Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Original Article

Comparing the Prediction of Dimensional Personality Disorders (PID-5) After Three Personality Trait Models

Five Factor, Zuckerman, and Cloninger Models

Published Online:September 14, 2020https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000601

Abstract

Abstract. A dimensional approach for Personality Disorders was proposed in the DSM-5. To assess this approach, a new instrument (the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 [PID-5]) was developed in 2012. One research line has analyzed its convergent validity with personality traits, focusing almost exclusively on the Five-Factor Model (FFM). However, previous evidence about the relationships between Categorical Personality Disorders and other personality trait models shows that they can improve our understanding of Personality Disorders beyond the FFM. The aim of the present study is to compare the power of three personality models (FFM, Cloninger’s, and Zuckerman’s) to predict PID-5 domains. Three samples from the Spanish and Catalan general population were collected for this study depending on which personality questionnaire was applied (1,052 for revised NEO Personality Inventory [NEO-PI-R], 465 for Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire [ZKA-PQ], and 332 for Temperament and Character Inventory Revised [TCI-R-140]). The PID-5 was also applied to all subjects. Factor and regression results indicate that the three models were able to predict Dimensional Personality Disorders well, although some differences emerge between them. Specific relationships between dimensional disorders and traits, the role of the facets as well as the utility of the results reported are discussed.

