Personality disorders in the elderly: a flagging field of inquiry

Department of Psychiatry, Cornell University, Итак, New York, United States
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 2.87). 11/2006; 21(11):1013-7. DOI: 10.1002/gps.1614
Source: PubMed
1 Follower
2 Reads
  • Source
    • "In addition, there is a paucity of both longitudinal and cross-sectional research on maladaptive personality traits, the so-called personality disorders , up to old age (Abrams & Bromberg, 2006). In the fourth edition of "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We reviewed the evidence regarding which personality traits and personality disorders remain stable into later middle and old age (age >60 years of age) and how expressions of (maladaptive) personality traits affect personality assessment among older adults. Our study was a literature review of longitudinal and cross-sectional studies of the Five Factor Model (FFM) or DSM personality disorders in old age, using PsychInfo, Psychlit, and PubMed (period 1980–2012). Combinations of the following keywords were used: personality, development, stability, five factor personality model, big 5, (borderline) personality disorder(s), aging, older adults. Of the 22 relevant articles that were found, 17 longitudinal or cross-sectional studies of the FFM mainly supported the hypothesis that personality characteristics are susceptible to change over a person’s entire lifetime. Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness appear to diminish as a person ages, while, conversely, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness appear to increase with age. Two longitudinal studies and three cross-sectional studies of DSM-IV personality disorders suggested there are age-related changes in the ways in which maladaptive personality traits manifest themselves. The temporal instability of personality traits in old age, both adaptive and maladaptive, affects the validity of personality assessment of older adults, especially the face validity. We recommend personality assessment measures that include only age-neutral items. Informant contributions to the personality assessment could also be helpful in improving the reliability in epidemiological research.
    Clinical Gerontologist 04/2014; 37(3):253-271. DOI:10.1080/07317115.2014.885917 · 0.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "CP09CH18-Morey ARI 25 February 2013 16:10 example, it can sometimes be difficult to distinguish personality pathology from distress caused by the aging process itself (Abrams & Bromberg 2006). As an illustration, in the case of disabled or partially disabled older adults, there could be difficulty in differentiating dependency based on personality from dependency based on circumstance. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Stability is thought to be one of the major distinguishing features between personality disorders (PDs) and other forms of psychopathology. The development of more reliable PD assessments and the implementation of four major longitudinal studies on PD stability have provided critical data with which to evaluate the stability of PD features. Results from these and other studies reveal significant complexity in the interpretation of PD stability because of several issues that can impact stability estimates. Such estimates will vary as a function of the type of constructs being assessed, the type of stability being considered, the modality and reliability of the assessments being used, and the impacts of sampling. In this article, longitudinal research on PD stability is reviewed in the context of these issues. It is concluded that no single answer can be given to the question, "How stable are PDs?" and that future research and classification need to consider carefully and account for the complexity of this question. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Clinical Psychology Volume 9 is March 26, 2013. Please see for revised estimates.
    Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 12/2012; 9(1). DOI:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185637 · 12.67 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "agegroupsthatsharethesamepositionontheunderlyingpersonalitytrait,hence corroboratingit"sageneutrality.However,47itemsdidreveallargeDIFbetweenthetwoage groups.Thesefindings,althoughnotoverwhelming,raisequestionsaboutthemetric equivalenceoftheseparticularitemsacrossagegroups(Tackettetal.,2009)andtheirimpact onthevalidityofthescalestheyrepresent.Forexample,withfiveoftheeightitems displayingDIFagainstolderadults,theExcitement-seekingscalehaspoorfacevalidityfor assessingExtraversioninanoldersample.Thesefindingssupportthenotionthatolderadults mayhavefeweropportunitiestomanifestrecklessandimpulsivebehavior,duetophysical age-relateddeclines(Abrams&Bromberg,2006;Segaletal.,2006).Itemsmeasuring excitementandstimulationmaythereforebeapoorfitamongolderadults,leadingto misleadinggroupdifferences.Poorhealth,financialissuesandtransportationproblemsmay "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Geriatric researchers and clinicians often have to deal with a lack of valid personality measures for older age groups (e.g., Mroczek, Hurt, & Berman, 1999; Zweig 2008), which hampers a reliable assessment of personality in later life. An age-neutral measurement system is one of the basic conditions for an accurate personality assessment across the lifespan, both longitudinally and cross-sectionally. In the present study, we empirically investigate the age-neutrality of one of the most widely used personality measures (i.e., the NEO PI-R (Costa & McCrae, 1992)), by examining potential Differential Item Functioning (DIF). Overall, results indicate that the vast majority (92.9 % at domain-level and 95 % at facet-level) of the NEO PI-R items was similarly endorsed by younger and older age groups with the same position on the personality trait of interest, corroborating the NEO PI-R’s age neutrality. However, Differential Test Functioning (DTF) analyses revealed large DTF for Extraversion, and facet A6 (Tender-Mindedness). Results are discussed in terms of their implications for using the current format of the NEO PI-R in older aged samples.
    Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 09/2012; 34(3). DOI:10.1007/s10862-012-9287-4 · 1.55 Impact Factor
Show more