Supplemental Material for A Closer Look at the Lower-Order Structure of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5: Comparison With the Five-Factor Model

2014 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Order ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Order Structure ◽  
Dsm 5

The Factor Structure of the Portuguese Version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5)

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. S259-S259 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Pires ◽  
A. Sousa Ferreira ◽  
B. Gonçalves
Keyword(s):  
Factor Structure ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Oblique Rotation ◽  
Personality Differences ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Exploratory Factor Analyses ◽  
Competing Interest

IntroductionThe DSM-5 Section III proposes a dimensional-categorical model of conceptualizing personality and its disorders, which includes assessment of impairments in personality functioning (criterion A) and maladaptive personality traits (criterion B). The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) is a self-report, composed of 220 items, organized into 25 facets nested in five domains of personality differences, and was developed to operationalize criterion B.ObjectivesThis study explores the factor structure of the Portuguese adaptation of the PID-5.AimsThe five-factor structure that has emerged in previous studies with the PID-5 (cf. Krueger & Markon) is expected to be replicated in the current study.MethodsExploratory factor analyses with varimax oblique rotation were conducted on a sample of Portuguese adults from the general population (n = 379, Mage = 31.49, SD = 14.16, 25.3% males, 74.7% females).ResultsA six factor structure was retained in which the first 5 factors resemble the PID-5 domains. The model showed good fit indices (KMO = 0.897). The total explained variance was 68.25%. All the facets but four had primary loadings on the expected factor.ConclusionsThe similarity of results across studies and nationalities contributes to the validation of the Portuguese translation of the PID-5 and highlights the structural resemblance among the DSM-5 model and the five factor model (FFM) and the personality psychopathology-five model (PSY-5), drawing attention to the relevance of these models for the diagnosis of Personality Disorders.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

Comparing the Prediction of Dimensional Personality Disorders (PID-5) After Three Personality Trait Models

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Luis F. García ◽  
L. Cuevas ◽  
I. Lucas ◽  
A. Aluja
Keyword(s):  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Personality Trait ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Questionnaire ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
New Instrument

Abstract. A dimensional approach for Personality Disorders was proposed in the DSM-5. To assess this approach, a new instrument (the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 [PID-5]) was developed in 2012. One research line has analyzed its convergent validity with personality traits, focusing almost exclusively on the Five-Factor Model (FFM). However, previous evidence about the relationships between Categorical Personality Disorders and other personality trait models shows that they can improve our understanding of Personality Disorders beyond the FFM. The aim of the present study is to compare the power of three personality models (FFM, Cloninger’s, and Zuckerman’s) to predict PID-5 domains. Three samples from the Spanish and Catalan general population were collected for this study depending on which personality questionnaire was applied (1,052 for revised NEO Personality Inventory [NEO-PI-R], 465 for Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire [ZKA-PQ], and 332 for Temperament and Character Inventory Revised [TCI-R-140]). The PID-5 was also applied to all subjects. Factor and regression results indicate that the three models were able to predict Dimensional Personality Disorders well, although some differences emerge between them. Specific relationships between dimensional disorders and traits, the role of the facets as well as the utility of the results reported are discussed.

Clarifying the interstitial nature of facets from the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 using the five factor model of personality.

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 330-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn A. Watters ◽  
Martin Sellbom ◽  
Amanda A. Uliaszek ◽  
R. Michael Bagby
Keyword(s):  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Dsm 5

Is the Narcissistic Personality Inventory Still Relevant? A Test of Independent Grandiosity and Entitlement Scales in the Assessment of Narcissism

Assessment ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua D. Miller ◽  
Joanna Price ◽  
W. Keith Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Lower Order ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
Narcissistic Personality ◽  
Narcissistic Personality Inventory

Some scholars have called for the replacement of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) with more narrow scales measuring grandiosity and entitlement instead. In the current study, the authors examined the relations among the NPI and measures of grandiosity and entitlement, as well as in relation to a measure of the Five-Factor Model (FFM). The NPI manifested significant correlations with the alternative scales of entitlement and grandiosity and relatively similar patterns of correlations with the FFM traits. Of note, the NPI manifested significant incremental validity in the prediction of several FFM traits that are central to the conceptualization of narcissism. These findings suggest that some caution must be used before assuming that these lower-order scales can be used to replace the NPI in the assessment of narcissism.

Maladaptive Personality Trait Models: Validating the Five-Factor Model Maladaptive Trait Measures With the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 and NEO Personality Inventory

Assessment ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley C. Helle ◽  
Stephanie N. Mullins-Sweatt
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Affective Dysregulation ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory Revised ◽  
Pathological Personality Traits

Eight measures have been developed to assess maladaptive variants of the five-factor model (FFM) facets specific to personality disorders (e.g., Five-Factor Borderline Inventory [FFBI]). These measures can be used in their entirety or as facet-based scales (e.g., FFBI Affective Dysregulation) to improve the comprehensiveness of assessment of pathological personality. There are a limited number of studies examining these scales with other measures of similar traits (e.g., DSM-5 alternative model). The current study examined the FFM maladaptive scales in relation to the respective general personality traits of the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised and the pathological personality traits of the DSM-5 alternative model using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. The results indicated the FFM maladaptive trait scales predominantly converged with corresponding NEO Personality Inventory-Revised, and Personality Inventory for DSM-5 traits, providing further validity for these measures as extensions of general personality traits and evidence for their relation to the pathological trait model. Benefits and applications of the FFM maladaptive scales in clinical and research settings are discussed.

Development and Validation of the Faceted Inventory of the Five-Factor Model (FI-FFM)

Assessment ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Watson ◽  
Ericka Nus ◽  
Kevin D. Wu
Keyword(s):  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Validity Data ◽  
Neo Personality Inventory ◽  
Convergent And Discriminant Validity ◽  
Three Samples ◽  
Five Phases

The Faceted Inventory of the Five-Factor Model (FI-FFM) is a comprehensive hierarchical measure of personality. The FI-FFM was created across five phases of scale development. It includes five facets apiece for neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness; four facets within agreeableness; and three facets for openness. We present reliability and validity data obtained from three samples. The FI-FFM scales are internally consistent and highly stable over 2 weeks (retest rs ranged from .64 to .82, median r = .77). They show strong convergent and discriminant validity vis-à-vis the NEO, the Big Five Inventory, and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Moreover, self-ratings on the scales show moderate to strong agreement with corresponding ratings made by informants ( rs ranged from .26 to .66, median r = .42). Finally, in joint analyses with the NEO Personality Inventory–3, the FI-FFM neuroticism facet scales display significant incremental validity in predicting indicators of internalizing psychopathology.

Personality of children with accident‐related injuries

2003 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margarete Vollrath ◽  
Markus A. Landolt ◽  
Karin Ribi
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
School Children ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Five Factor Model ◽  
Economic Status ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Emotional Instability ◽  
Socio Economic Status ◽  
Personality Inventory For Children ◽  
Comprehensive Test

Previous studies based on a variety of behaviour, temperament, and personality measures identified a pattern of over‐activity, impulsiveness, emotional instability, and aggressiveness in children who are prone to accidents. The present study is the first to study accident‐prone children by means of a comprehensive test for the assessment of the Five Factor model (Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children (HiPIC) (Mervielde & De Fruyt, 1999). 118 children, aged 6–15 years, who were hospitalized due to an accident‐related injury, were contrasted with 184 school‐children of the same age. Lower socio‐economic status was under‐represented in both groups. Children who were exposed to accidents had higher scores on the facets of energy, optimism, and non‐shyness (Extraversion domain), and lower scores on the facets of concentration and achievement striving (Conscientiousness domain). There was no indication of higher aggressiveness, impulsiveness, or emotional instability in the group exposed to accidents, and there were no gender‐by‐accident interactions. Results suggest that there is a relatively benign pattern of personality traits that is related to greater accident hazard in children. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document