The Amsterdam Open MRI Collection, a set of multimodal MRI datasets for individual difference analyses.

We present the Amsterdam Open MRI Collection (AOMIC): three datasets with multimodal (3 T) MRI data including structural (T1-weighted), diffusion-weighted, and (resting-state and task-based) functional BOLD MRI data, as well as detailed demographics and psychometric variables from a large set of healthy participants (N = 928, N = 226, and N = 216). Notably, task-based fMRI was collected during various robust paradigms (targeting naturalistic vision, emotion perception, working memory, face perception, cognitive conflict and control, and response inhibition) for which extensively annotated event-files are available. For each dataset and data modality, we provide the data in both raw and preprocessed form (both compliant with the Brain Imaging Data Structure), which were subjected to extensive (automated and manual) quality control. All data is publicly available from the OpenNeuro data sharing platform.

From adaptive to maladaptive fear: Heterogeneity in threat and safety learning across response systems in a representative sample.

Individual differences in fear learning are a crucial prerequisite for the translational value of the fear-conditioning model. In a representative sample (N = 936), we used latent class growth models to detect individual differences in associative fear learning. For a series of subsequent test phases varying in ambiguity (i.e., acquisition, extinction, generalization, reinstatement, and re-extinction), conditioned responding was assessed on three response domains (i.e., subjective distress, startle responding, and skin conductance). We also associated fear learning across the different test phases and response domains with selected personality traits related to risk and resilience for anxiety, namely Harm Avoidance, Stress Reaction, and Wellbeing (MPQ; Tellegen and Waller, 2008). Heterogeneity in fear learning was evident, with fit indices suggesting subgroups for each outcome measure. Identified subgroups showed adaptive, maladaptive, or limited-responding patterns. For subjective distress, fear and safety learning was more maladaptive in the subgroups high on Harm Avoidance, while more adaptive learning was observed in subgroups with medium Harm Avoidance and the limited- or non-responders were lowest in Harm Avoidance. Distress subgroups did not differ in Stress Reaction or Wellbeing. Startle and SCR subgroups did not differ on selected personality traits. The heterogeneity in fear-learning patterns resembled risk and resilient anxiety development observed in real life, which supports the associative fear-learning paradigm as a useful translational model for pathological fear development.

Change in self-reported personality during major depressive disorder treatment: A reanalysis of treatment studies from a demoralization perspective.

Change in self-reported personality trait scores (especially Neuroticism and Extraversion) over the course of treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) has been robustly demonstrated. We believe that these observed changes on personality trait scales may reflect reduction in demoralization rather than changes in personality per se. Data were combined from 3 archival samples: a randomized clinical trial and 2 naturalistic follow-up studies. All participants (N = 300) received either psychotherapy or psychopharmacological treatment. Pre- and posttreatment participants were assessed with the revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R), the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-I7), and Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Comparisons were made between "unadjusted" and "adjusted" NEO-PI-R substantive personality trait scales-in which demoralization-related items were removed from their original trait scale (i.e., adjusted NEO-PI-R scales) and also used to form a separate NEO demoralization scale (NEOdem). The NEOdem scale changed more over the course of treatment (d = .41) compared with the adjusted NEO-PI-R scales, which manifested only small changes (d < |.19|). Moreover, the adjusted NEO-PI-R trait scales revealed much smaller changes compared with their unadjusted counterparts. The study provides further support for the utility of distinguishing between demoralization and NEO-PI-R traits in clinical assessment and research. A substantial part of change in self-reported personality during treatment for depression resulted from a reduction in demoralization. (PsycINFO Database Record

Personality in general and clinical samples: Measurement invariance of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire.

