Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 78
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Publication year range
1.
J Pers Assess ; 106(2): 145-155, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37417686

ABSTRACT

We re-oriented the HEXACO personality dimensions to approximate the Big Five, using two measures of the Big Five as targets in a derivation sample and then in cross-validation samples. The HEXACO approximations of Big Five Agreeableness represented blends of HEXACO Agreeableness, Emotionality, and Honesty-Humility. The HEXACO approximations of Big Five Neuroticism represented blends of Emotionality with low Agreeableness and low Extraversion. The residual sixth dimension, unrelated to the Big Five, contrasted Honesty-Humility with HEXACO Agreeableness. We then examined, in additional samples, some correlates of the original and re-rotated HEXACO dimensions. In the original HEXACO factor space, Honesty-Humility was the strongest correlate of unethical behaviors (selfishness and cheating), participant age, and "assumed similarity" to a friend or partner. Upon re-rotation of the HEXACO factors, associations involving these variables were divided between Big Five Agreeableness and the residual sixth dimension. Sex differences were mainly associated with Emotionality but after re-rotation of the HEXACO factors were divided between Big Five Agreeableness and Neuroticism. We discuss the relative merits of the original and Big Five-targeted HEXACO dimensions with reference to the practical utility of Big Five Agreeableness and Neuroticism and the simplicity and theoretical interpretability of the original HEXACO factors.


Subject(s)
Personality Disorders , Personality , Female , Humans , Male , Neuroticism , Personality Inventory
2.
J Pers ; 90(1): 20-33, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32978977

ABSTRACT

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is an empirically and quantitatively derived dimensional classification system designed to describe the features of psychopathology and, ultimately, to replace categorical nosologies. Among the constructs that HiTOP organizes are "symptom components" and "maladaptive traits," but past HiTOP publications have not fully explicated the distinction between symptoms and traits. We propose working definitions of symptoms and traits and explore challenges, exceptions, and remaining questions. Specifically, we propose that the only systematic difference between symptoms and traits in HiTOP is one of time frame. Maladaptive traits are dispositional constructs that describe persistent tendencies to manifest features of psychopathology, whereas symptoms are features of psychopathology as they are manifest during any specific time period (from moments to days to months). This has the consequence that almost every HiTOP dimension, at any level of the hierarchy, can be assessed as either a trait or a symptom dimension, by adjusting the framing of the assessment. We discuss the implications of these definitions for causal models of the relations between symptoms and traits and for distinctions between psychopathology, normal personality variation, and dysfunction.


Subject(s)
Personality Disorders , Psychopathology , Humans , Personality , Personality Disorders/diagnosis , Personality Inventory
3.
Ann Med Psychol (Paris) ; 179(1): 95-106, 2021 Jan.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34305151

ABSTRACT

Shortcomings of approaches to classifying psychopathology based on expert consensus have given rise to contemporary efforts to classify psychopathology quantitatively. In this paper, we review progress in achieving a quantitative and empirical classification of psychopathology. A substantial empirical literature indicates that psychopathology is generally more dimensional than categorical. When the discreteness versus continuity of psychopathology is treated as a research question, as opposed to being decided as a matter of tradition, the evidence clearly supports the hypothesis of continuity. In addition, a related body of literature shows how psychopathology dimensions can be arranged in a hierarchy, ranging from very broad "spectrum level" dimensions, to specific and narrow clusters of symptoms. In this way, a quantitative approach solves the "problem of comorbidity" by explicitly modeling patterns of co-occurrence among signs and symptoms within a detailed and variegated hierarchy of dimensional concepts with direct clinical utility. Indeed, extensive evidence pertaining to the dimensional and hierarchical structure of psychopathology has led to the formation of the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) Consortium. This is a group of 70 investigators working together to study empirical classification of psychopathology. In this paper, we describe the aims and current foci of the HiTOP Consortium. These aims pertain to continued research on the empirical organization of psychopathology; the connection between personality and psychopathology; the utility of empirically based psychopathology constructs in both research and the clinic; and the development of novel and comprehensive models and corresponding assessment instruments for psychopathology constructs derived from an empirical approach.

