Development and initial validation of Personality Disorder Syndrome scales for the MMPI-3.

The purpose of the present study was to revise and update the MMPI-2-RF personality disorder (PD) syndrome scales for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-3 (MMPI-3). Study 1 describes the development of the MMPI-3 PD syndrome scales in three separate samples of community participants (n = 1,591), university students (n = 1,660), and outpatient mental health patients (n = 1,537). The authors independently evaluated each of the 72 new MMPI-3 items and rated them for appropriateness for scale inclusion and used various statistical procedures for final item selection. Ultimately, all 10 scales were revised, with nine incorporating items that were new to the MMPI-3. In Study 2, we subsequently validated the new MMPI-3 PD Syndrome scales against measures of traditional PD measures, trait measures of the Alternative Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition-5 model of personality disorders (AMPD) and the five-factor model (FFM) of personality, and specific criterion measures of externalizing, psychopathy, narcissism, emotional dysregulation, and self-harm, in two samples of university students (ns = 489 and 645). With some exceptions, the results were generally supportive of the convergent and discriminant validities of the MMPI-3 PD Syndrome scales. The Histrionic PD scale in particular was associated with questionable results and diverged most strongly from the theoretical construct it was originally meant to reflect. Further continuous validation of the scales is needed, especially in clinical samples, but the findings to date are promising. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Contributions of Multimethod Personality Assessment in Indirect Evaluation.

Indirect assessment is a useful tool in forensic evaluation, especially in cases of threat assessment. To this end, we illustrated the ability to conceptualize a complicated case (i.e., Theodore John Kaczynski) using an indirect approach, with a particular emphasis upon dimensional frameworks of personality. Raters who were unrelated to Mr. Kaczynski's case and with expertise in relevant domains were asked to study information available in the public domain about Mr. Kaczynski and provide ratings using several assessment instruments. Our aim was not to provide a professional clinical opinion, but rather engage in scholarly discourse about the utility of instruments. Mr. Kaczynski was rated to demonstrate characteristics associated with lone actor terrorists. He showed an elevation on a measure of psychosis, and raters conceptualized trauma as an important aspect of his functioning. He demonstrated impairments in detachment and psychoticism (Criterion B of the AMPD) and interpersonal functioning (Criterion A of the AMPD). Clinical conceptualizations for Mr. Kaczynski emphasized schizotypal and paranoid personality disorders. This analysis of an infamous case about which considerable data are publicly available demonstrates the ease with which indirect and multimethod assessment can be applied and integrated in forensic assessment, using modern conceptualizations of personality pathology.

Applying the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders and the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure to the Classic Case of "Madeline G.": Novice and Expert Rater Convergences and Divergence.

Prior research supports the learnability of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD). However, researchers have yet to compare novice ratings on the AMPD's Level of Personality Functioning Scale and the 25 pathological personality traits with expert ratings. Furthermore, the AMPD has yet to be examined with the idiographic Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP). We compared the aggregated AMPD clinical profile of a group of psychology doctoral students who learned the AMPD to high levels of reliability to that of an expert rater using the crucible of the classical case of "Madeline G." Examination of AMPD and SWAP ratings of "Madeline G." revealed excellent overall concordance but suggests that novice raters tend to perceive lower levels of personality impairment.

Criterion A of the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders in MMPI-2/RF Personality Disorder Scales.

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) instruments are frequently used to assess personality and psychopathology. Recent publications of personality disorder (PD) spectra scales for dimensionalized PD syndromes with MMPI instruments may advance PD assessment. To this end, we examined MMPI-Second Edition (2) and MMPI-2-Restructured Form (-RF) PD Spectra scales within the lens of a contemporary dimensional model of PDs, the alternative model for personality disorders (AMPD). The core dimension of PD, Criterion A of the AMPD or level of personality functioning (LPF), was characterized quantitatively within the PD Spectra scales. By sequentially factor analyzing the scales of the Severity Indices of Personality Problems (SIPP-118) to a common general factor of PD, an index of LPF external to the MMPI item pool was established. This LPF dimension was strongly represented across most PD Spectra scales. LPF variances within the PD Spectra scales were deconstructed using measures of general demoralization (RCdemoralization) and maladaptive personality traits indexed by the Personality Psychopathology-5 (PSY-5). Nuanced LPF and PD Spectra scale relationships were discerned. Dimensionalized Antisocial PD, Borderline PD, Dependent PD, and Paranoid PD showed meaningful association with LPF after demoralization, and maladaptive trait variances were removed. The examination of the MMPI-3 item pool reveals that the existing PD Spectra scale item sets are largely carried forward in the new edition of the MMPI. This suggests PD Spectra scale correlates, including LPF relationships, may be discernable in the newest edition of the MMPI, pending future study.

Assessing Self-Definition and Relatedness in Level of Personality Functioning.

The two polarities model (TPM) of personality organizes psychological assessment and psychotherapy and connects to personality disorder diagnosis using the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD). The authors developed scales assessing the TPM from an existing self-report measure for level of personality functioning (LPF), a core component of the AMPD. Iterative content analyses of the LPF measure yielded scales for Autonomy and Communion corresponding to dimensions of the TPM. The scales were refined via internal consistency analyses using a measure of psychological attachment and studied in development and validation samples. Associations with relevant external criteria were explored in a series of multiple regressions. The new content-based LPF scales were illustrated with a case vignette. Although the new Autonomy/Communion scales await further validation prior to clinical use, initial evidence suggests that they may bridge the nomological nets of the TPM and AMPD and potentially offer clinical utility in assessment and treatment planning.

Benchmarking SARS CoV-2 Infection in the Workplace to Support Continuity of Operations.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic jeopardizes continuity of operations of workplaces and the health and safety of workers. Exemplar workplace-related SARS-CoV-2 benchmarks are described and illustrated with empirical data. METHODS: Benchmarks were collected over a 9-month period on a large workplace (N = 5500+). These ranged from quantitative indices associated with RT-qPCR targeted testing and random surveillance screening, surveillance for new variants of SARS-CoV-2, intensive contact tracing, case management, return to work procedures, to monitoring of antibody seropositive status. RESULTS: Data and analyses substantiated effectiveness of interventions. This was evidenced in suppressed infection rates, rapid case identification and isolation, acceptance of the program by employees, documentation of presumptive immunity, and working relationships with senior management. CONCLUSIONS: These SARS-CoV-2 exemplar benchmarks provided an evidence-base for practice and contributed strategically to organizational decisions.

Comparative Content Analysis of Self-Report Scales for Level of Personality Functioning.

Content validity analyses of eight self-report instruments for assessing severity of personality disorder (PD), also known as Level of Personality Functioning (LPF), were conducted using the conceptual scheme of the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD; APA, 2013). The item contents of these eight inventories were characterized for the LPF constructs of Identity (ID), Self-Direction (SD), Empathy (EM), and Intimacy (IN) along with the pathological personality trait domains of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism. Severity of pathology (SV) reflected in item content was also rated. Raters demonstrated robust agreement for AMPD and SV constructs across instruments. Similarity between instrument AMPD construct profiles was quantified by intraclass correlations (ICC). Results showed the instruments were generally similar in AMPD-construct coverage, but some important differences emerged. The subscales of the instruments also were characterized for the degree to which they reflect the four LPF (ID, SD, EM, IN) domain constructs. Collectively, these content validity comparisons clarify the equivalence of instruments for AMPD constructs and the relative proportions of construct coverage within instrument subscales. These results can inform future research with LPF self-report instruments and guide clinicians in selecting an LPF-related instrument for use in practice.

Deconstructing criterion a of the alternative model for personality disorders.

The construct composition of the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS; Criterion A) of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition alternative model for personality disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 2013) was examined in a clinical vignette rating study. Multiple indices of level of personality functioning, psychiatric and psychosocial impairment, Criterion B maladaptive personality traits, and conceptually divergent variables (intellectual level, socioeconomic status, and likability) were used to deconstruct the LPFS. Most variables were highly intercorrelated, but partial correlational analyses showed the LPFS possesses meaningful personality construct variance not fully explained by severity of pathological traits, psychiatric and psychosocial impairment, or the conceptually divergent variables. This exploratory study offers initial evidence that the LPFS contains substantive LPF variance beyond PD severity. Results are framed and discussed in terms of the known conceptual and empirical overlap between Criterion A and Criterion B as well as the differing ways a dimension of personality disorder (PD) severity may be interpreted. We propose the LPFS is more than statistical artifact created by empirical covariation but less than a true latent dimension of PD severity. The LPFS may be understood as a methodologically pragmatic but theoretically substantive dimension of PD severity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Borderline personality disorder diagnosis in a new key.

BACKGROUND: Conceptualizations of personality disorders (PD) are increasingly moving towards dimensional approaches. The definition and assessment of borderline personality disorder (BPD) in regard to changes in nosology are of great importance to theory and practice as well as consumers. We studied empirical connections between the traditional DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for BPD and Criteria A and B of the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD). METHOD: Raters of varied professional backgrounds possessing substantial knowledge of PDs (N = 20) characterized BPD criteria with the four domains of the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS) and 25 pathological personality trait facets. Mean AMPD values of each BPD criterion were used to support a nosological cross-walk of the individual BPD criteria and study various combinations of BPD criteria in their AMPD translation. The grand mean AMPD profile generated from the experts was compared to published BPD prototypes that used AMPD trait ratings and the DSM-5-III hybrid categorical-dimensional algorithm for BPD. Divergent comparisons with DSM-5-III algorithms for other PDs and other published PD prototypes were also examined. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability analyses showed generally robust agreement. The AMPD profile for BPD criteria rated by individual BPD criteria was not isomorphic with whole-person ratings of BPD, although they were highly correlated. Various AMPD profiles for BPD were generated from theoretically relevant but differing configurations of BPD criteria. These AMPD profiles were highly correlated and showed meaningful divergence from non-BPD DSM-5-III algorithms and other PD prototypes. CONCLUSIONS: Results show that traditional DSM BPD diagnosis reflects a common core of PD severity, largely composed of LPFS and the pathological traits of anxiousness, depressively, emotional lability, and impulsivity. Results confirm the traditional DSM criterion-based BPD diagnosis can be reliably cross-walked with the full AMPD scheme, and both approaches share substantial construct overlap. This relative equivalence suggests the vast clinical and research literatures associated with BPD may be brought forward with DSM-5-III diagnosis of BPD.

Criterion A of the AMPD in HiTOP.

The categorical model of personality disorder classification in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed. [DSM-5]; American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ) is highly and fundamentally problematic. Proposed for DSM-5 and provided within Section III (for Emerging Measures and Models) was the Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) classification, consisting of Criterion A (self-interpersonal deficits) and Criterion B (maladaptive personality traits). A proposed alternative to the DSM-5 more generally is an empirically based dimensional organization of psychopathology identified as the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP; Kotov et al., 2017 ). HiTOP currently includes, at the highest level, a general factor of psychopathology. Further down are the five domains of detachment, antagonistic externalizing, disinhibited externalizing, thought disorder, and internalizing (along with a provisional sixth somatoform dimension) that align with Criterion B. The purpose of this article is to discuss the potential inclusion and placement of the self-interpersonal deficits of the DSM-5 Section III Criterion A within HiTOP.

Personality Constructs and Paradigms in the Alternative DSM-5 Model of Personality Disorder.

The DSM-5 Section III alternative model for personality disorders (AMPD) is a personality disorder (PD) nosology based on severity of personality dysfunction and pathological traits. We examined the degree to which the personality constructs identified by McAdams and Pals (2006; dispositional traits, characteristic adaptations, narrative identity) and the paradigms of personality assessment described by Wiggins (2003; psychodynamic, interpersonal, personological, multivariate, empirical) are represented within the AMPD. Nine raters expert with the AMPD and personality evaluated elements of Criterion A and the 25 trait facets of Criterion B for presence of type and degree of personality constructs and paradigms, as well as level of inference. Criterion B showed higher rater agreement compared to Criterion A. Criteria A and B reflect different configurations of construct, paradigm, and level of inference. The characteristic adaptation construct and interpersonal paradigm were strongly reflected in both Criteria A and B. The psychodynamic and personological paradigms and the narrative identity construct were highly correlated, and the multivariate, empirical, and dispositional traits variables were highly correlated. Results illustrate differential conceptual emphases as well as areas of overlap with Criteria A and B. This characterization highlights that PD nosology rests on personality theory and suggests implications for integrative PD assessment.

It's not that Difficult: An Interrater Reliability Study of the DSM-5 Section III Alternative Model for Personality Disorders.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed. [DSM-5]; American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ) Section III Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) represents a novel approach to the diagnosis of personality disorder (PD). In this model, PD diagnosis requires evaluation of level of impairment in personality functioning (Criterion A) and characterization by pathological traits (Criterion B). Questions about clinical utility, complexity, and difficulty in learning and using the AMPD have been expressed in recent scholarly literature. We examined the learnability, interrater reliability, and clinical utility of the AMPD using a vignette methodology and graduate student raters. Results showed that student clinicians can learn Criterion A of the AMPD to a high level of interrater reliability and agreement with expert ratings. Interrater reliability of the 25 trait facets of the AMPD varied but showed overall acceptable levels of agreement. Examination of severity indexes of PD impairment showed the level of personality functioning (LPF) added information beyond that of global assessment of functioning (GAF). Clinical utility ratings were generally strong. The satisfactory interrater reliability of components of the AMPD indicates the model, including the LPF, is very learnable.

Development and Validation of Personality Disorder Spectra Scales for the MMPI-2-RF.

The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a set of MMPI-2-RF (Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008/2011) personality disorder (PD) spectra scales. These scales could serve the purpose of assisting with DSM-5 PD diagnosis and help link categorical and dimensional conceptions of personality pathology within the MMPI-2-RF. We developed and provided initial validity results for scales corresponding to the 10 PD constructs listed in the DSM-5 using data from student, community, clinical, and correctional samples. Initial validation efforts indicated good support for criterion validity with an external PD measure as well as with dimensional personality traits included in the DSM-5 alternative model for PDs. Construct validity results using psychosocial history and therapists' ratings in a large clinical sample were generally supportive as well. Overall, these brief scales provide clinicians using MMPI-2-RF data with estimates of DSM-5 PD constructs that can support cross-model connections between categorical and dimensional assessment approaches.

Psychological Assessment with the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders: Tradition and Innovation.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition (DSM-5) Section III Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD; APA, 2013) represents an innovative system for simultaneous psychiatric classification and psychological assessment of personality disorders (PD). The AMPD combines major paradigms of personality assessment and provides an original, heuristic, flexible, and practical framework that enriches clinical thinking and practice. Origins, emerging research, and clinical application of the AMPD for diagnosis and psychological assessment are reviewed. The AMPD integrates assessment and research traditions, facilitates case conceptualization, is easy to learn and use, and assists in providing patient feedback. New as well as existing tests and psychometric methods may be used to operationalize the AMPD for clinical assessments.