Incremental validity of the Structured Interview for the Five‐Factor Model of Personality (SIFFM)

2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie D. Stepp ◽  
Timothy J. Trull ◽  
Rachel M. Burr ◽  
Mimi Wolfenstein ◽  
Angela Z. Vieth
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Histrionic Personality Disorder

This study examined the incremental validity of the Structured Interview for the Five‐Factor Model (SIFFM; Trull & Widiger, 1997) scores in the prediction of borderline, antisocial, and histrionic personality disorder symptoms above and beyond variance accounted for by scores from the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP; Clark, 1993), a self‐report questionnaire that includes items relevant to both normal (i.e. Big Three) and abnormal personality traits. Approximately 200 participants (52 clinical outpatients, and 149 nonclinical individuals from a borderline‐features‐enriched sample) completed the SIFFM, the SNAP, and select sections of the Personality Disorder Interview—IV (PDI‐IV; Widiger, Mangine, Corbitt, Ellis, & Thomas, 1995). We found support for the incremental validity of SIFFM scores, further indicating the clinical utility of this instrument. However, results also supported the incremental validity of SNAP scores in many cases. We discuss the implications of the findings in terms of dimensional approaches to personality disorder assessment. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

scholarly journals La Personalidad como predictora de dificultades cotidianas en la adolescencia

2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 109
Author(s):  
Susana Molina Martín ◽  
Mercedes Inda Caro ◽  
Carmen María Fernández García
Keyword(s):  
Body Image ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Daily Life ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Personality Questionnaire ◽  
Poor Body Image

RESUMEN Los objetivos de este trabajo han sido: estudiar la adecuación de los datos al modelo de cinco factores e identificar rasgos de personalidad en adolescentes que manifiestan tener diversas problemáticas. Para ello se utilizaron dos instrumentos de evaluación, el Cuestionario de Personalidad para Adolescentes (16PF-APQ) y el Cuestionario Autoaplicado de Síntomas (CAS), que se administraron a ciento ocho estudiantes de último curso de educación obligatoria. Los resultados señalan que la muestra se adecua al modelo de cinco factores y que hay rasgos de personalidad que parecen explicar mejor o predecir la presencia de ciertas problemáticas en la adolescencia. ABSTRACT The aim of this research is twofold. Firstly, it studies the adjustment of the data with the five-factor model. Secondly, it intends to describe and identify personality traits in adolescents who have manifested different problems in their daily life. For this purpose, two evaluation instruments were used: the Adolescent Personality Questionnaire (16PF-APQ) and the Adolescents Self-report of Symptoms (C.A.S.). This last one is based on Rogers, Bagby and Dickens’ instrument, Structured Interview Re- ported Symptoms (1990, 1991, 1992). These tests were administered to a sample of a hundred and eight students who were in their last year of compulsory secondary education. The results of the study suggest that the sample fits with the five factor model and that there are some personality traits that seem to explain the existence of life’s difficulties (questions concerning matters of anger or aggression, discouragement, worry, poor body image, alcohol or drugs, overall trouble, familiar context, scholar context and strategies coping). All the already mentioned results allow us to formulate certain indications or suggestions which would need to be taken into account in future research.

DSM‐IV personality disorders and the Five‐Factor Model of personality: a multi‐method examination of domain‐ and facet‐level predictions

2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Michael Bagby ◽  
Paul T. Costa ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger ◽  
Andrew G. Ryder ◽  
Margarita Marshall
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Personality Psychopathology