4.
J Pers Assess ; 101(1): 16-24, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29388839

ABSTRACT

Although there has been widespread consensus on the use of the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of general personality functioning in personality research, there are various, diverse models of the lower order traits of the FFM domains. Given the usefulness of these finer grained traits, it is imperative to integrate facets proposed across a variety of models and eventually reach consensus on the lower level traits of the FFM. Due to its depth and coverage, the Abridged Big Five-Dimensional Circumplex (AB5C) model potentially provides a useful framework for organizing various faceted models due to its conceptual organization and inclusiveness. The only measure of this model-the IPIP-AB5C-has shown promise, but is limited by its length (i.e., 485 items). This study developed an abbreviated version of the IPIP-AB5C using an iterative process including item response theory methods. The shorter version maintained key features of the long form including a factor structure that matched the full form as well as facets that correlated in expected ways with other FFM measures. Building on this support, the short form was used to contextualize and organize the facets from 2 commonly used measures.


Subject(s)
Personality Assessment/standards , Personality Inventory/standards , Personality , Adult , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Female , Humans , Male , Models, Psychological , Personality Disorders/diagnosis , Psychometrics
5.
J Pers Assess ; 101(4): 345-355, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29746190

ABSTRACT

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 etĀ 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.


Subject(s)
Defense Mechanisms , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Personality Disorders/diagnosis , Personality , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Personality Inventory , Problem Behavior , Psychopathology
6.
Psychopathology ; 51(2): 122-129, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29635236

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It is widely established that personality disorder has as broad negative impact on psychotherapy outcomes. Given the increased emphasis on dimensional traits for personality pathology in the DSM-5 and the proposal for the ICD-11, it is important to understand how traits are linked to treatment outcomes. Building on past research with general traits, we hypothesized that more nuanced and specific relations would be apparent. Furthermore, much of the past research has relied upon self-reports of personality and little is known about how ratings from therapists might be related to outcomes. SAMPLING AND METHODS: The present paper examined how dimensional traits from the Five-Factor Model predicted outcomes in a case series of 54 therapist-client dyads within a doctoral training clinic. Importantly, this extends past research as dimensional traits were rated by both therapists and clients at intake as well as sequentially over the course of therapy. RESULTS: Correlations and regression analyses indicated that traits predicted a variety of outcomes including initial engagement in treatment as well as overall symptom reduction across therapy. Specifically, preliminary evidence suggests that therapist-rated conscientiousness at intake was positively related to clients' early engagement in therapy. In addition, openness to experience after the 4th session - particularly as rated by the client - was predictive of long-term therapy outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Broadly, these results provided preliminary information about the promise of dimensional models for improving the clinical utility of personality disorder diagnoses. More specifically, these results reinforced the relevance of personality assessment during therapy and indicated the potential predictive value of ratings by therapists and their clients.


Subject(s)
Personality Disorders/diagnosis , Psychotherapy/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Personality Assessment , Personality Disorders/pathology , Professional-Patient Relations , Self Report , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
7.
J Pers ; 85(2): 220-231, 2017 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26691245

ABSTRACT

Several studies have shown structural and statistical similarities between the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5) alternative personality disorder model and the Five-Factor Model (FFM). However, no study to date has evaluated the nomological network similarities between the two models. The relations of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) with relevant criterion variables were examined in a sample of 336 undergraduate students (Mage = 19.4; 59.8% female). The resulting profiles for each instrument were statistically compared for similarity. Four of the five domains of the two models have highly similar nomological networks, with the exception being FFM Openness to Experience and PID-5 Psychoticism. Further probing of that pair suggested that the NEO PI-R domain scores obscured meaningful similarity between PID-5 Psychoticism and specific aspects and lower-order facets of Openness. The results support the notion that the DSM-5 alternative personality disorder model trait domains represent variants of the FFM domains. Similarities of Openness and Psychoticism domains were supported when the lower-order aspects and facets of Openness domain were considered. The findings support the view that the DSM-5 trait model represents an instantiation of the FFM.


