Impairments in Cognitive and Emotional Empathy as Markers of General versus Specific Personality Pathology.

INTRODUCTION: The alternative model for personality disorders (AMPD) of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - 5th edition (DSM-5) considers impairments in empathy a basic feature of personality disorders (PDs). In contrast, the AMPD pathological personality trait model and the categorical DSM-5 Section II PD model associate deficits in empathy to specific forms of personality pathology. The present study investigated to what extent impairments in cognitive and emotional empathy are markers of general versus specific personality pathology. METHODS: In a clinical sample (n = 119), the Multifaceted Empathy Test was used to assess cognitive empathy, emotional empathy for positive emotions, and emotional empathy for negative emotions. Personality functioning, pathological personality traits, and DSM-5 Section II PDs were assessed via interviews and self-reports. Confirmatory factor analyses were applied to associate the three empathy facets with the three personality pathology approaches, each modeled with general personality pathology (common factor) and specific personality pathology (residuals of indicators). RESULTS: Impairments in cognitive empathy and emotional empathy for positive emotions were significantly correlated with general personality pathology. All three empathy facets were also correlated to specific personality pathology when controlling for general personality pathology, respectively. Impairments in cognitive empathy were incrementally associated with identity and empathy (personality functioning), psychoticism (pathological personality traits), and paranoid and dependent PD (DSM-5 Section II PDs). Deficits in emotional empathy for positive emotions were incrementally associated with self-direction and intimacy (personality functioning) and detachment (pathological personality traits). Impairments in emotional empathy for negative emotions were incrementally associated with antagonism (pathological personality traits) and antisocial PD (DSM-5 Section II PDs). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that impairments in cognitive empathy and emotional empathy for positive emotions, but not for negative emotions, are markers of general personality pathology, while deficits in the three empathy facets are also markers for specific personality pathology.

Evaluating the Psychometric Properties of the German Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS).

The Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS) is a 24-item self-report questionnaire assessing personality functioning according to the alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders. We evaluated the German SIFS version in a total sample of 886 participants from Germany and Switzerland. Its factor structure was investigated with confirmatory factor analysis comparing bifactor models with two specific factors (self- and interpersonal functioning) and four specific factors (identity, self-direction, empathy, and intimacy). The SIFS sum and domain scores were tested for reliability and convergent validity with self-report questionnaires and interviews for personality functioning, -organization, -traits, -disorder categories, and well-being. None of the bifactor models yielded good model fit, even after excluding two items with low factor loadings and including a method factor for reverse-keyed items. Based on a shortened 22-item SIFS version, models suggested that the g-factor explained 52.9-59.6% of the common variance and that the SIFS sum score measured the g-factor with a reliability of .68-.81. Even though the SIFS sum score showed large test-retest reliability and correlated strongly with well-established self-report questionnaires and interviews, the lack of structural validity appears to be a serious disadvantage of the SIFS compared to existing self-reports questionnaires of personality functioning.

Reliability, structure, and validity of module I (personality functioning) of the Structured Clinical Interview for the alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders (SCID-5-AMPD-I).

