Week 2: Learning Goals
Lecture 3: Learning Goals
1. To identify key aspects of construct validity of PD
The construct of PDs considers different levels:
1) The conceptualization of the constructs themselves
2) The formulation of the essential diagnostic criteria sets – i.e., DSM or ICD
3) Instruments to assess these constructs
There is a debate between the (1) medical/categorical approach and the (2) dimensional
approach
Key Aspects of the Construct Validity of PDs – DSM-5
Classification Consistent with the medical tradition
i.e., dichotomous, categorical phenomena
DSM-5 Criteria The criteria are polythetic – i.e., there is no one criterion that is necessary to meet the
diagnosis
Symptoms – e.g., transient paranoid ideation – vs Traits – i.e., behavioral expressions of
traits – e.g., frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment
Pros: minimal interference is needed on part of the clinician – promotes interrater
reliability
Cons: tendency to favor behavioral expressions at expense of characteristic patterns of
inner experience – such as motivation of behavior, affective experience, and cognitive
style
Heterogeneity – i.e., multiple ways of meeting the criteria; no two persons with the same
diagnosis are the same – do NOT present with the same manifestation
All criteria are of equal weight towards the diagnosis
There are alternative definers of the disorder – with a certain critical minimum number
, for the diagnosis to be present
Comorbidity – individuals with PDs often suffer from more than one PD and can
experience syndrome disorders as well
Differential Diagnoses are differentiated on the basis of (1) inner motivation for the behavior – and
Diagnostics (2) inter/intrapersonal dynamics
PID-5 The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 is the official measure for the DSM-5s
dimensional model
Criterion B in the AMPD is dimensional personality traits – the basis of which are 5
domains of 25 maladaptive personality traits
These domains are based on factors of the FFM and include (1) negative affectivity, (2)
detachment, (3) antagonism, (4) disinhibition, and (5) psychoticism
2. To identify and distinguish between different alternative models of PD:
The Five-Factor Model (FFM)
Description Also referred to as the Big Five – is a dimensional model which consists of five,
broader higher order dimensions or domains of personality
Neuroticism – proneness to experience unpleasant and disturbing emotions – and
have corresponding disturbances in thoughts and actions
Extraversion – preference for social interactions and lively activity
Openness to Experience – receptiveness to new ideas, approaches, and experiences
Conscientiousness – organization and achievement motivation
Agreeableness – altruism, and trust in relationships
FFM to Map PDs Specific PDs can be described as constellations of maladaptive variants of normal
FFM personality traits
The covariation between the dimensions of the FFM – matches the pattern of
comorbidity among the PDs
FFM is limited to basic tendencies – i.e., trait descriptors
Limitations Not all factors have been found to be equal
Questioned whether the FFM does adequately capture the more severe
manifestations of PDS – e.g., the deliberate self-harm behaviors of BPD
Lecture 3: Learning Goals
1. To identify key aspects of construct validity of PD
The construct of PDs considers different levels:
1) The conceptualization of the constructs themselves
2) The formulation of the essential diagnostic criteria sets – i.e., DSM or ICD
3) Instruments to assess these constructs
There is a debate between the (1) medical/categorical approach and the (2) dimensional
approach
Key Aspects of the Construct Validity of PDs – DSM-5
Classification Consistent with the medical tradition
i.e., dichotomous, categorical phenomena
DSM-5 Criteria The criteria are polythetic – i.e., there is no one criterion that is necessary to meet the
diagnosis
Symptoms – e.g., transient paranoid ideation – vs Traits – i.e., behavioral expressions of
traits – e.g., frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment
Pros: minimal interference is needed on part of the clinician – promotes interrater
reliability
Cons: tendency to favor behavioral expressions at expense of characteristic patterns of
inner experience – such as motivation of behavior, affective experience, and cognitive
style
Heterogeneity – i.e., multiple ways of meeting the criteria; no two persons with the same
diagnosis are the same – do NOT present with the same manifestation
All criteria are of equal weight towards the diagnosis
There are alternative definers of the disorder – with a certain critical minimum number
, for the diagnosis to be present
Comorbidity – individuals with PDs often suffer from more than one PD and can
experience syndrome disorders as well
Differential Diagnoses are differentiated on the basis of (1) inner motivation for the behavior – and
Diagnostics (2) inter/intrapersonal dynamics
PID-5 The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 is the official measure for the DSM-5s
dimensional model
Criterion B in the AMPD is dimensional personality traits – the basis of which are 5
domains of 25 maladaptive personality traits
These domains are based on factors of the FFM and include (1) negative affectivity, (2)
detachment, (3) antagonism, (4) disinhibition, and (5) psychoticism
2. To identify and distinguish between different alternative models of PD:
The Five-Factor Model (FFM)
Description Also referred to as the Big Five – is a dimensional model which consists of five,
broader higher order dimensions or domains of personality
Neuroticism – proneness to experience unpleasant and disturbing emotions – and
have corresponding disturbances in thoughts and actions
Extraversion – preference for social interactions and lively activity
Openness to Experience – receptiveness to new ideas, approaches, and experiences
Conscientiousness – organization and achievement motivation
Agreeableness – altruism, and trust in relationships
FFM to Map PDs Specific PDs can be described as constellations of maladaptive variants of normal
FFM personality traits
The covariation between the dimensions of the FFM – matches the pattern of
comorbidity among the PDs
FFM is limited to basic tendencies – i.e., trait descriptors
Limitations Not all factors have been found to be equal
Questioned whether the FFM does adequately capture the more severe
manifestations of PDS – e.g., the deliberate self-harm behaviors of BPD