The personality disorder classification system (Axis II) in the various versions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals of Mental Disorders (DSM) has been the target of repeated criticism, with conceptual analysis and empirical evidence documenting its flaws. In response, many have proposed alternative approaches for the assessment of personality psychopathology, including the application of the Five‐Factor Model of personality (FFM). Many remain sceptical, however, as to whether domain and facet traits from a model of general personality functioning can be successfully applied to clinical patients with personality disorders (PDs). In this study, with a sample of psychiatric patients (n = 115), personality disorder symptoms corresponding to each of the 10 PDs were successfully predicted by the facet and domain traits of the FFM, as measured by a semi‐structured interview, the Structured Interview for the Five Factor Model (SIFFM; Trull & Widiger, 1997) and a self‐report questionnaire, the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI‐R; Costa and McCrae, 1992). These results provide support for the perspective that personality psychopathology can be captured by general personality dimensions. The FFM has the potential to provide a valid and scientifically sound framework from which to assess personality psychopathology, in a way that covers most of the domains conceptualized in DSM while transcending the limitations of the current categorical approach to these disorders. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Similarities and differences among antisocial and psychopathic self‐report inventories from the perspective of general personality functioning

2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jabbar Hicklin ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Antisocial Personality Disorder ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Psychopathic Personality ◽  
Personality Functioning ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Report Measure

There are currently many alternative self‐report inventories for the assessment of antisocial and psychopathic personality traits. The hypothesis of the current study was that similarities and differences among them can be meaningfully understood with respect to their representation of common personality traits. The current study explored this hypothesis using as a point of comparison the Five Factor Model (FFM) of general personality functioning. Six self‐report measures currently being used in antisocial and psychopathy research were administered, along with a self‐report measure of the FFM. Differences were obtained across the six inventories with respect to how they related to the domains and facets of the FFM that were consistent with FFM models of psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder. Implications for the theoretical and clinical understanding of findings obtained with the respective inventories, and the personality disorder constructs they assess, are discussed. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Borderline Personality Disorder: Associations Between Dimensional Personality Profiles and Self-Destructive Behaviors

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 249-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Kolbeck ◽  
Steffen Moritz ◽  
Julia Bierbrodt ◽  
Christina Andreou
Keyword(s):  
Borderline Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Risk Preference ◽  
Borderline Personality ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Personality Profiles ◽  
Ongoing Research ◽  
Destructive Behaviors

Ongoing research is shifting towards a dimensional understanding of borderline personality disorder (BPD). Aim of this study was to identify personality profiles in BPD that are predictive of self-destructive behaviors. Personality traits were assessed (n = 130) according to the five-factor model of personality (i.e., Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) and an additional factor called Risk Preference. Self-destructive behavior parameters such as non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and other borderline typical dyscontrolled behaviors (e.g., drug abuse) were assessed by self-report measures. Canonical correlation analyses demonstrated that Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Conscientiousness are predictors of NSSI. Further, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, and Risk Preference were associated with dyscontrolled behaviors. Our results add further support on personality-relevant self-destructive behaviors in BPD. A combined diagnostic assessment could offer clinically meaningful insights about the causes of self-destruction in BPD to expand current therapeutic repertoires.

scholarly journals The Five-Factor Personality Inventory for ICD-11: A Facet-Level Assessment of the ICD-11 Trait Model

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua R. Oltmanns ◽  
Thomas A. Widiger
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Theoretical Structure ◽  
Specific Assessment ◽  
Data Collections ◽  
Domain Level ◽  
Report Measure

The ICD-11 includes a dimensional model of personality disorder assessing five domains of maladaptive personality. To avoid unnecessary complexity, the ICD-11 model includes assessment of personality traits only at the domain level. A measure exists to assess the domains of the ICD-11 model (the Personality Inventory for ICD-11; PiCD), yet a more rich and useful assessment of personality is provided at the facet level. We used items from the scales assessing the five-factor model of personality disorder (FFMPD) to develop the Five-Factor Personality Inventory for ICD-11 (FFiCD), a new 121-item, 20-facet, self-report measure of the ICD-11 maladaptive personality domains at the facet level. Further, the FFiCD includes 47 short scales organized beneath the facets—at the “nuance” level. Items were selected and evaluated empirically across two independent data collections, and the resulting scales were further validated in a third data collection. Correlational and factor analytic results comparing the scales of the FFiCD to the five-factor model, PiCD, and Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) supported the validity of the theoretical structure of the FFiCD and the ICD-11 model. The FFiCD may be a useful instrument for clinicians and researchers interested in a more specific assessment of maladaptive personality according to the dimensional ICD-11 personality disorder model.

