An investigation of the triarchic model of psychopathy and self-reported Cluster B personality disorder traits.

Author(s):  
Allison M. Daurio ◽  
Jeanette Taylor
2019 ◽  
pp. 088626051985340
Author(s):  
Nicola S. Gray ◽  
Stephen Blumenthal ◽  
Richard Shuker ◽  
Heather Wood ◽  
Peter Fonagy ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 1005-1013 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. C. Venables ◽  
J. R. Hall ◽  
C. J. Patrick

BackgroundThe triarchic model of psychopathy characterizes the disorder in terms of three distinguishable phenotypic facets: disinhibition, meanness and boldness. The present study sought to (1) inform current debates regarding the role of boldness in the definition of psychopathy and (2) clarify boundaries between psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD).MethodThis study evaluated the degree to which facets of the triarchic model are represented in the most widely used clinical inventory for psychopathy, the Psychopathy Checklist – Revised (PCL-R), in comparison with ASPD as defined by DSM-IV criteria. Adult male offenders from two distinct correctional settings (n = 157 and 169) were investigated to ensure replicability of findings across samples exhibiting high base rates of psychopathy and antisocial behavior.ResultsWe found evidence for convergent and discriminant validity of the three triarchic facets in predicting symptomatic components of psychopathy as assessed by the PCL-R. Additionally, and crucially vis-à-vis current debates in the field, we found that boldness contributed incrementally (over and above disinhibition and meanness) to prediction of PCL-R psychopathy, in particular its interpersonal style component, but not ASPD.ConclusionsThe three distinct facets of the triarchic model of psychopathy are represented clearly and distinctly in the PCL-R, with boldness through its interpersonal facet, but not in DSM-defined ASPD. Our findings suggest that boldness is central to diagnostic conceptions of psychopathy and distinguishes psychopathy from the more prevalent diagnosis of ASPD.


1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 5-6

Abstract Personality disorders are enduring patterns of inner experience and behavior that deviate markedly from those expected by the individual's culture; these inflexible and pervasive patterns reflect issues with cognition, affectivity, interpersonal functioning and impulse control, and lead to clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fourth Edition, defines two specific personality disorders, in addition to an eleventh condition, Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified. Cluster A personality disorders include paranoid, schizoid, and schizotypal personalities; of these, Paranoid Personality Disorder probably is most common in the legal arena. Cluster B personality disorders include antisocial, borderline, histrionic, and narcissistic personality. Such people may suffer from frantic efforts to avoid perceived abandonment, patterns of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships, an identity disturbance, and impulsivity. Legal issues that involve individuals with cluster B personality disorders often involve determination of causation of the person's problems, assessment of claims of harassment, and assessment of the person's fitness for employment. Cluster C personality disorders include avoidant, dependent, and obsessive-compulsive personality. Two case histories illustrate some of the complexities of assessing impairment in workers with personality disorders, including drug abuse, hospitalizations, and inpatient and outpatient psychotherapy.


2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Ottosson ◽  
Martin Grann ◽  
Gunnar Kullgren

Summary: Short-term stability or test-retest reliability of self-reported personality traits is likely to be biased if the respondent is affected by a depressive or anxiety state. However, in some studies, DSM-oriented self-reported instruments have proved to be reasonably stable in the short term, regardless of co-occurring depressive or anxiety disorders. In the present study, we examined the short-term test-retest reliability of a new self-report questionnaire for personality disorder diagnosis (DIP-Q) on a clinical sample of 30 individuals, having either a depressive, an anxiety, or no axis-I disorder. Test-retest scorings from subjects with depressive disorders were mostly unstable, with a significant change in fulfilled criteria between entry and retest for three out of ten personality disorders: borderline, avoidant and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. Scorings from subjects with anxiety disorders were unstable only for cluster C and dependent personality disorder items. In the absence of co-morbid depressive or anxiety disorders, mean dimensional scores of DIP-Q showed no significant differences between entry and retest. Overall, the effect from state on trait scorings was moderate, and it is concluded that test-retest reliability for DIP-Q is acceptable.


Crisis ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 125-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ludmila Kryzhanovskaya ◽  
Randolph Canterbury

Summary: This retrospective study characterizes the suicidal behavior in 119 patients with Axis I adjustment disorders as assessed by psychiatrists at the University of Virginia Hospital. Results indicated that 72 patients (60.5%) had documented suicide attempts in the past, 96% had been suicidal during their admission to the hospital, and 50% had attempted suicide before their hospitalization. The most commonly used method of suicide attempts was overdosing. Of the sample group with suicide attempts in the past, 67% had Axis II diagnoses of borderline personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder. Adjustment disorder diagnosis in patients with the suicide attempts was associated with a high level of suicidality at admission, involuntary hospitalization and substance-abuse disorders. Axis II diagnoses in patients with adjustment disorders constituted risk factors for further suicidal behavior. Additional future prospective studies with reliability checks on diagnosis of adjustment disorders and suicidal behavior are needed.


Crisis ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Jacqueline M. Frei ◽  
Vladimir Sazhin ◽  
Melissa Fick ◽  
Keong Yap

Abstract. Psychiatric hospitalization can cause significant distress for patients. Research has shown that to cope with the stress, patients sometimes resort to self-harm. Given the paucity of research on self-harm among psychiatric inpatients, a better understanding of transdiagnostic processes as predictors of self-harm during psychiatric hospitalization is needed. The current study examined whether coping styles predicted self-harm after controlling for commonly associated factors, such as age, gender, and borderline personality disorder. Participants were 72 patients (mean age = 39.32 years, SD = 12.29, 64% male) admitted for inpatient treatment at a public psychiatric hospital in Sydney, Australia. Participants completed self-report measures of coping styles and ward-specific coping behaviors, including self-harm, in relation to coping with the stress of acute hospitalization. Results showed that younger age, diagnosis of borderline personality disorder, and higher emotion-oriented coping were associated with self-harm. After controlling for age and borderline personality disorder, higher levels of emotion-oriented coping were found to be a significant predictor of self-harm. Findings were partially consistent with hypotheses; emotion-oriented but not avoidance-oriented coping significantly predicted self-harm. This finding may help to identify and provide psychiatric inpatients who are at risk of self-harm with appropriate therapeutic interventions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document