Gender Differences in the Relationship between Lifetime Exposure to Trauma and the Development of Pathological Personality Traits

Gender differences in the prevalence, types and outcomes of traumas have consistently been reported in the literature. Other research has documented that exposure to trauma is associated with the development and maintenance of pathological personality traits. In the current study, we examined the moderating role of gender in the association between lifetime exposure to trauma and pathological personality traits. The sample included 148 clients who sought treatment at a community mental health clinic. All participants completed online questionnaires including demographic information, the Trauma History Questionnaire (THQ), and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Brief Form (PID-5-BF) at the entry to treatment. Our findings documented a significant association between exposure to trauma and pathological personality traits in men, but not in women. Furthermore, this pattern of results was specifically evident within two personality domains: antagonism and detachment. These findings contribute to the theoretical understanding of the interplay between trauma, gender, and the development of pathological personality traits. They expand upon the growing knowledge about the mental health crisis among boys and men by shedding light on the unique vulnerabilities that men face in response to traumatic experiences and how these experiences can have a lasting impact on their adaptive functioning. Consequently, at the clinical level, the current study emphasizes the importance of paying particular attention to men's trauma histories and explicitly exploring these during the intake session.

Prognostic Value of Pathological Personality Traits for Treatment Outcome in Anxiety and Depressive Disorders: The Leiden Routine Outcome Monitoring Study

ABSTRACT

Previous studies have failed to take baseline severity into account when assessing the effects of pathological personality traits (PPT) on treatment outcome. This study assessed the prognostic value of PPT (Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Short Form) on treatment outcome (Brief Symptom Inventory [BSI-posttreatment]) among patients with depressive and/or anxiety disorders ( N = 5689). Baseline symptom level (BSI-pretreatment) was taken into account as a mediator or moderator variable. Results showed significant effects of PPT on outcome, of which Emotional Dysregulation demonstrated the largest association ( β = 0.43, p < 0.001). When including baseline BSI score as a mediator variable, a direct effect ( β = 0.11, p < 0.001) remained approximately one-third of the total effect. The effects of Emotional Dysregulation (interaction effect β = 0.061, p < 0.001) and Inhibition (interaction effect β = 0.062, p < 0.001), but not Compulsivity or Dissocial Behavior, were moderated by the baseline symptom level. PPT predicts higher symptom levels, both before and after treatment, but yields relatively small direct effects on symptom decline when the effect of pretreatment severity is taken into account.

DSM-5 pathological personality domains as vulnerability factors in predicting COVID-19-related anxiety symptoms

Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, individuals worldwide have shown different anxiety-related reactions. Several vulnerability factors may play a role in individuals' psychological reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic. Such factors include pathological personality traits which have been shown to contribute to the development of anxiety-related conditions. Consequently, the present study investigated the relationships between DSM-5 pathological personality domains and COVID-19-related anxiety symptoms. Using an online data portal, the relationships between DSM-5 pathological personality domains and COVID-19-related anxiety symptoms among a mixed university student and community sample (N = 612) were studied. The results showed that there was a positive and significant relationship between all DSM-5 pathological personality domains and COVID-19-related anxiety. The results of multiple linear regression analysis showed that DSM-5 pathological personality domains explained 21% of COVID-19-related anxiety variance. Based on standardized coefficients, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) negative affect domain had the main role in COVID-19-related anxiety. The findings suggest that pathological personality domains can be predictors in the symptoms of anxiety in a viral outbreak. The novel findings add to the literature on individual differences in domains of personality in response to pandemic situations. Implications for future clinical applications and research investigations are discussed.

Translation and cultural adaptation of the DSM-5 Personality Inventory - Brief Form (PID-5-BF)

INTRODUCTION

The Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 - Brief Form (PID-5-BF) - is an instrument for assessment of the five pathological personality traits from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM-5) alternative model of personality disorders.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the psychometric properties of the version of the PID-5-BF translated and adapted to Brazilian Portuguese.

METHODS

The process of translating and cross-culturally adapting the text was carried out by independent translators and the resulting version was administered to 176 patients in two hospitals in Rio Grande do Sul. The internal structure was tested by means of confirmatory factor analysis. Evidence of reliability was tested by examining the internal consistency of the scales and their convergent and concurrent validity with other methods of psychopathology.

RESULTS

The five factors were replicated in the present sample with adequate indicators of fit of the data to the model. Appropriate reliability coefficients for the scales and evidence of validity were observed, indicating the clinical usefulness of the PID-5-BF in the Brazilian context.

CONCLUSION

The psychometric properties of PID-5-BF proved satisfactory in an initial sample of Brazilians.

[The classification of personality disorders in ICD-11]

The classification of personality disorders in ICD-11 Abstract. In ICD-11, the classification of personality disorders (PD) is no longer categorical but dimensional, along a spectrum defined by the severity of the disorder. The definition of PD is based on the level of impairment of self-directed and interpersonal personality functioning. Only one general diagnostic category "Personality Disorder" remains (ICD-11 Code 6D10). All distinct PD diagnoses from ICD-10 are missing, with the exception of Borderline PD, which can be classified with a "trait qualifier." The type of PD is characterized by specific patterns of five maladaptive personality traits. From the perspective of child and adolescent psychiatry, the most important change from ICD-10 to ICD-11 is the removal of an age limit, meaning PDs can be diagnosed across the lifespan.

Relationship Between Personality Disorders Scales, Pathological Personality Traits, and Six Domains of Functioning in Sample With Alcohol Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

Studies reveal a functional impairment in patients with personality disorders (PDs), but there is not enough information to form conclusions about this relation in patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD). The aim of this study was to investigate to what extent a personality disorders scales including pathological personality traits (PPTs) predict six domains of functioning in patients with AUD.

METHODS

In total, 48 patients with AUD diagnosis, who were treated in the psychiatric clinics, aged 20 to 65 years [M = 37.5; SD = 12.08; 12 (25%) females and 36 (75%) males], filled out the demographic questionnaire, WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0, Latvian version) and Latvian Clinical Personality Inventory (LCPI v2.1.). All respondents signed the informed consent form.

RESULTS

Stepwise regression analysis showed that PD Avoidant scale positively predicts impairment in Cognition and Getting along domains of functioning in AUD patients, but, on the PPTs level, it was found that Social withdrawal along with Irresponsibility and Guilt/Shame positively predict impairment in Cognition domain of functioning, and Social withdrawal along with Depressivity and Irresponsibility positively predict impairment in Getting along domain of functioning. The results of the study showed that PPT Orderliness negatively predicts impairment in Live activities domain of functioning. The PD Dependent scale and PPT Separation insecurity positively predict impairment in Participation domain of functioning.

CONCLUSIONS

Obtained results add deeper insight into understanding of the relationship between personality disorders scales including pathological personality traits and six domains of functioning in patients with AUD.

Inner Dialogical Communication and Pathological Personality Traits

Dialogicality and its relation to personality traits have been extensively explored since the evolution of dialogical self theory. However, the latest edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) proposes a new hybrid personality disorder system and, thereby, a new model of pathological personality traits. As of now, there are no studies which show the relationships between self-talk, internal dialogicality, and pathological traits. Thus, the aim of this study was twofold: (a) to investigate the relationship between self-talk and pathological personality traits and (b) to explore the possible affinity between pathological structure of personality and dialogicality. A representative sample of 458 individuals from the non-clinical population, aged 18–67 (M = 30.99, SD = 10.27), including 52% women, completed three questionnaires: the Self-Talk Scale by Brinthaupt et al. (2009), the Internal Dialogical Activity Scale by Oleś (2009), and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 by Krueger et al. (2012). To verify the correspondence between self-talk, internal dialogues, and pathological personality traits, the Pearson product–moment correlation coefficients (Pearson’s r) and canonical correlation analysis were used. The results supported the hypotheses about the specific relationship between internal dialogical activity and five crucial dysfunctional personality traits related to the hybrid DSM-5 system of diagnosis. People characterized as having emotional lability, anxiousness, and separation insecurity (high negative affectivity), with unusual beliefs and experiences, as well as eccentricity (high psychoticism), are prone to having ruminative and confronting dialogues. The correlation between pathological personality traits and self-talk were statistically significant, but the relationships are very small.

Examination of the Section III DSM-5 diagnostic system for personality disorders in an outpatient clinical sample

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013), includes a novel approach to the diagnosis of personality disorders (PDs) in Section III, to stimulate further research with the possibility that this proposal will be included more formally in future DSM iterations. This study provides the 1st test of this proposal in a clinical sample by simultaneously examining its 2 primary components: a system for rating personality impairment and a newly developed dimensional model of pathological personality traits. Participants were community adults currently receiving outpatient mental health treatment who completed a semistructured interview for DSM-IV PDs and were then rated in terms of personality impairment and pathological traits. Data on the pathological traits were also collected through self-reports using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Both sets of trait scores were compared with self-report measures of general personality traits, internalizing symptoms, and externalizing behaviors. Interrater reliabilities for the clinicians' ratings of impairment and the pathological traits were fair. The impairment ratings manifested substantial correlations with symptoms of depression and anxiety, DSM-5 PDs, and DSM-5 pathological traits. The clinician and self-reported personality trait scores demonstrated good convergence with one another, both accounted for substantial variance in DSM-IV PD constructs, and both manifested expected relations with the external criteria. The traits but not the impairment ratings demonstrated incremental validity in the prediction of the DSM-IV PDs. Overall, these results support the general validity of several of the components of this new PD diagnostic system and point to areas that may require further modification.