Toward an Empirically Based Classification of Personality Pathology

Department of Psychology, University of Colorado
Clinical Psychology Science and Practice (Impact Factor: 2.92). 05/2007; 14(2):77 - 93. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2850.2007.00065.x

ABSTRACT A number of investigations have utilized factor analysis or similar data analytic methods to examine the empirical validity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders classification system of Axis II personality pathology. This article reviews analyses of the Axis II cluster structure and the latent structure of individual personality disorder criteria. Overall, these studies do not provide sound empirical support for the current personality disorder organization described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. They highlight the need for identifying the latent dimensions of personality pathology in order to create a different representation that would more accurately correspond to both a theoretical and functional model of personality disorder. Preliminary research identifying consensus across datasets is summarized. Clinical implications of these findings and future directions for research on personality pathology are discussed.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study explores longitudinally a four-factor structure of pathological personality trait dimensions (PPTDs) to examine both its structural stability and intra-individual changes among PPTDs over time. Personality Disorder (PD) scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III were administered to 361 low-income women with various psychiatric conditions (drug dependence, depression), who were followed in a two-wave study over 5-years. Cross-sectional and longitudinal factor analyses outlined a robust factorial structure of PPTDs, extrinsically invariant over time, representing Negative Emotionality, Introversion, Antagonism and Impulsivity. Despite moderate rank-order stability in the PPTDs, results also indicated substantial intra-individual variability in the degree and direction of change, consistent with trajectories of change in participants' clinical diagnoses. Results are discussed in light of current debates on the structure and dynamic of pathological personality.
    Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 06/2013; 35(2):173-185. · 1.55 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is little agreement about the latent factor structure of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) personality disorders (PDs). Factor analytic studies over the past 2 decades have yielded different results, in part reflecting differences in factor analytic technique, the measure used to assess the PDs, and the changing DSM criteria. In this study, we explore the latent factor structure of the DSM (4th ed.; IV) PDs in a sample of 1200 psychiatric outpatients evaluated with the Structured Interview for DSM-IV PDs (B. Pfohl, N. Blum, & M. Zimmerman, 1997). We first evaluated 2 a priori models of the PDs with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), reflecting their inherent organization in the DSM-IV: a 3-factor model and a 10-factor model. Fit statistics did not suggest that these models yielded an adequate fit. We then evaluated the latent structure with exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Multiple solutions produced more statistically and theoretically reasonable results, as well as providing clinically useful findings. On the basis of fit statistics and theory, 3 models were evaluated further-the 4-, 5-, and 10-factor models. The 10-factor model, which did not resemble the 10-factor model of the CFA, was determined to be the strongest of all 3 models. Future research should use contemporary methods of evaluating factor analytic results in order to more thoroughly compare various factor solutions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved).
    Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment 01/2010; 1(1):22-37. · 3.54 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present study investigated the relationship between psychiatric classification and personality organization (PO) in a secondary/tertiary clinical sample of chronic pain patients (CPPs). Forty-three patients were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID I+II) and the Structured Interview of Personality Organization (STIPO). The prevalence of axis I and axis II disorders was correlated with the STIPO level of PO. The STIPO dimensional ratings of patients without personality disorder (PD) were compared to those of patients diagnosed with one or more PDs. Axis I comorbidity was high (93%), and 63% of the patients met the criteria for at least one axis II diagnosis. Twenty-five patients (58%) were diagnosed as borderline PO, with high-level impairments in the dimensions 'coping/rigidity', 'primitive defenses' and 'identity'. Higher axis I and axis II comorbidity corresponded with greater severity of PO impairment. No difference was found between the dimensional ratings of patients without PD and those of patients with one or more PDs. The assessment of PO is a crucial issue for diagnosis and treatment planning in CPPs, since it represents a measure of structural impairment that is to a considerable extent independent of axis I and II diagnoses. Moreover, the STIPO dimensional rating focuses on the most salient dysfunctions at a given time.
    Psychopathology 10/2010; 44(1):21-6. · 1.62 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 5, 2014