A growing body of research suggests that the same general dimensions can describe normal and pathological personality, but most of the supporting evidence is exploratory. We aim to determine in a confirmatory framework the extent to which responses on the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) are identical across general and clinical samples. We tested the Dutch brief form of the MPQ (MPQ-BF-NL) for measurement invariance across a general population subsample (N = 365) and a clinical sample (N = 365), using Multiple Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MGCFA) and Multiple Group Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (MGESEM). As an omnibus personality test, the MPQ-BF-NL revealed strict invariance, indicating absence of bias. Unidimensional per scale tests for measurement invariance revealed that 10% of items appeared to contain bias across samples. Item bias only affected the scale interpretation of Achievement, with individuals from the clinical sample more readily admitting to put high demands on themselves than individuals from the general sample, regardless of trait level. This formal test of equivalence provides strong evidence for the common structure of normal and pathological personality and lends further support to the clinical utility of the MPQ. (PsycINFO Database Record

Distinguishing between demoralization and specific personality traits in clinical assessment with the NEO-PI-R.

Demoralization, a nonspecific unpleasant state that is common in clinical practice, has been identified as a potential source of nonspecificity in the assessment of personality and psychopathology. The aim of this research was to distinguish between Demoralization and specific personality traits in a widely used measure of personality: the Neuroticism-Extraversion-Openness Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R). NEO-PI-R and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 questionnaires were completed by 278 patients of a specialized clinic for personality disorders in The Netherlands. Furthermore, a replication sample was used consisting of 405 patients from the same institution who completed NEO-PI-R questionnaires, as well. A measure of Demoralization was derived (NEOdem, a NEO-PI-R-based Demoralization scale) using factor analytic techniques. Results indicated that the Demoralization Scale scores were reliable and showed expected patterns of convergence and divergence with conceptually relevant Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-RF scales. When items contributing to Demoralization-related variance were removed from the NEO-PI-R scales, increased specificity was notable with regard to external correlates. These results provide supportive evidence for the validity and heuristic potential of distinguishing between Demoralization and specific personality traits within the NEO-PI-R.

Development and validation of the Dutch brief form of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ-BF-NL).

This study describes the development and psychometric properties of the Dutch brief form of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ-BF-NL). Representative samples from the Netherlands (N = 1,055) and the United States (N = 1,153) and a Dutch student sample (N = 987) were used for development, cross- and external validation, respectively. The authors' strategy for item selection and scale validation replicated the development of the U.S. brief form (MPQ-BF). Internal consistencies were generally good and comparable to the U.S. version, as were correlations with the U.S. full-length scales and higher order structure. Moreover, convergent and divergent patterns were consistent with prediction, with Positive Emotionality related to social and activating behavior, Negative Emotionality to anxiety, and Constraint to reversed impulsivity and externalizing behaviors. In sum, the MPQ-BF-NL provides the Dutch-Flemish language area with a personality inventory well suited for both psychopathology research and clinical practice and offers new opportunities for fundamental and cross-cultural studies on personality.

Comparative validity of brief to medium-length Big Five and Big Six Personality Questionnaires.

A general consensus on the Big Five model of personality attributes has been highly generative for the field of personality psychology. Many important psychological and life outcome correlates with Big Five trait dimensions have been established. But researchers must choose between multiple Big Five inventories when conducting a study and are faced with a variety of options as to inventory length. Furthermore, a 6-factor model has been proposed to extend and update the Big Five model, in part by adding a dimension of Honesty/Humility or Honesty/Propriety. In this study, 3 popular brief to medium-length Big Five measures (NEO Five Factor Inventory, Big Five Inventory [BFI], and International Personality Item Pool), and 3 six-factor measures (HEXACO Personality Inventory, Questionnaire Big Six Scales, and a 6-factor version of the BFI) were placed in competition to best predict important student life outcomes. The effect of test length was investigated by comparing brief versions of most measures (subsets of items) with original versions. Personality questionnaires were administered to undergraduate students (N = 227). Participants' college transcripts and student conduct records were obtained 6-9 months after data was collected. Six-factor inventories demonstrated better predictive ability for life outcomes than did some Big Five inventories. Additional behavioral observations made on participants, including their Facebook profiles and cell-phone text usage, were predicted similarly by Big Five and 6-factor measures. A brief version of the BFI performed surprisingly well; across inventory platforms, increasing test length had little effect on predictive validity. Comparative validity of the models and measures in terms of outcome prediction and parsimony is discussed.