Personality Disorders as Collections of Traits

2019 ◽  
pp. 40-70
Author(s):  
Joshua D. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
General Model ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Empirical Relations ◽  
Expert Ratings

This chapter argues that personality disorders can and should be understood as collections of basic personality traits from a general model of personality, namely the five-factor model (FFM). It reviews evidence for the convergence of FFM personality disorder profiles across multiple approaches—expert ratings (i.e., researchers and clinicians) and empirical relations. It discusses how to score the personality disorders from the FFM and provides evidence for the convergent, discriminant, and construct validity of this approach. The chapter also demonstrates how the new alternative model for personality disorders can be embedded within the more established and robust FFM literature.

Personality Traits During Depression and After Clinical Recovery

1994 ◽  
Vol 164 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric D. Peselow ◽  
Michael P. Sanfilipo ◽  
Ronald R. Fieve ◽  
Gary Gulbenkian
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Dose Range ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Clinical Recovery ◽  
Treatment Dose ◽  
Characteristic Modes ◽  
Before And After

We investigated whether and how acute depressive symptoms affect the self-report of maladaptive personality traits. Sixty-eight acutely depressed patients underwent the Structured Interview for DSM–III Personality Disorder (SIDP) before and after pharmacological treatment, allowing us to determine whether self-reported maladaptive personality traits are different during depression and after successful clinical recovery. After the initial SIDP administration (during an episode of major depression), patients received desipramine treatment (dose range 150–300 mg/day) over a course of 4–5 weeks before readministration of the SIDP. For those who recovered from their depression (n = 39), cluster III trait scores were significantly lower than those assessed at baseline, and there was a lower frequency of cluster III categorical diagnoses for a personality disorder after treatment than before treatment. Recovered patients also had significantly lower cluster I personality trait scores after treatment as compared with baseline ratings. For those who did not recover from their depression after treatment (n = 29), cluster I trait scores were in fact higher than those measured at baseline, but there were no differences in categorical diagnoses before and after treatment. Cluster II personality traits and categorical diagnoses were not different between those who did and did not recover from their depression. Thus, depression may have a significant effect on the assessment of cluster I and cluster III personality traits. It is possible that cluster I and III ‘personality traits’ may be interwoven with depressive features and therefore subject to state influences, whereas cluster II personality traits may entail enduring, long-term characteristic modes of thinking, feeling, and behaving.

scholarly journals Quantifying the Predictive Role of Temperament Dimensions and Attachment Styles on the Five Factor Model of Personality

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 145
Author(s):  
Efrat Barel ◽  
Yonathan Mizrachi ◽  
Maayan Nachmani
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Attachment Style ◽  
Adult Attachment ◽  
Attachment Styles ◽  
Attachment Security ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Self Report

Background: The present study investigated the role of temperament and attachment security in predicting individual differences in the five factor personality traits among adults. As previous studies suggested the potential moderating role of attachment in the association between temperament and personality traits, the present study sought to examine an interactionist model combining attachment and temperament in explaining individual differences in personality traits. Methods: A sample of 1871 participants (1151 women and 719 men) completed self-report measures of adult attachment style (the Relationships Questionnaire—RQ), temperament dimension (the Fisher Temperament Inventory—FTI), and personality domain (the Five Factor Model—FFM). Results: Partial correlational analyses revealed associations between attachment security and each of the five domains of the FFM, and few associations between some temperament dimensions and several domains of the FFM. Moderated regression analyses showed that attachment security moderated the associations between temperament dimensions and the Agreeableness domain of the FFM. Among secure individuals, those with higher scores on the Curious/Energetic, Cautious/Social Norm Compliant and Prosocial/Empathetic scales exhibited higher Agreeableness scores, whereas among insecure individuals, those with higher scores on the Analytic/Tough-minded scale exhibited lower scores on the Agreeableness scale. Conclusion: Overall, the current study provides evidence in support of the substantive role of social-environmental factors (Adult Attachment) as a moderating element bridging temperament-related personality elements and a number of their FFM manifestations.

