Search

The clinical relevance of nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) has received growing recognition, and NSSI represents a relevant risk factor for suicide. The present study aimed at running a head-to-head comparison between interview scores of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) Section II personality disorders (PDs) criteria, and DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) Criterion A and Criterion B measures in providing significant and relevant information for understanding NSSI and suicidal ideation and behavior among psychotherapy participants. To this aim, a clinical sample of 103 adult participants was administered the Clinician-Administered Nonsuicidal Self-Injury Disorder Index (CANDI), the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), as well as the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Personality Disorders, the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders Module I, and a self-report measure of dysfunctional personality traits (i.e., the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 [PID-5]). Logistic ordinal regression dominance analysis results showed that, when compared to the 10 DSM-5 Section II PD symptom counts, the DSM-5 Section III PD measure scores provided the same amount of information in the CANDI Global Severity Index scores (Nagelkerke pseudo- R ² value = .41), and a markedly larger information quantity in the case of the C-SSRS Suicidal Ideation (+35.1%), and Suicidal Behavior Index (+35.9%) levels. As a whole, our data suggested the clinical usefulness of the DSM-5 AMPD in understanding NSSI and suicidal ideation and behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

The present study aimed to test the relationships of Dark Triad constructs with propensity toward moral disengagement and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) maladaptive personality traits. A total of 279 community-dwelling adult participants (41.6% male; Mage = 32.27 years) were administered the Two-Dimensional Mach-IV Scale, Five-Factor Narcissism Inventory-Short Form, Triarchic Psychopathy Measure, Personality Inventory for DSM-5, and Moral Disengagement Scale. Multiple regression results showed differential associations between Dark Triad construct traits and propensity toward moral disengagement. Correlation analyses showed that all Dark Triad trait dimensions could be substantially described in terms of AMPD maladaptive trait profile. When the effect of Moral Disengagement Scale scores was taken into account in relative importance weights analysis (Radjusted2 = .66), DSM-5 AMPD maladaptive trait profile explained 27% of the variance in the "Dark Triad" latent factor over and above the effect of moral disengagement. As a whole, our findings supported the idea that the Dark Triad personality constructs are likely to share a common core of antagonistic maladaptive personality traits. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

In order to study the relationships between DSM-5 Section III maladaptive personality traits and personality dysfunction, 312 Italian community dwelling adults completed the Italian translations of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Measure of Disordered Personality Functioning Scale (MDPF); participants were also administered the Iowa Personality Disorder Screen (IPDS). Consistent with previous findings, 22 (88.0%) PID-5 maladaptive trait scales showed moderate and significant correlations with MDPF Non Coping (median r value = .32), and Non Cooperativeness, (median r value = .24) scales. Regression analyses showed that PID-5 trait scales explained roughly 59% and 35% of the variance in MDPF Non Coping and Non Cooperativeness scales, respectively. PID-5 traits were significantly associated also with the IPDS total score, adjusted R2 = .45, p < .001. As a whole, our data seemed to indicate that the wide majority of the PID-5 scales showed significant relationships of at least moderate size with a self-report measure of personality dysfunction, lending further support to the criterion validity of the PID-5. (PsycINFO Database Record, ((c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).)

Comments on the original article by Widiger (see record 2013-45025-016). Widiger provides a thoughtful overview of some reasons the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fifth Edition (DSM-5) personality disorder (PD) proposal came to its current position in Section III of the manual, as well as insightful advice about how to move forward. Markon comments that psychiatry seems to suffer an inordinate fear of what would transpire if authoritative nosologies were unavailable as guides to scientific discourse. Widiger's admonishments to be thorough, rigorous, and fair in developing arguments for a given model are good advice for anyone in science, not only those involved in constructing an authoritative nosology. However, Markon remarks, as we move forward, it is also important to ask why do we have such nosologies, and are they really needed to fulfill those purposes?, (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved.)