Search

In order to assess the reliability, factorial validity, and criterion validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) among adolescents, 1,264 Italian high school students were administered the PID-5. Participants were also administered the Questionnaire on Relationships and Substance Use as a criterion measure. In the full sample, McDonald's ω values were adequate for the PID-5 scales (median ω = .85, SD = .06), except for Suspiciousness. However, all PID-5 scales showed average inter-item correlation values in the .20-.55 range. Exploratory structural equation modeling analyses provided moderate support for the a priori model of PID-5 trait scales. Ordinal logistic regression analyses showed that selected PID-5 trait scales predicted a significant, albeit moderate (Cox & Snell R2 values ranged from .08 to .15, all ps < .001) amount of variance in Questionnaire on Relationships and Substance Use variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to evaluate if measures of DSM-5 Alternative PD Model domains predicted interview-based scores of general personality pathology when compared to self-report measures of DSM-IV Axis II/ DSM-5 Section II PD criteria, 300 Italian community adults were administered the Iowa Personality Disorder Screen (IPDS) interview, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), and the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4+ (PDQ-4+). Multiple regression analyses showed that the five PID-5 domain scales collectively explained an adequate rate of the variance of the IPDS interview total score. This result was slightly lower than the amount of variance in the IPDS total score explained by the 10 PDQ-4+ scales. The PID-5 traits scales performed better than the PDQ-4+, although the difference was marginal. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that the PID-5 domain and trait scales provided a moderate, but significant increase in the prediction of the general level of personality pathology above and beyond the PDQ-4+ scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to assess the relationships between DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) maladaptive personality traits and self-reports of aggression, 508 Italian adult participants who met at least one DSM-IV Axis II/ DSM-5 Section II personality disorder (PD) diagnosis were administered the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ). Analysis results showed that multiple regression results, PID-5 Hostility, Callousness, and Risk Taking trait scale scores explained a large amount of variance in AQ Physical Aggression (PA) scores. Moreover, PID-5 Hostility, Callousness, and Risk Taking explained more than 20% of the variance in the AQ Physical Aggression scale scores that was left unexplained by selected continuously scored DSM-IV Axis II/ DSM-5 Section II PDs, whereas SCID-II Paranoid, Narcissistic, Borderline, and Antisocial PDs added only 4% of variance to the amount of variance in AQ Physical Aggression scores that was already explained by the PID-5 trait scale scores.