Abstract
Objective: to validate the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in a Colombian clinical population and the gender differences. Participants: 341 patients between 18 and 60 years of age, 60% of women. Method: Confirmatory Factor Analyses (AFC) and concurrent validity whit PBQ-SF. Results: supported the existence of the 25 first-order factors. In terms of domains (second-order analysis), several organization models were posed. The results supported the model proposed by Krueger, Derringer, Markon, Watson, and Skodol (2012): c2(2661, n = 341) = 3350, RMSEA = 0.028 (90% CI: 0.025; 0.030), CFI = 0.99, NNFI=0.99. Men scored significantly higher than women on grandiosity, irresponsibility, manipulativeness, risk-taking, antagonism, and disinhibition. Women scored significantly higher than men on emotional lability and intimacy avoidance. The concurrent validity of PID with the PBQ-SF was high, giving support to the traits of personality disorder models of the DSM-5.
Highlights
RESUMEN Objetivo: validar el Inventario de Personalidad para el DSM-5 en una población clínica colombiana e identificar diferencias de género
A while ago it started to be considered that the categorical approach to personality disorders, which had prevailed until the DSM-IVTR (American Psychiatric Association, 1994), was not the most appropriate because, it had the advantage of clarity and ease of communication among professionals, it had serious difficulties
Multiple models emerged in the dimensions of pathologic personality traits: The Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP; Livesley, 2001); The Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP) Model (Clark, Simms, Wu, & Casillas, 2008); The Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) Model (Harkness, Finn, McNulty, & Shields, 2012; Harkness, McNulty, & BenPorath, 1995; Harkness & McNulty, 1994; Harkness, 1992); The Dimensional Personality Symptom Item Pool (DIPSI) Model (De Clercq, De Fruyt, Van Leeuwen, & Mervielde, 2006); The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III) Model (Millon, Millon, Davies, & Grossman, 2009); Models derived from the empirical structure of the DSM (Markon, 2010; OConnor, 2005); and the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP) Model (Westen & Shedler, 2007)
Summary
RESUMEN Objetivo: validar el Inventario de Personalidad para el DSM-5 en una población clínica colombiana e identificar diferencias de género. A while ago it started to be considered that the categorical approach to personality disorders, which had prevailed until the DSM-IVTR (American Psychiatric Association, 1994), was not the most appropriate because, it had the advantage of clarity and ease of communication among professionals, it had serious difficulties These difficulties included a high degree of overlap between categories and diagnoses, lack of clarity in the thresholds of each disorder, temporary instability of diagnoses, lack of agreement in the conceptualization of disorders, and variability of symptoms (Clark, 1999). Multiple models emerged in the dimensions of pathologic personality traits: The Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP; Livesley, 2001); The Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP) Model (Clark, Simms, Wu, & Casillas, 2008); The Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) Model (Harkness, Finn, McNulty, & Shields, 2012; Harkness, McNulty, & BenPorath, 1995; Harkness & McNulty, 1994; Harkness, 1992); The Dimensional Personality Symptom Item Pool (DIPSI) Model (De Clercq, De Fruyt, Van Leeuwen, & Mervielde, 2006); The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III) Model (Millon, Millon, Davies, & Grossman, 2009); Models derived from the empirical structure of the DSM (Markon, 2010; OConnor, 2005); and the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP) Model (Westen & Shedler, 2007)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