References

  • Abad, F. J., Sorrel, M. A., García, L. F., & Aluja, A. (2016). Modeling general, specific, and method variance in personality measures: Results for ZKA-PQ and NEO-PI-R. Assessment, 25, 959–977. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191116667547 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Al-Dajani, N., Gralnick, T. M., & Bagby, R. M. (2016). A psychometric review of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5): Current status and future directions. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 62–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2015.1107572 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Aluja, A., Blanch, A., García, L. F., García, O., & Escorial, S. (2012). Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) as a predictor of MCMI-III personality disorders scales: The role of facets. Personality and Mental Health, 6, 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmh.1185 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Aluja, A., Cuevas, L., García, L. F., & García, O. (2007a). Prediction the MCMI-III personality disorders scores by NEO-PI-R dimensions and facets in Spanish and American samples. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7(2), 307–321. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Aluja, A., Cuevas, L., García, L. F., & García, O. (2007b). Zuckerman’s personality model predicts MCMI-III personality disorders. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1311–1321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.10.009 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Aluja, A., García, L. F., Cuevas, L., & García, O. (2007). The MCMI-III personality disorders scores predicted by the NEO-FFI-R and the ZKPQ-50-CC: A comparative study. Journal of Personality Disorders, 21, 60–73. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2007.21.1.58 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Aluja, A., García, O., & García, L. F. (2004). Replicability of the three, four and five Zuckerman’s personality super-factors: exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the EPQ-RS, ZKPQ and NEO-PI-R. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1093–1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00203-4 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Aluja, A., García, O., García, L. F., & Seisdedos, N. (2005). Invariance of the “NEO-PI-R” factor structure across exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1879–1890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.11.014 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Aluja, A., Kuhlman, M., & Zuckerman, M. (2010). Development of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ): A factor/facet version of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ). Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.497406 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th edition revised (DSM-IV TR). Washington, DC: Author. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Ayerst, L., Quilty, L. C., Chmielewski, M., & Bagby, R. M. (2015). Associations between DSM-5 section III personality traits and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2 – Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) scales in a psychiatric patient sample. Psychological Assessment, 27, 801–815. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000096 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., de Vries, R. E., Hendrickse, J., & Born, M. Ph. (2012). The maladaptive personality traits of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in relation to the HEXACO personality factors and Schizotypy/Dissociation. Journal of Personality Disorders, 26, 641–659. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2012.26.5.641 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ashton, M. C., Paunonen, S. V., & Lee, K. (2014). On the validity of narrow and broad personality traits: A response to Salgado, Moscoso and Berges (2013). Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 24–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.08.019 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chimielewski, M., Bagby, M., Markon, K., Ring, A., & Ryder, A. (2014). Openness to experience, intellect, schizotypal personality disorder, and psychoticism: Resolving the controversy. Journal of Personality Disorders, 28, 483–499. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cloninger, C. R. (1999). The Temperament and Character Inventory – Revised. St. Louis, MO: Center for Psychobiology of Personality, Washington University. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Cloninger, C. R., Svrakic, D. M., & Przybeck, T. R. (1993). A psychobiological model of temperament and character. Archives of General Psychiatry, 50, 975–990. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820240059008 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1999). Inventario de Personalidad NEO Revisado (NEO PI-R) e Inventario NEO Reducido de Cinco Factores (NEO FFI). Manual Profesional [Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and Reduced NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI). Professional Manual]. Madrid, Spain: TEA Ediciones. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Costa, P. T., & Widiger, T. A. (2002). Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Crego, C., Gore, W. L., Rojas, S. L., & Widiger, T. A. (2015). The discriminant (and convergent) validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Personality Disorders, 6, 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000118 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Daneluzzo, E., Stratta, P., & Rossi, A. (2005). The contribution of temperament and character to schizotypy multidimensionality. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 46, 50–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2004.07.010 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • De Fruyt, F., De Clercq, B., De Bolle, M., Wille, B., Markon, K., & Krueger, R. F. (2013). General and maladaptive traits in a five-factor framework for DSM-5 in a university student sample. Assessment, 20, 295–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191113475808 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • De Fruyt, F., De Clercq, B., van de Wiele, L., & Van Heeringen, K. (2006). The validity of Cloninger’s psychobiological model versus the five-factor model to predict DSM-IV personality disorders in a heterogeneous psychiatric sample: Domain facet and residualized facet descriptions. Journal of Personality, 74, 479–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00382.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • De Fruyt, F., van de Wiele, L., & Van Heeringen, C. (2000). Cloninger’s psychobiological model of temperament and character and the five-factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 441–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00204-4 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • DeYoung, C. G., Carey, B. E., Krueger, B. F., & Ross, S. R. (2016). Ten aspects of the Big Five in the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 7, 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000170 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Dolcet, J. (2006). Carácter y Temperamento: Similitudes y Diferencias entre los modelos de Personalidad de 7 y 5 factores [Character and Temperament: Similarities and Differences between personality models of 7 and 5 factors] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Spain, Lleida: University of Lleida. Retrieved from http://www.tdx.cat/bitstream/handle/10803/8295/Tjds1de1.pdf?sequence=1 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Dyce, J. A., & O’Connor, B. P. (1998). Personality disorders and the five-factor model: A test of facet-level predictions. Journal of Personality Disorders, 12, 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1998.12.1.31 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Edmundson, M., Lynam, D. R., Miller, J. D., Gore, W. L., & Widiger, T. A. (2011). A five-factor measure of schizotypal personality traits. Assessment, 18, 321–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191111408228 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Gallart, S. (2015). Predicción de los trastornos de la personalidad del Eje II del DSM-IV-TR a partir de diferentes modelos dimensionales: Costa y McCrae, Zuckerman y Cloninger [Prediction of DSM-IV-TR Axis II personality disorders from different dimensional models: Costa and McCrae, Zuckerman and Cloninger] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Lleida, Spain: University of Lleida. Retrieved from http://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/306603 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • García, L. F., Escorial, S., García, O., Blanch, A., & Aluja, A. (2012). Structural analysis of the facets and dimensions of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) and the NEO-PI-R. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94, 156–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2011.645935 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • García, O., Aluja, A., García, L. F., Escorial, S., & Blanch, A. (2012). Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ) and Cloninger’s Temperament and Character Inventory Revised (TCI-R): A comparative study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53, 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00943.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Gore, W. L., & Widiger, T. A. (2013). The DSM-5 dimensional trait model and five-factor models of general personality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 816–821. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032822 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Griffin, S. A., & Samuel, D. B. (2014). A closer look at the lower-order structure of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5: Comparison with the five-factor model. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 5, 406–412. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000074 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Gutiérrez, F., Aluja, A., Peri, J. M., Calvo, N., Ferrer, M., Bailles, E., & Krueger, R. F. (2017). Psychometric properties of the Spanish PID-5 in a clinical and a community sample. Assessment, 24, 326–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115606518 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Gutiérrez, F., Navinés, R., Navarro, P., García-Esteve, L., Subirá, S., Torrens, M., & Martín-Santos, R. (2008). What do all personality disorders have in common? Ineffectiveness and uncooperativeness. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 49, 570–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2008.04.007 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson, D., & Skodol, A. E. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5. Psychological Medicine, 42, 1879–1890. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291711002674 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1996). Bandwidth–fidelity dilemma in personality measurement for personnel selection. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 609–626. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199611)17:6<609::AID-JOB1828>3.0 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Paunonen, S. V., Rothstein, M. G., & Jackson, D. N. (1999). Narrow reasoning about the use of broad personality measures for personnel selection. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199905)20:3<389::AID-JOB917>3.0 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Richter, J., & Brändström, S. (2009). Personality disorder diagnosis using the Temperament and Character Inventory. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 50, 347–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2008.09.002 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Roskam, I., Galdiolo, S., Hansenne, M., Massoudi, K., Rossier, J., Gicquel, L., & Rolland, J. P. (2015). The psychometric properties of the French version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. PLoS One, 10, e0133413. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133413 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Salgado, J. F., Moscoso, S., & Berges, A. (2013). Conscientiousness, its facets, and the prediction of job performance ratings: Evidence against the narrow measures. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 21, 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12018 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Saroglou, V. (2002). Religion and the five factors of personality: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00233-6 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Saulsman, L. M., & Page, A. C. (2004). The five-factor model and personality disorder empirical literature: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychological Review, 23, 1055–1085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2002.09.001 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Surányi, Z., & Aluja, A. (2014). Catalan and Hungarian validation of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja Personality Questionnaire (ZKA-PQ). Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17, e24. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2014.25 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Suzuki, T., Griffin, S. A., & Samuel, D. B. (2017). Capturing the DSM-5 alternative personality disorder model traits in the five-factor model’s nomological net. Journal of Personality, 85, 220–231. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Svrakic, D. M., Whitehead, C., Przybeck, T. R., & Cloninger, C. R. (1993). Differential diagnosis of personality disorders by the seven-factor model of temperament and character. Archives of General Psychiatry, 50, 991–999. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820240075009 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Thimm, J. C., Jordan, S., & Bach, B. (2016). Hierarchical structure and cross-cultural measurement invariance of the Norwegian version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Journal of Personality Assessment, 99, 204–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2016.1223682 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Thomas, K. M., Yalch, M. M., Krueger, R. F., Wright, A. G., Markon, K. E., & Hopwood, C. J. (2013). The convergent structure of DSM-5 personality trait facets and five-factor model trait domains. Assessment, 20, 308–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191112457589 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Trull, T. J., Scheiderer, E. M., & Tomko, R. L. (2012). Axis II comorbidity. In T. A. WidigerEd., The Oxford handbook of personality disorders (pp. 219–236). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wang, W., Du, W., Wang, Y., Livesley, W. J., & Jang, K. L. (2004). The relationship between the Zuckerman–Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire and traits delineating personality pathology. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00075-8 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Watson, D., Stasik, S. M., Ro, E., & Clark, L. A. (2013). Integrating normal and pathological personality: Relating the DSM-5 trait-dimensional model to general traits of personality. Assessment, 20, 312–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191113485810 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wright, A. G., & Simms, L. J. (2014). On the structure of personality disorder traits: Conjoint analyses of the CAT–PD, PID–5, and NEO PI–3 trait models. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 5, 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000037 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zimmermann, J., Altenstein, D., Krieger, T., Holtforth, M. G., Pretsch, J., Alexopoulos, J., & Markon, K. E. (2014). The structure and correlates of self-reported DSM-5 maladaptive personality traits: Findings from two German-speaking samples. Journal of Personal Disorders, 28, 518–540. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi_2014_28_130 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zuckerman, M. (1999). Vulnerability to psychopathology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zuckerman, M., & Cloninger, C. R. (1996). Relationships between Cloninger’s, Zuckerman’s, and Eysenck’s dimensions of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 283–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(96)00042-6 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D. M., Joireman, J., Teta, P., & Kraft, M. (1993). A comparison of three structural models for personality: The Big Three, the Big Five, and the Alternative Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 757–768. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.4.757 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar