ABSTRACT
Resumen El modelo dimensional alternativo para los trastornos de personalidad incluye 25 facetas (rasgos patológicos) organizadas en cinco dominios de orden superior (Desapego, Afectividad Negativa, Psicoticismo, Antagonismo y Desinhibición). Para evaluar este modelo, se desarrolló el Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), que posee dos versiones: una extensa (220 ítems) que evalúa dominios y facetas, y una breve (25 ítems) que evalúa solo los dominios. En un trabajo anterior, se brindó evidencia favorable para una versión breve (31 ítems) adaptada para ser utilizada en población argentina. En el presente trabajo se estudian las propiedades psicométricas de una versión reducida y modificada del PID-5 que permite evaluar ambos componentes por medio de una cantidad de ítems (108). La validez convergente se evaluó a través de la relación con una medida de rasgos de personalidad normal del Modelo de los Cinco Grandes Factores. Se trabajó con una muestra de tipo no probabilística de n = 525 sujetos de población general, que respondieron la versión adaptada del PID-5 y el Listado de Adjetivos para Evaluar la Personalidad. Los resultados brindaron evidencia de validez y confiabilidad para el instrumento. El Análisis Factorial Exploratorio y Confirmatorio sugirió un buen ajuste de la estructura pentafactorial. La consistencia interna resultó adecuada y los ítems presentaron buenos índices de discriminación. Se observaron diferencias de género y edad, y correlaciones con los factores correspondientes de los cinco grandes. Esta versión puede ser utilizada para evaluar el modelo, con fines tanto clínicos como de investigación, y con ventajas respecto al tiempo de administración respecto a la versión extensa original.
Abstract The official classification of personality disorders in the latest edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) remains categorical. However, a dimensional alternative for personality disorders is presented as an emerging model. The model is organized in five higher order domains (Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition and Psychoticism), with relationships with the Big Five Model of Personality, strongly established within the Personality Psychology. The proposal also includes 25 facets or second-order traits, included within the main domains. Domains and facets represent psychopathological traits with clinical relevance. To assess this model, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) was developed. PID-5 has two forms: extensive (220 items) that assesses domains and facets, and brief (25 items) that assesses only the domains. In a previous study, evidence for a short version (31 items) adapted to the Argentine population was provided, that overcomes some of the limitations of the original one. In this work, the psychometric properties of a reduced and modified version of the PID-5 are studied, which allows evaluating five domains and 25 facets, through a reduced number of items (108). We worked with a non-probabilistic sample of n = 525 subjects from the general population, who answered the adapted version of the PID-5 and the Adjectives Checklist to Assess the Big Five Personality Factors (AEP), a Big Five Model measure. The following data analyses were performed: (1) Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis to evaluate the internal structure of PID-5; (2) reliability analysis to assess the internal consistency of the PID-5 scales; (3) item analysis to assess discriminating power; (4) multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to examine significant differences due to gender and age; and (5) bivariate correlation analysis to analyze PID-5 convergent validity. The results provided evidence of validity and reliability. Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis suggested a five-factor structure. The facets presented factor loadings in the domain theoretically expected, with some exceptions: Suspiciousness (loaded in Psychoticism), Hostility (loaded in Disinhibition), Depressivity (loaded in Detachment) and Insensitivity (loaded in Detachment). CFA also suggested a good model fit (CFI = .98; RMSEA = .04; SRMR = 0.083). Psychoticism, Detachment, and Disinhibition facets had their higher factor loadings in the expected domain. Negative affectivity showed higher correlations with the rest of the scales. Internal consistency was satisfactory, especially at the domain level, and the items had good discrimination indices. Correlations with the corresponding of the Big Five factors were observed, similar to previous studies. The five PID-5 domains were also found positively correlated. Additionally, gender and age differences were found. In line with previous literature, results suggest that some facets scales are "pure" markers of these domains (e. g., Psychoticism and Antagonism facets), whereas others (e. g., Negative Affectivity facets such as Depressiveness, Suspicion, Hostility), are located "in between" domains since they share features of more than one domain. Psychoticism facets presented higher loadings in their domains and lower in the rest. This is not surprising; although most of psychopathology cannot be understood as categories, schizophyte and Schizotypal Personality Disorder are exceptions, and Psychoticism would be the representation of these categories in the APA model. Findings also provide evidence of convergent validity for the instrument, as well as theorical evidence regarding the relationship between normal and pathological personality traits. This version can be used to evaluate the model, both in research and clinical practice. It has advantages over the original longer version, in terms of administration time and participants' fatigue, while maintaining its psychometric properties. The results are also expected to contribute to the recent literature on the dimensional approach to personality psychopathology. However, complementary studies, particularly with a clinical population, are needed.
ABSTRACT
Resumen El DSM-5 presenta un modelo dimensional alternativo para los trastornos de personalidad, que incluye rasgos patológicos organizados en cinco grandes áreas: Desapego, Afectividad Negativa, Psicoticismo, Antagonismo y Desinhibición. Para evaluar dicho modelo, se desarrolló el Personality Inventory for DSM-5. El objetivo de este trabajo fue estudiar las propiedades psicométricas de una versión adaptada del instrumento a población argentina. Se trabajó con una muestra no probabilística de 393 sujetos de población general. Se administró la versión adaptada del Personality Inventory for DSM-5 junto con el Listado de Adjetivos para Evaluar Personalidad, una medida de los cinco rasgos del modelo de los Grandes Factores de Personalidad (Amabilidad, Responsabilidad, Extraversión, Neuroticismo y Apertura a la experiencia), equivalentes normales de los rasgos patológicos del modelo alternativo. Los resultados mostraron propiedades psicométricas satisfactorias. La versión argentina del Inventario mostró una estructura de cinco factores similar a la original, con niveles adecuados de consistencia interna e ítems con buenos índices de discriminación. Se observaron diferencias por género y edad. Los hombres puntuaron más alto en Antagonismo, Psicoticismo y Desapego, y las mujeres en Afectividad Negativa. Los jóvenes puntuaron más alto en todas las escalas salvo en Desapego. Por último, se encontraron correlaciones significativas con los cinco factores correspondientes del modelo de los "cinco grandes" (ej., entre Afectividad Negativa y Neuroticismo). Los resultados brindan evidencia preliminar de validez y confiabilidad para la versión local del instrumento, y se espera que sirvan como base para su posterior perfeccionamiento, para ser implementado en tareas clínicas como de investigación.
Abstract The DSM-5 presents an alternative dimensional model for personality disorders, which includes pathological traits organized in five major areas: Detachment, Negative affectivity, Psychoticism, Antagonism and Disinhibition. To evaluate this model, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) was developed. However, it is unknown how the PID-5 would work adapted to our context. On the other hand, the PID-5 suffers from various limitations (e.g., not all facets are represented in the brief version, affecting the construct validity). The objective of this paper was to study the psychometric properties of an adapted version of the PID-5 to the Argentine population. We worked with a non-probabilistic sample of 393 subjects from the general population. The adapted version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 was administered together with the Adjectives Checklist to Assess the Big Five Personality Factors (AEP), a measure of the five traits of Big Five Model, normal equivalents of the pathological traits of the alternative model. The following data analyzes were performed: a) Exploratory Factor Analysis to evaluate the internal structure of PID-5; b) reliability analysis to assess the internal consistency of the different scales of the PID-5; c) item analysis to assess discriminating power; d) bivariate correlation analysis to analyze the relationship between PID-5 scores and the AEP; e) multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) to analyze significant differences due to gender, age, and possible interaction effects. Results indicated satisfactory psychometric properties. The Argentinean version of the PID-5 showed a five-factor structure similar to the original, with adequate levels of internal consistency and good discrimination indices. Regarding gender, men scored higher in Antagonism, Psychoticism and Detachment, and the effect size was significant although weak. On the other hand, women scored higher in negative affectivity, but the differences were not significant. Regarding age, young people presented higher scores than adults at all scales except in Detachment, and the effect size was significant although weak. Finally, significant relationships were found with the five factors of the big five model (e.g., strong and positive correlation between Negative Affectivity and Neuroticism; moderate and negative correlations between Detachment and Extraversion, and between Disinhibition and Conscientiousness). Additionally, other high correlations were found (e.g., between Agreeableness and Detachment; Conscientiousness and Psychoticism; Neuroticism and Disinhibition). These results are in line with those found in previous studies. Finally, moderate correlations were found between PID-5 scales (e.g., Disinhibition and Antagonism; Negative Affectivity and Disinhibition; Psychoticism and Disinhibition; and Detachment and Negative Affectivity). These correlations would imply the existence of some higher order factor that would cover the dimensions of the model. Although the results found are acceptable, this study has some limitations. First, we worked with general population, and in future work it would be important to administer the instrument in clinical samples. Second, the Antagonism scale was left with only 4 items, which may affect the construct validity of the instrument. In this regard, it would be convenient to add new items, not only on this scale, to obtain a final version with an intermediate length between 25 and 220 items of the two versions of the original scale. A version of approximately 60 items may be a good solution, that includes both the different facets of the model as well as time constraints if the instrument is pretended to be used within a diagnostic battery. Beyond these limitations, the present study provides preliminary evidence of validity and reliability for the adapted version of the PID 5, and could be a start point for its deepening and improvement to be implemented in clinical and research tasks.