scholarly journals Personality traits in patients with refractory versus non-refractory epilepsy

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Khaled A. M. Elbeh ◽  
Yasser M. Elserogy ◽  
Menna F. Hamid ◽  
Romany H. Gabra
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Openness To Experience ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Arabic Version ◽  
Adult Intelligence Scale ◽  
Epileptic Patients

Abstract Background Epilepsy has significant effects on the behavior of most people who suffer it. In some cases, the seizure activity itself is manifested as a brief change in behavior that might appear unusual to the casual observer. Evidence also suggests that epilepsy can affect behavior when seizures are not occurring. Descriptions of inter-ictal behavior in people with epilepsy have a long and controversial history. The study aims to assess the personality disorders among epileptic patients and impact of the severity of epilepsy on personality traits. Methods: This study is conducted upon 90 patients presented at outpatient clinic of epilepsy in Assiut University Hospital diagnosed as having epilepsy versus 40 cross-matched healthy controls. Patient group were classified into two groups (refractory versus controlled groups). All patients and control were subjected to (1) detailed medical interview. (2) Assessment of intelligence using The Arabic Version of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. (3) Conventional EEG study. (4) The Arabic Version of The Structured interview for the five-factor model of personality. Results A relationship was found between personality traits and the severity of epilepsy. When patients have more severe epilepsy, they often have a high seizure frequency, they use more antiepileptic medications. It is likely that in those patients the need for control is usually high (because seizures mean a loss of control). Regarding the five-factor model of personality which we used to assess the personality traits of our selected studied samples, we found that the five main domains of the scale which are neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness and conscientiousness differ markedly between the two groups of our patients. We found neuroticism was markedly increased at the refractory epileptic patients than the controlled epileptic ones, while extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness increased at the controlled epileptic patients than the refractory epileptic ones. Conclusion Patients with epilepsy have raised scores for several personality traits also those personality traits are different in patients with refractory and controlled epilepsy. Also, those personality traits are different compared with a control group from the general population.

Validation of an Adapted French Form of the Structured Interview for the Five-Factor Model (SIFFM) in a Swiss Sample

2018 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-43
Author(s):  
Cornelia Pocnet ◽  
Jean-Philippe Antonietti ◽  
Armin von Gunten ◽  
Jérôme Rossier
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Self Report ◽  
English Version ◽  
French Version

Abstract. We analyzed the psychometric properties of the Structured Interview for the Five-Factor Model (SIFFM) in a French-speaking Swiss sample and compared the French version to the original English version. A community-based sample of 260 participants (183 women and 77 men, aged 20 to 88 years, Mage = 46.23, SDage = 16.37) were assessed using the SIFFM and the NEO-FFI-R. Forty of the participants agreed to be filmed or to be assessed by two investigators simultaneously. The internal consistency coefficients of the five dimensions of SIFFM ranged from .63 to .84. An exploratory factor analysis within the confirmatory factor analysis framework showed that the structure of the French version of the SIFFM was in line with the structure suggested by the Five-Factor Model. Except for the modesty and dutifulness subscales, each facet scale had its highest factor loading on the factor representing the targeted domain. Moreover, a principal axis joint factor analysis of the SIFFM and NEO-FFI-R domains suggested that the convergent validity between the two instruments was adequate. Furthermore, the interrater reliability coefficients for the SIFFM scores were high. The French version of the SIFFM shows acceptable psychometric properties, comparable to those of the English version, and may be an informative assessment method and an alternative to self-report measures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document