Subject(s)
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Personality Disorders/diagnosis , Personality Inventory , Personality/physiology , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Psychometrics/instrumentation , Adolescent , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Models, Psychological , Young Adult
8.
J Pers Assess ; 97(1): 13-21, 2015.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25203418

ABSTRACT

One-hundred sixty-nine psychiatric outpatients and 171 undergraduate students were assessed with the Personality Disorder Interview-IV (PDI-IV; Widiger, Mangine, Corbitt, Ellis, & Thomas, 1995) and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II disorders (SCID-II; First, Gibbon, Spitzer, Williams, & Benjamin, 1997) for borderline personality disorder (BPD). Eighty individuals met PDI-IV BPD criteria, whereas 34 met SCID-II BPD criteria. Dimensional ratings of both measures were highly intercorrelated (rs = .78, .75), and item-level interrater reliability fell in the good to excellent range. An item-response theory analysis was performed to investigate whether properties of the items from each interview could help understand these differences. The limited agreement seemed to be explained by differences in the response options across the two interviews. We found that suicidal behavior was among the most discriminating criteria on both instruments, whereas dissociation and difficulty controlling anger had the 2 lowest alpha parameter values. Finally, those meeting BPD criteria on both interviews had higher levels of anxiety, depression, and more impairments in object relations than those meeting criteria on just the PDI-IV. These findings suggest that the choice of measure has a notable effect on the obtained diagnostic prevalence and the level of BPD severity that is detected.


Subject(s)
Borderline Personality Disorder/diagnosis , Interview, Psychological/standards , Mental Disorders/diagnosis , Personality Assessment/standards , Adolescent , Adult , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Borderline Personality Disorder/epidemiology , Borderline Personality Disorder/psychology , Community Mental Health Centers , Depressive Disorder/diagnosis , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Midwestern United States/epidemiology , Outpatients , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results , Severity of Illness Index , Students , Universities , Young Adult
10.
11.
Int J Psychophysiol ; 204: 112404, 2024 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39047794

ABSTRACT

The current study examined how individual differences in error-related brain activity might moderate the association between high trait neuroticism and internalizing symptoms. Data were collected from a sample of high-achieving young adults (NĀ =Ā 188) as part of a larger study on risk versus resiliency for psychopathology. Participants completed two behavioral tasks to elicit the error-related negativity (ERN): an arrow Flanker task and a Go/No-Go task. Analyses were constrained to two internalizing symptom dimensions of checking behavior and irritability. Contrary to expectations, ERN amplitude was not related to symptom severity at the bivariate level. However, ERN amplitude moderated the association between trait neuroticism and symptoms of ill temper, such that the neuroticism-irritability association was strongest among individuals with a blunted ERN. In addition, this finding was relatively consistent across tasks and across two complementary methods of scoring the ERN, suggesting an effect of ERN variance that is shared between tasks and that is relatively robust regarding processing differences. In all, the current study represents the first attempt to investigate how the ERN interacts with trait neuroticism to predict transdiagnostic symptom dimensions in adulthood.


Subject(s)
Anxiety Disorders , Electroencephalography , Neuroticism , Humans , Neuroticism/physiology , Male , Female , Young Adult , Adolescent , Anxiety Disorders/physiopathology , Adult , Evoked Potentials/physiology , Brain/physiopathology , Brain/physiology , Reaction Time/physiology , Psychomotor Performance/physiology
12.
J Psychopathol Clin Sci ; 133(8): 656-666, 2024 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39480334

ABSTRACT

Brain structure correlates of obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) remain poorly understood as limited OCPD assessment has precluded well-powered studies. Here, we tested whether machine learning (ML; elastic net regression, gradient boosting machines, support vector regression with linear and radial kernels) could estimate OCPD scores from personality data and whether ML-predicted scores are associated with indices of brain structure (cortical thickness and surface area and subcortical volumes). Among older adults (ns = 898-1,606) who completed multiple OCPD assessments, ML elastic net regression with Revised NEO Personality Inventory personality items as features best predicted Five-Factor Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Short Form (FFOCI-SF) scores, root-mean-squared error (RMSE)/SD = 0.66; performance generalized to a sample of college students (n = 175; RMSE/SD = 0.51). Items from all five-factor model personality traits contributed to predicted FFOCI-SF (p-FFOCI-SF) scores; conscientiousness and openness items were the most influential. In college students (n = 1,253), univariate analyses of cortical thickness, surface area, and subcortical volumes revealed only a positive association between p-FFOCI-SF and right superior frontal gyrus cortical thickness after adjusting for multiple testing (b = 2.21, p = .0014; all other |b|s < 1.04; all other ps > .009). Multivariate ML models of brain features predicting FFOCI, conscientiousness, and neuroticism performed poorly (RMSE/SDs > 1.00). These data reveal that all five-factor model traits contribute to maladaptive OCPD traits and identify greater right superior frontal gyrus cortical thickness as a promising correlate of OCPD for future study. Broadly, this study highlights the utility of ML to estimate unmeasured psychopathology phenotypes in neuroimaging data sets but that our application of ML to neuroimaging may not resolve unreliable associations and small effects characteristic of univariate psychiatric neuroimaging research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
Brain , Compulsive Personality Disorder , Machine Learning , Personality , Humans , Male , Female , Personality/physiology , Middle Aged , Aged , Brain/pathology , Brain/diagnostic imaging , Compulsive Personality Disorder/psychology , Compulsive Personality Disorder/pathology , Adult , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Young Adult , Personality Inventory
13.
J Pers ; 81(3): 335-44, 2013 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22812532

