(2) value = 0.25, all ps < 0.001. Our findings suggest that the maladaptive personality domains and traits listed in the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders show meaningful associations with adult attachment styles.

The objective of this study was to test if the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) is an adequate instrument to evaluate psychiatric inpatients' pathological personality traits. Inpatients (n=130; mean age: 38.5years; 62.3% female; 63.9% single) answered the PID-5 after clinical improvement of their psychiatric symptoms. The mean scores of the DSM-5 personality domains, facets and profiles, and ICD-11 domain traits were compared with the mean scores of a Brazilian normative sample (n=656). We investigated the diagnostic performance of the scales to identify individuals with and without psychopathology. The final sample included mainly diagnoses of mood disorders. Except for Antagonism and Disinhibition, all DSM-5 personality domains and most facets as well as almost all DSM-5 personality disorder profiles (except Narcissist) and ICD-11 trait domains (except Detachment and Dissociality) of the inpatients presented high differences compared with the normative sample. In general, the PID-5 scales presented a high negative predictive value and a low positive predictive value to identify individuals with severe psychopathology. This study found high scores of pathological personality traits in a sample of Brazilian psychiatric inpatients. The PID-5 may be a promising instrument to measure pathological personality traits among psychiatric inpatients. Methodological and sample size limitations may have influenced the results. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

In order to assess the internal consistency, fit indexes, test-retest reliability, and validity of the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) and its associations with age, gender, and education, 471 non-clinical (69,6% female; mean age: 37,63) and 314 clinical participants (69,7% female, mean age: 37,41) were administered the Hungarian translation of the PID-5, as well as the SCL-90-R and the SCID-II Personality Questionnaire. We found that; (a) temporal consistency of the Hungarian PID-5 was confirmed by one-month test-retest reliability analysis, (b) validity of the PID-5 instrument is acceptable in the clinical and the non-clinical sample as well, based on significant correlations with SCID-II and SCL-90-R, (c) PID-5 facets' and domains' associations with gender, age, and level of education are in accordance with previous findings. These findings support that the Hungarian PID-5 is a reliable and valid instrument for both clinical and non-clinical populations.