ABSTRACT
Los factores disposicionales y socioambientales de la personalidad no son elementos separados, deben ser vistos holísticamente como un sistema persona-medio que funciona como una totalidad. Por lo cual un ambiente desfavorecido por la pobreza es una variable socioambiental que interactuaría con las disposiciones del niño pequeño, pudiendo incidir en ciertas características de personalidad. En base a lo mencionado, el objetivo específico de este trabajo fue comparar el perfil de personalidad de niños en riesgo ambiental por situación de pobreza con el de niños sin estas características. Se administró el Cuestionario Argentino de Personalidad Infantil (CAPI) en su versión para niños de 6 a 8 años (Lemos, 2005). Se compararon los perfiles de personalidad de ambas muestras mediante MANOVAs, comparaciones de medias y gráficos de perfiles. A partir de estos análisis, se pudieron observar diferencias significativas tanto a nivel de los factores como de las facetas de personalidad, entre los niños en riesgo por pobreza y los niños no expuestos a esta condición. Las diferencias significativas se presentaron específicamente en el factor Escrupulosidad y en las facetas: competencia, vulnerabilidad, sentimiento gregario y emociones positivas, orden y acción. En relación a los factores y facetas de personalidad en los que no se encontraron diferencias significativas desde el punto de vista estadístico es posible observar, a partir de la comparación de los perfiles de medias de ambos grupos, que la dirección de los resultados encontrados concuerda en general con los patrones vinculados a los aspectos temperamentales de los niños en riesgo que la literatura menciona recurrentemente, como por ejemplo: (a) valores levemente más elevados en el factor de Neuroticismo y (b) valores levemente más descendidos en los factores de Extraversión, Mesura, Escrupulosidad y Apertura.
An individual's context affects the way in which their biological and psychological subsystems function and interacts with each other. While individuals are normally able to manipulate their environment, personality factors increase or diminish their context characteristics, which at the same time influence personality. Heredity and socio-environmental personality factors should not be considered separate elements, but rather a holistic approach as an individual-environment system that functions as a whole. Therefore, an unfavorable environment is a socio-environmental variable that interacts with children's heredity, thus influencing the development of certain personality traits. Based on the above, the specific goal of our research was to compare personality characteristics of children at risk due to poverty and children without risk due to poverty. We applied the Child Personality Questionnaire for Argentina (Cuestionario Argentino de Personalidad Infantil - CAPI) for children aged 6 to 8 (Lemos, 2005). We compared personality profiles from both groups through MANOVA, as well as comparisons of means and graphic profiles. Based on this analysis, we observed significant differences regarding personality factors [F de Hotelling (5, 168) = 2.47; p = .035], as well as facets [F de Hotelling (14, 159) = 2.607; p = .002], among children at risk due to poverty and those who were not. There were significant differences particularly in Conscientiousness [F(1) = 4.35; p = .038] and the following facets: competence [F(1) = 4.652; p = .032], vulnerability [F(1) = 9.732; p = .002], gregariousness and positive affect [F(1) = 8.338; p = .004], order [F(1) = 6.798; p = .010] and action [F(1) = 4.233; p = .041]. The tendencies of the results are as follows: the group at risk scored lower in Conscientiousness, and regarding facets: competence, gregariousness, positive affect, order, action and vulnerability. With regards to Conscientiousness, which includes order, organization and responsibility as facets, Vanistendael (1995) states that children at risk usually have lower levels of achievement motivation. A child's impulsivity and lack of ability to postpone gratification, particularly of children at risk, generally affects them negatively in this aspect. Regarding lower levels in the competence facet, this could be related to other results found in the same group of children at risk, which showed lower levels of self-esteem, as well as of self-sufficiency, and lower levels of self-efficacy (Ghiglione, 2007). In relation to the vulnerability facet, defined for our purposes as lack of independence, we could suppose that depending on someone naturally implies that there be someone who can be depended upon and in whom to seek shelter. These children have little trust in their parents' love and perceive them as unavailable, together with diminished efforts at seeking a social support group and lack of a social network (Richaud de Minzi, 2006). Low scores in relation to the positve affect facet is probably due to the fact that children who are exposed to poverty usually have a more negative view of the world and more feelings of hopelessness (Kotliarenco, 1997). Last but not least, regarding low scores in the action facet, which is part of the Openness factor, in a previous study on coping strategies, this group of children at risk showed more paralization at both cognitive and emotional levels (Richaud de Minzi and Lemos, 2008). In spite of the results which show that children at risk due to poverty have a more vulnerable personality profile, we hope to strengthen their resources through therapeutic interventions. The stories of resilient children show that faith and trust can be developed and sustained, even amidst adverse circumstances. However, this happens only when these children find people who give meaning to their lives, as well as reasons for them to trust life. This is our great challenge.