According to the alternative model for personality disorders (AMPD) of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), a moderate or greater impairment in personality functioning is the essential criterion for a personality disorder diagnosis. Personality functioning is operationalized in the Level of Personality Functioning Scale via 4 domains (identity, self-direction, empathy, and intimacy) and 2 higher order dimensions (self and interpersonal functioning). The current study examined the reliability (interrater, test-retest), structure, and validity (convergent, discriminant, and incremental) of the Structured Clinical Interview for the AMPD-Module I (SCID-5-AMPD-I). A clinical sample (n = 121) completed the SCID-5-AMPD-I, along with an interview for DSM-5 Section II personality disorders and self-reports for personality pathology (personality functioning, personality organization, personality structure, and pathological personality traits) and other forms of psychopathology (depression, anxiety, somatization, and general disability). Interrater and test-retest reliability was excellent for overall personality functioning, the higher order dimensions, and the domains, except for the empathy domain in the test-retest condition. Factor analyses suggest that personality functioning is an essentially unidimensional construct. Personality functioning demonstrated high convergence with other forms of personality pathology and showed good discriminant validity in relation to depression, anxiety, and somatization but not in relation to the broader construct of general disability. Personality functioning (Criterion A) showed incremental validity over pathological personality traits (Criterion B) in predicting interview-assessed DSM-5 Section II personality disorders but not in predicting self-reported personality and general psychopathology. The present study suggests that the SCID-5-AMPD-I is a viable measure for personality functioning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Three Dimensional Approaches to Personality Disorders: a Review on Personality Functioning, Personality Structure, and Personality Organization.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The concept of personality functioning (Alternative DSM-5 Model of Personality Disorders) has led to increased interest in dimensional personality disorder diagnosis. While differing markedly from the current categorical classification, it is closely related to the psychodynamic concepts of personality structure and personality organization. In this review, the three dimensional approaches, their underlying models, and common instruments are introduced, and empirical studies on similarities and differences between the concepts and the categorical classification are summarized. Additionally, a case example illustrates the clinical application. RECENT FINDINGS: Numerous studies demonstrate the broad empirical basis, validated assessment instruments and clinical usefulness of the dimensional concepts. Their advantages compared to the categorical approach, but also the respective differences, have been demonstrated empirically, in line with clinical observations. Evidence supports the three dimensional concepts, which share conceptual overlap, but also entail unique aspects of personality pathology, respectively.

Process-Outcome Associations in an Interdisciplinary Treatment for Chronic Pain and Comorbid Mental Disorders Based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Numerous studies support the effectiveness of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for chronic pain, yet little research has been conducted about its underlying mechanisms of change, especially regarding patients with comorbid mental disorders. The present investigation addressed this issue by examining associations of processes targeted by ACT (pain acceptance, mindfulness, psychological flexibility) and clinical outcomes (pain intensity, somatic symptoms, physical health, mental health, depression, general anxiety). SUBJECTS: Participants were 109 patients who attended an ACT-based interdisciplinary treatment program for chronic pain and comorbid mental disorders in a routine care psychiatric day hospital. METHODS: Pre- to posttreatment differences in processes and outcomes were examined with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and effect size r. Associations between changes in processes and changes in outcomes were analyzed with correlation and multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: Pre- to posttreatment effect sizes were mostly moderate to large (r between 0.21 and 0.62). Associations between changes in processes and changes in outcomes were moderate to large for both, bivariate correlations (r between 0.30 and 0.54) and shared variances accounting for all three processes combined (R2 between 0.21 and 0.29). CONCLUSION: The present investigation suggests that changes in pain acceptance, mindfulness, and psychological flexibility are meaningfully associated with changes in clinical outcomes. It provides evidence on particular process-outcome associations that had not been investigated in this way before. The focus on comorbid mental disorders informs clinicians about a population of chronic pain patients who often have a severe course of illness and have seldom been studied.

Acceptance and commitment-based therapy for patients with psychiatric and physical health conditions in routine general hospital care - Development, implementation and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Transdiagnostic approaches are needed to effectively treat patients with a broad range of diagnoses and comorbidities in routine general hospital care. Yet the evidence for the effectiveness of treatments beyond Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is largely lacking. We describe the process of implementing an interdisciplinary multi-professional Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)-based treatment for patients with psychiatric and physical health conditions and present outcomes before and after implementation. METHOD: The present investigation was a naturalistic comparative study comparing ACT-based (n = 126) vs. CBT-based (n = 127) treatments in a psychiatric day hospital in Berlin, Germany. Within- and between-group changes (pre- to post-treatment) in everyday functioning and health-related quality of life (primary outcomes; assessed by the Short Form 36 (SF-36)), as well as anxiety and depressive symptoms (secondary outcomes; assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II)), were analyzed with Generalized Linear Models, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and effect size r. RESULTS: Data analysis showed statistically significant improvements from pre- to post-treatment (r ranging from 0.27 to 0.61, p < 0.001) for most SF-36 scales as well as for all HADS and BDI-II scores (r ranging from 0.38 to 0.60, p < 0.001) for both the ACT and CBT groups. ACT and CBT showed comparable effects in relation to clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: An interdisciplinary multi-professional ACT-based group treatment is a valuable approach for patients with psychiatric and physical health conditions in real-life hospital settings, with effects equivalent to CBT interventions.