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study compares the 10-year retest stability of normal traits, pathological traits, and personality disorder dimensions in a clinical sample. METHOD: Ten-year rank-order stability estimates for the Revised NEO Personality Inventory, Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality, and Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders were evaluated before and after correcting for test-retest dependability and internal consistency in a clinical sample (N = 266). RESULTS: Dependability-corrected stability estimates were generally in the range of.60-.90 for traits and.25-.65 for personality disorders. CONCLUSIONS: The relatively lower stability of personality disorder symptoms may indicate important differences between pathological behaviors and relatively more stable self-attributed traits and imply that a full understanding of personality and personality pathology needs to take both traits and symptoms into account. The five-factor theory distinction between basic tendencies and characteristic adaptations provides a theoretical framework for the separation of traits and disorders in terms of stability in which traits reflect basic tendencies that are stable and pervasive across situations, whereas personality disorder symptoms reflect characteristic maladaptations that are a function of both basic tendencies and environmental dynamics.


Subject(s)
Personality Disorders/diagnosis , Personality Disorders/psychology , Personality , Adult , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Emotions , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Interview, Psychological , Male , Personality Inventory , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and Questionnaires
14.
Am Psychol ; 78(5): 714-715, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37523287

ABSTRACT

Wright et al. (2022) propose to replace personality disorders with a new classification of interpersonal disorders. We suggest that the trait model addresses well the limitations of the personality disorder categorical syndromes and accommodates the dynamics asserted as strengths of the interpersonal model. We identify weaknesses of the interpersonal model that explain why it has never been officially adopted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
Personality Disorders , Personality , Humans , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
15.
J Pers ; 80(6): 1669-96, 2012 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22321159

ABSTRACT

Although reasonably strong support has been obtained for the Five-Factor Model's (FFM) ability to account for the existing personality disorder (PD) constructs, the support for obsessive-compulsive PD (OCPD) and dependent PD (DPD) has been relatively less consistent. Specifically, the expected correlation between OCPD and the FFM trait of Conscientiousness has varied in magnitude across studies while DPD has, at times, also evinced rather weak relationships with FFM Agreeableness. We determined that these inconsistencies were due primarily to the reliance on FFM measures that lack adequate fidelity to assess the maladaptive aspects of high Conscientiousness and Agreeableness. When alternative measures were utilized, the correlations were generally large and in line with expectations. We conclude that OCPD and DPD can be fruitfully conceptualized within the FFM but encourage the use of measures that provide a comprehensive assessment of both the adaptive and maladaptive aspects of the FFM traits.


Subject(s)
Compulsive Personality Disorder/diagnosis , Models, Psychological , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/diagnosis , Personality/classification , Compulsive Personality Disorder/classification , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Humans , Internal-External Control , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/classification , Personality Assessment/standards , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales/standards , Psychometrics , Psychotherapy , Reproducibility of Results
16.
J Pers Assess ; 94(5): 456-65, 2012.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22519829

ABSTRACT

This study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for the Five-Factor Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory (FFOCI), a newly developed measure of traits relevant to obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) from the perspective of the Five-factor model (FFM). Twelve scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of specific FFM facets (e.g., Perfectionism as a maladaptive variant of FFM competence). On the basis of data from 407 undergraduates (oversampled for OCPD symptoms) these 12 scales demonstrated convergent correlations with established measures of OCPD and the FFM. Further, they obtained strong discriminant validity with respect to facets from other FFM domains. Most important, the individual scales and total score of the FFOCI obtained incremental validity beyond existing measures of the FFM and OCPD for predicting a composite measure of obsessive-compulsive symptomatology. The findings support the validity of the FFOCI as a measure of obsessive-compulsive personality traits, as well as of maladaptive variants of the FFM.


