1
|
Radetzki P, Wrath AJ, McWilliams L, Olson T, Adams S, De Souza D, Lau B, Adams GC. Exploring the Relationship Between Attachment and Pathological Personality Trait Domains in an Outpatient Psychiatric Sample. J Nerv Ment Dis 2023; 211:46-53. [PMID: 36044704 DOI: 10.1097/nmd.0000000000001569] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2023]
Abstract
ABSTRACT The current study investigates the relationship between insecure attachment and pathological personality trait domains in a sample of psychiatric outpatients. Participants ( N = 150) completed measures for attachment and personality. Bivariate correlations and multiple regression analyses investigated the extent to which insecure attachment and personality pathology were associated. Insecure attachment positively correlated with overall personality pathology, with attachment anxiety having a stronger correlation than attachment avoidance. Distinct relationships emerged between attachment anxiety and negative affectivity and attachment avoidance and detachment. Insecure attachment and male sex predicted overall personality pathology, but only attachment anxiety predicted all five trait domains. Insecure attachment might be a risk factor for pathological personality traits. Assessing attachment in clinical contexts and offering attachment-based interventions could benefit interpersonal outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Trevor Olson
- Kinetik Physical Rehabilitation Program, Saskatchewan Health Authority, Saskatoon, SK, Canada
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Baggio S, Iglesias K, Duarte M, Nicastro R, Hasler R, Euler S, Debbané M, Starcevic V, Perroud N. Validation of self-report measures of narcissism against a diagnostic interview. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0266540. [PMID: 35385531 PMCID: PMC8986001 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266540] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2022] [Accepted: 03/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
The Pathological Narcissism Inventory (PNI) and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) are often used to screen for pathological narcissism but have rarely been validated against a clinician-administered diagnostic interview. Our study evaluated the convergent validity of the PNI and NPI against a diagnostic interview for narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) in a clinical population. We used data from a psychiatric outpatient center located in Switzerland (n = 123). Correlations between PNI/NPI and NPD ranged between .299 and .498 (common variance 9.0–24.8%). The PNI and NPI should be used carefully to screen for NPD. We highlight a need to increase the compatibility between the conceptual underpinnings of the PNI, NPI and NPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stéphanie Baggio
- Division of Prison Health, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
- Institute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
- * E-mail:
| | - Katia Iglesias
- School of Health Sciences (HEdS-FR), HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Western Switzerland, Fribourg, Switzerland
| | - Miguel Duarte
- Service of Psychiatric Specialties, Department of Mental Health and Psychiatry, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Rosetta Nicastro
- Service of Psychiatric Specialties, Department of Mental Health and Psychiatry, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Roland Hasler
- Service of Psychiatric Specialties, Department of Mental Health and Psychiatry, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- NCCR Synapsy, Campus Biotech, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Sebastian Euler
- Department of Consultation Psychiatry and Psychosomatics, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Martin Debbané
- Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Developmental Imaging and Psychopathology Lab, Department of Psychiatry, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Research Department of Clinical, Educational, and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Vladan Starcevic
- University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney Medical School, Nepean Clinical School, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Nader Perroud
- Service of Psychiatric Specialties, Department of Mental Health and Psychiatry, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Department of Psychiatry, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gamache D, Savard C, Leclerc P, Payant M, Berthelot N, Côté A, Faucher J, Lampron M, Lemieux R, Mayrand K, Nolin MC, Tremblay M. A Proposed Classification of ICD-11 Severity Degrees of Personality Pathology Using the Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale. Front Psychiatry 2021; 12:628057. [PMID: 33815167 PMCID: PMC8012561 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.628057] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2020] [Accepted: 02/19/2021] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: The 11th version of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) has adopted a dimensional approach to personality disorder (PD) nosology. Notably, it includes an assessment of PD degree of severity, which can be classified according to five categories. To date, there is no gold standard measure for assessing degree of PD severity based on the ICD-11 model, and there are no empirically-based anchor points to delineate the proposed categories. With the operationalization of PD degrees of severity in the ICD-11 PD model now being closely aligned with Criterion A of the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD), sharing a focus on self and interpersonal dysfunction, self-report instruments developed for the latter model might prove useful as screening tools to determine degrees of severity in the former. Methods: The Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale, a brief validated self-report questionnaire originally designed to assess level of personality pathology according to the AMPD framework, was used to derive anchor points to delineate the five severity degrees from the ICD-11 PD model. Data from five clinical and non-clinical samples (total N = 2,240) allowed identifying anchor points for classification, based on Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis, Latent Class Analysis, and data distribution statistics. Categories were validated using multiple indices pertaining to externalizing and internalizing symptoms relevant to PD. Results: Analyses yielded the following anchor points for PD degrees of severity: No PD = 0-1.04; Personality Difficulty = 1.05-1.29; Mild PD = 1.30-1.89; Moderate PD = 1.90-2.49; and Severe PD = 2.50 and above. A clear gradient of severity across the five categories was observed in all samples. A high number of significant contrasts among PD categories were also observed on external variables, consistent with the ICD-11 PD degree of severity operationalization. Conclusions: The present study provides potentially useful guidelines to determine severity of personality pathology based on the ICD-11 model. The use of a brief self-report questionnaire as a screening tool for assessing PD degrees of severity should be seen as a time-efficient support for clinical decision and treatment planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dominick Gamache
- Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
| | - Claudia Savard
- Department of Educational Fundamentals and Practices, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada
| | - Philippe Leclerc
- Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
| | - Maude Payant
- Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Nicolas Berthelot
- Department of Nursing Sciences, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
| | - Alexandre Côté
- Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
| | - Jonathan Faucher
- Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
| | | | - Roxanne Lemieux
- Department of Nursing Sciences, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
| | - Kristel Mayrand
- School of Psychology, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada
| | - Marie-Chloé Nolin
- Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Trois-Rivières, QC, Canada
| | - Marc Tremblay
- Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec City, QC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|