Subject(s)
Compulsive Behavior/diagnosis , Compulsive Personality Disorder/diagnosis , Obsessive Behavior/diagnosis , Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder/diagnosis , Personality , Adolescent , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Personality Inventory , Psychometrics
17.
Personal Disord ; 13(6): 629-640, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34941349

ABSTRACT

Research on dimensional models of personality pathology has achieved a good deal of consensus on the 5 broad constructs that span adaptive and maladaptive personality traits. Nonetheless, connections between the 5th domain, typically called openness to experience within general personality measures and psychoticism or schizotypy on maladaptive measures, have proven more challenging to integrate. Using experiential permeability as a guiding framework, the current study seeks to develop a hierarchical, empirically derived lower order structure with these concepts. Using a top-down "Bass-Ackward" approach, we examined the item-level structure of adaptive and maladaptive components of high experiential permeability. Results showed support for a hierarchical model with a 6-component solution including mystical beliefs/experiences, oddity, intellect, openness to aesthetics, openness to ideas, and introspection. These components from items drawn from general and maladaptive measures related to one another within and across levels, specifically oddity and openness to aesthetics. Findings also highlight the importance of using lower level analyses when examining larger, heterogeneous constructs such as schizotypal thinking and perception and openness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
Bass , Schizotypal Personality Disorder , Humans , Animals , Personality Inventory , Personality , Permeability
18.
Personal Disord ; 13(4): 418-421, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35787132

ABSTRACT

The alternative model of personality disorder (AMPD) included in Section III of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) reconceptualized personality pathology in terms of pathological traits and impairments in functioning. For example, the construct of obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) was reconceptualized via the traits of rigid perfectionism as well as at least 2 of perseveration, intimacy avoidance, and restricted affectivity. We review the literature to summarize how effectively the legacy construct of OCPD is captured by the AMPD. We conclude that although the trait of rigid perfectionism is highly related to scores on OCPD measures, the AMPD as a whole fails to adequately account for the broader features of the legacy OCPD construct. Specifically, the AMPD trait model lacks a number of traits, such as workaholism, excessive deliberation, and moral scrupulousness, which are necessary for a fulsome dimensional trait system. These limitations in the inclusion of important traits stem from the AMPD's development process that left out crucial content. We outline how the AMPD could be improved in its ability to account for problems of overcontrolled behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
Compulsive Personality Disorder , Personality Disorders , Compulsive Personality Disorder/diagnosis , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Humans , Personality , Personality Disorders/diagnosis , Personality Inventory
19.
Personal Disord ; 13(3): 254-265, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34542308

ABSTRACT

Research has repeatedly evidenced the structural validity of the five-factor model (FFM), but questions remain about the use of its dimensions in clinical practice. Samuel and colleagues (2018) found therapists reported their clients had lower levels of personality pathology compared with clients' own self-reports when using the unipolar Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) scale. The present study utilized the same sample of 54 client-therapist dyads to examine their use of the bipolar FFM Rating Form. When comparing the clinical ratings to expertly rated healthy profile ratings, clients rated themselves as more aligned with healthy than their therapists rated them. Alternatively, clients were up to 3.6 times more likely to use the extreme (i.e., theoretically pathological) ratings of the FFM Rating Form compared with their therapists. These results suggest that therapists and clients use these measures quite differently, and we cannot firmly conclude which source reports more pathology. Theoretical explanations, limitations, and future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
Personality Disorders , Professional-Patient Relations , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Humans , Personality Disorders/diagnosis , Personality Inventory , Psychotherapy/methods , Self Report
20.
Assessment ; 29(1): 34-45, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34823365

ABSTRACT

This article outlines the Phase 1 efforts of the HiTOP Measure Development group for externalizing constructs, which include disinhibited externalizing, antagonistic externalizing, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, substance use, and externalizing/maladaptive behaviors. We provide background on the constructs included and the process and issues involved in developing a measure for this diverse range of psychopathology symptoms, traits, and behaviors.


Subject(s)
Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity , Problem Behavior , Substance-Related Disorders , Humans , Psychopathology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL