Associations between the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 trait facets and aggression among outpatients with personality disorder: A multimethod study.

BACKGROUND: Most research on the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) was conducted with self-reports. One of the specific areas for which a multimethod design has yet to be implemented is for the PID-5's associations with aggression. The main objectives of this study were to (a) compare the PID-5 associations with self-reported and file-rated aggression, (b) compare these associations between women and men, and (c) identify the relative importance of PID-5 facet predictors. METHODS: A sample of outpatients with personality disorder (N = 285) was recruited in a specialized public clinic to complete questionnaires, and a subsample was assessed for file-rated aggression (n = 227). Multiple regression analyses were performed with PID-5 facets as statistical predictors but using distinct operationalizations of aggression (self-reported vs. file-rated). Moderation analyses were performed to identify the moderating effect of biological sex. Dominance analyses were computed to identify the relative importance of predictors. RESULTS: PID-5 facet predictors of self-reported and file-rated aggression were very consistent in both conditions. However, the amount of explained variance was reduced in the latter case (from 39% to 14%), especially for women (from 40% to 2%). The most important predictors were Hostility, Risk Taking, and Callousness. CONCLUSION: Pertaining to the statistically significant facets associated with aggression, strong evidence of multimethod replication was found. The women-men discrepancies were not most obvious in their specific associations with aggression, but rather in their amount of explained variance, maybe reflecting examiners' or patients' implicit biases, and/or different manifestations of aggression between women and men.

Personality inventory for DSM-5 brief form(PID-5-BF) in Chinese students and patients: evaluating the five-factor model and a culturally informed six-factor model.

BACKGROUND: The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Brief Form (PID-5-BF) is a 25-item measuring tool evaluating maladaptive personality traits for the diagnosis of personality disorders(PDs). As a promising scale, its impressive psychometric properties have been verified in some countries, however, there have been no studies about the utility of the PID-5-BF in Chinese settings. The current study aimed to explore the maladaptive personality factor model which was culturally adapted to China and to examine psychometric properties of the PID-5-BF among Chinese undergraduate students and clinical patients. METHODS: Seven thousand one hundred fifty-five undergraduate students and 451 clinical patients completed the Chinese version of the PID-5-BF. Two hundered twenty-eight students were chosen randomly for test-retest reliability at a 4-week interval. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted to discover the most suitable factor structure in China, measurement invariance(MI), internal consistency, and external validity were also calculated. RESULTS: The theoretical five-factor model was acceptable, but the exploratory six-factor model was more applicable in both samples (Undergraduate sample: CFI = 0.905, TLI = 0.888, RMSEA = 0.044, SRMR = 0.039; Clinical sample: CFI = 0.904, TLI = 0.886, RMSEA = 0.047, SRMR = 0.060). In the Chinese six-factor model, the Negative Affect domain was divided into two factors and the new factor was named "Interpersonal Relationships", which was in line with the Big-Six Personality model in Chinese. Measurement invariance across non-clinical and clinical sample was established (configural, weak, strong MI, and partial strict MI). Aside from acceptable internal consistency (Undergraduate sample: alpha = 0.84, MIC = 0.21; Clinical sample: alpha = 0.86, MIC = 0.19) and test-retest reliability(0.73), the correlation between the 25-item PID-5-BF and the 220-item PID-5 was significant(p < 0.01). The six PDs measured by Personality diagnostic questionnaire-4+ (PDQ-4+) were associated with and predicted by expected domains of PID-5-BF. CONCLUSIONS: Both the theoretical five-factor model and the exploratory six-factor model of the PID-5-BF were acceptable to the Chinese population. The five-factor model could allow for comparison and integration with other work on the original theoretical model. However, the Chinese six-factor structure may be more culturally informed in East Asian settings. In sum, the PID-5-BF is a convenient and useful screening tool for personality disorders.

Continuity between DSM-5 Section II and Section III personality traits for obsessive-compulsive personality disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) is formally operationalized in Section II of the DSM-5 by a heterogeneous collection of 8 categorical criteria. Section III contains an alternative model operationalizing personality disorders via dimensional personality traits and associated impairment. The extent to which the personality traits used to define OCPD in Section III correspond with the Section II operationalization of the disorder is contested. The current study aims to contribute to the evidence base necessary to solidify the optimal trait profile for this disorder via a more fine-tuned examination of OCPD. METHOD: The research questions were examined using a clinical sample of 142 Danish adults who completed the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Disorders and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 to index both the Sections II and III (personality traits) operationalizations of OCPD, respectively. RESULTS: Bivariate correlations supported Rigid Perfectionism and Perseveration as traits relevant to OCPD; however, hierarchical regression analyses indicated that of the 4 traits used in the Section III operationalization of OCPD, only Rigid Perfectionism uniquely predicted OCPD (p < .05). In addition to Rigid Perfectionism, the conceptually relevant traits of Submissiveness, Suspiciousness, and (low) Impulsivity were also found to uniquely predict OCPD and its specific symptoms in a regression model. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the traits proposed in Section III are only partially aligned with the traditional, Section II conceptualization of OCPD, and may be augmented by incorporating Submissiveness, Suspiciousness, and (low) Impulsivity. In light of the current findings and existing literature, a modified constellation of traits to operationalize OCPD is likely justified.

[Validation of a French translation of Krueger's personality inventory for DSM-5 in its brief form (PID-5 BF)]. / Validation d'une version française de la forme brève de l'inventaire des troubles de la personnalité pour le DSM-5 (PID-5 BF) de Krueger.

OBJECTIVE: Since the publication of the DSM-5 (APA, 2013), the dimensional conception of the personality disorders is co-existing with the classical categorical paradigm. Tools have been proposed for the evaluations of five big pathological factors to be explored further according to the APA (negative affectivity, detachment, antagonism, disinhibition, psychoticism). Despite numerous works using these questionnaires (30 works in 3 years according to Al-Adjani et al., 2015), none of them have yet been translated into French. Also, the main objective of the paper is to present a French translation of the Personality Inventory for DSM -5 by Kruegger et al. (2013) in its brief form of 25 items (PID-5 BF). METHOD: To reach this goal, we have employed the classic translation-retranslation method (Vallerand, 1989) and tested the consistence and the validity of this French version among a non-clinical sample (n=216) of young adults (age=31.4, SD=4.8), in joining some other questionnaires in their short forms to study the external validity of the PID-5 about the psychological distress (SCL-10, Nguyen, 1983), the categorical diagnosis of personality disorders (SAPAS, Moran et al., 2003) and the classical Big Five dimensions of the personality (BDI 10, Ramamstedt and John, 2007). The internal consistency of this translation has been studied through the classical outcomes on factor analysis for the dimensional repartitions of the items in 5 scales and Cronbach's alpha for the consistency of each found dimensions. The external validity has been explored by studying Pearson's correlations between the outcomes on each dimension of the PID-5 BF and both the clinical dimensions of SCL-10, personality dimensions of the BFI-10 or personality disorders (SAPAS). RESULTS: Factor analysis led to the same repartition of the 25 items as the original versions. Each of the dimensions is consistent enough (α>.65) to be taken into account as clinically significant. The items of the French version of the PID-5 BF follow the expected repartitions in 5 dimensions, which are consistent enough. Although their mean scores are significantly not different from the outcomes found by Krueger with the PID-5 200 items among another non-clinical population (n=264), one cannot say that is enough to ensure the external validity of our translation, for it uses neither the same tools nor sample. A comparison with a French translation of the PID-5 would be more significant. However, the external validity of the French version seems to be significant enough. Global score on the PID-5 is correlated both to the Global Severity Index of the SCL-10, which reflects global psychological distress, and SAPAS's score, which evaluates the suspicion of personality disorder. The clinical validity of the PID-5 is confirmed by the relationships between negative affectivity and anxiety or depression or antagonism and hostility, although the clinical scale of the SCL-10, with one item by dimension, is less sensitive than the complete original version in 90 items (DeRogatis, 1974). PID-5 score and domains are also correlated with the Big Five personality dimension and global score of personality disorders which led us to think that it is coherent with the evaluation of personality suffering (r=.34) and dimensions. The links between negative affectivity and neurosism (r=.48) or between desinhibition and extraversion (r=.32) or the negative correlation between psychoticism and conscientiousness (r=-0.16) are consistent with the expectations related both to the descriptions of the domains by the DSM and outcomes on the comparisons between PID-5 200 item scales and NEO-PI or BFI 45 items. DISCUSSION: This translation offers enough consistency and validity to be used in future studies. This could lead us to either continue studying a more representative general population or testing its validity in focusing on a clinical sample where personality disorders are prevalent, such as homeless men or substance users. As soon as a French version of the PID-5 200 items is published, one can compare the outcomes on PID-5 BF and PID-5 to lead to estimations of personality disorders and pathological domains among French populations and explore personality disorders throughout a dimensional paradigm instead of syndromic perspective. One can also see whether the items that have been kept for each dimension are as saturated in the French version as in the original one. Among general populations, comparisons with clinical distress, syndromic personality disorders or dimensional aspect of personality could be done with complete versions of PID-5, Symptom Check-list, Personality Disorders Questionnaires or Big Five Inventory; therefore, the brief forms of any questionnaire could be used among any people whose psychological distress or side effects impaired their attention and concentration.

On the relationships between DSM-5 dysfunctional personality traits and social cognition deficits: A study in a sample of consecutively admitted Italian psychotherapy patients.

This study aims at testing the hypothesis that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fifth edition (DSM-5) alternative model of personality disorder (AMPD) traits may be significantly associated with deficits on 2 different social cognition tasks, namely, the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test and the Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition, in a sample of consecutively admitted inpatients and outpatients. The sample was composed of 181 consecutively admitted participants (57.5% women; mean age = 38.58 years). Correlation coefficients and partial correlation coefficients were computed in order to assess the associations among social cognition tasks, DSM-5 AMPD traits, and dimensionally assessed DSM-5 Section II personality disorders. Specific maladaptive traits listed in the DSM-5 AMPD were significantly associated with Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test scores and Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition scores, even when the effect of selected DSM-5 Section II personality disorders was controlled for. Our results support the relevance of studying social cognitive functioning in subjects suffering from personality disorders.

Continuity between DSM-5 Categorical Criteria and Traits Criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) includes a heterogeneous constellation of symptoms operationalized with 9 categorical criteria. As the field of personality disorder (PD) research moves to emphasize dimensional traits in its operationalization, it is important to delineate continuity between the 9 DSM-IV/Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) categorical criteria for BPD and the trait dimensions in DSM-5 Section III. To date, no study has attempted such validation. METHODS: We examined the associations between the 9 categorical DSM-IV/DSM-5 criteria for BPD and the trait dimensions of the alternative DSM-5 model for PDs in consecutively recruited psychiatric outpatients (N = 142; 68% female; age: mean 29.02, SD 8.38). This was investigated by means of bivariate correlations, followed by multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The categorical BPD criteria were associated with conceptually related DSM-5 Section III traits (P > 0.001), except for the criterion of chronic feelings of emptiness. Consistent with the proposed traits criteria for BPD in DSM-5 Section III, we found Emotional lability, Anxiousness, Separation insecurity, Depressivity, Impulsivity, Risk taking, and Hostility to capture conceptually coherent BPD categorical criteria, while Suspiciousness was also strongly associated with BPD criteria. At the domain level, this applied to Negative affectivity, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism. Notably, Emotional lability, Impulsivity, and Suspiciousness emerged as unique predictors of BPD (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the proposed BPD traits criteria, Suspiciousness and features of Psychoticism also augment BPD features. Provided that these findings are replicated in forthcoming research, a modified traits operationalization of BPD is warranted.

Examining Measurement Invariance in the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Brief Form Across Sexual and Gender Minority Status.

The Personality Inventory for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Brief Form (PID-5-BF) was developed with an assumption of invariance across sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals. This assumption has yet to be tested empirically. Using multigroup confirmatory factor analysis, we examined measurement invariance in the PID-5-BF across the SGM status in clinical (N = 1,174; n = 254 SGM) and nonclinical (N = 1,456; n = 151 SGM) samples. Measurement invariance was supported for the PID-5-BF structure, item thresholds, and factor loadings, but not at the item intercept level. SGM individuals endorsed higher negative affectivity, antagonism, disinhibition, and psychoticism domains in both samples. In the clinical sample, adjusting for partial invariance decreased detachment and antagonism levels for SGM persons. In the nonclinical sample, adjusting for partial invariance reduced antagonism disparities in the SGM group, even rendering original group differences null. Our results support the use of the PID-5-BF in SGM populations but indicate that some measurement bias may drive observed disparities in maladaptive trait domains and, in turn, personality disorder diagnosis.

Measurement invariance of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 across sex.

Introduction: There has been an international movement towards dimensional models of personality disorders (PDs) in the last decades, which culminated in the publication of the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) in the Emerging Measures and Models section of the DSM-5. This model was accompanied by a APA-sanctioned Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) for the assessment of the AMPD pathological personality traits. One major issue with the assessment of personality disorders pertains to sex differences, and measurement invariance across sex in assessment instruments for PDs is necessary in order to ensure non-biased evaluations and to make valid comparisons between men and women. This study aimed to provide more information on measurement invariance across sex for the PID-5, using both the original scoring approach provided by the authors of the instrument and the scoring approach suggested by the APA in the published version of the PID-5. Methods: This study was conducted with a sample of 2273 participants from the general Québec (Canada) adult population aged 18 to 90 years (M = 46.59; SD = 16.32; 51.8% women). Results: The original scoring approach model showed good fit to data after freeing paths between certain traits and reached strict invariance. The APA scoring approach also showed good fit to data and reached strict invariance, but needed an adjustment (path freed between Emotional lability and Impulsivity in men) to reach scalar invariance. Discussion: In line with previous research, the PID-5 is invariant across sex and the five-factor structure adjusts well to data. The APA scoring approach appears to attenuate the cross-loading problem observed with the original scoring approach. In light of these results, we recommend using the APA scoring approach to derive domain scores.

Comparing Measures of Criterion A to Better Understand Incremental Validity in the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders.

The Alternative Model of Personality Disorders distinguishes between the severity of personality dysfunction (Criterion A) and individual differences in personality disorder expression (Criterion B). Several Criterion A measures exist, but few studies have compared these measures with each other. Moreover, debates about whether the constructs of Criteria A and B are redundant (i.e., weak incremental validity) should be framed around how different Criterion A measures perform relative to others. This study of 204 undergraduate students evaluated multiple measures of Criterion A. These measures were strongly correlated with Criterion B, but evidenced incremental validity (39% of outcomes, 5% average additional variance explained) with outcomes of psychopathology and interpersonal impairments, and less consistent incremental validity with suicidality, aggression, and mental health utilization. We discuss how these results inform the construct of Criterion A relative to Criterion B and evaluate strengths/weaknesses of Criterion A measures.

Psychometric properties of the Hungarian childhood trauma questionnaire short form and its validity in patients with adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder or borderline personality disorder.

BACKGROUND: Compelling evidence supports the role of childhood traumatization in the etiology of psychiatric disorders, including adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (aADHD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD). The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Hungarian version of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire Short Form (H-CTQ-SF) and to investigate the differences between patients diagnosed with aADHD and BPD in terms of early traumatization. METHODS: Altogether 765 (mean age = 32.8 years, 67.7% women) patients and control subjects were enrolled from different areas of Hungary. Principal component analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were carried out to explore the factor structure of H-CTQ-SF and test the validity of the five-factor structure. Discriminative validity was assessed by comparing clinical and non-clinical samples. Subsequently, aADHD and BPD subgroups were compared with healthy controls to test for the role of early trauma in aADHD without comorbid BPD. Convergent validity was explored by measuring correlations with subscales of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). RESULTS: The five scales of the H-CTQ-SF demonstrated adequate internal consistency and reliability values. The five-factor model fitted the Hungarian version well after exclusion of one item from the physical neglect scale because of its cross-loading onto the emotional neglect subscale. The H-CTQ-SF effectively differentiated between the clinical and non-clinical samples. The BPD, but not the aADHD group showed significant differences in each CTQ domain compared with the healthy control group. All CTQ domains, except for physical abuse, demonstrated medium to high correlations with PID-5 emotional lability, anxiousness, separation insecurity, withdrawal, intimacy avoidance, anhedonia, depressivity, suspiciousness, and hostility subscales. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirmed the psychometric properties of the H-CTQ-SF, an easy-to-administer, non-invasive, ethically sound questionnaire. In aADHD patients without comorbid BPD, low levels of traumatization in every CTQ domain were comparable to those of healthy control individuals. Thus, the increased level of traumatization found in previous studies of aADHD might be associated with the presence of comorbid BPD. Our findings also support the role of emotional neglect, emotional abuse and sexual abuse in the development of BPD.

The Hierarchical Structure and Predictive Validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 in Chinese Nonclinical Adolescents.

To evaluate the factor structure, reliability, and validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in Chinese nonclinical adolescents, a total of 1,442 Chinese middle school youths (Mage = 14.85, girls = 52.4%) were recruited in the present study. All the participants completed the full-length 220-item PID-5. Some participants (n = 1,003) were administered adolescents' social adjustment as a criterion measure at the same time and 236 participants took part in longitudinal assessment of the PID-5 and adolescents' social adjustment 6 months later. First, exploratory structural equation modeling analyses supported a six-factor structure of the PID-5 in our present sample. Second, Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonistic, and Disinhibition domains had positive correlations with negative social adjustment, and negative correlations with positive social adjustment concurrently and longitudinally, with the exception of Constraint and Psychoticism. Third, Cronbach's alpha for the PID-5 traits ranged from .57 to .91 in the full sample. The 6-month test-retest reliability by indexes of interclass correlation coefficient showed poor to good stability. As a whole, our findings provided preliminary evidence of the PID-5 as a reliable and valid measure of adolescents' maladaptive personality traits in mainland China.

In light of the DSM-5 dimensional model of personality: Borderline personality disorder at the crossroads with the bipolar spectrum.

BACKGROUND: State-of-the-art research highlights that borderline personality disorder (PD) and bipolar spectrum disorders have clinical characteristics in common, which imply uncertainty in differential diagnoses. Although there is a growing body of literature on the DSM-5 dimensional model of personality disorder, its discriminative features between these clinical samples are still understudied. In this study, we seek to identify the best set of predictors that differentiate between borderline PD and bipolar spectrum, based on pathological and normative personality traits and symptoms. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of three clinical samples: 1) Borderline PD group of 63 participants; 2) Major depressive disorder group of 89 participants; 3) Bipolar disorder group of 65 participants. Self-reported assessment: Personality Inventory for DSM-5; Brief Symptom Inventory; FFM Inventory. A series of one-way ANOVAs and logistic regression analyses were computed. RESULTS: The major set of data emerging as common discriminants of borderline PD across the bipolar spectrum are unusual beliefs & experiences, paranoid ideation, obsession-compulsion and extraversion. Depressivity (OR: 34.95) and impulsivity (OR: 22.35) pathological traits displayed the greatest predictive values in the differential diagnosis. LIMITATIONS: The small size of the samples; a lack of data from participants' previous clinical history. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the DSM-5 pathological traits as differentiating borderline PD through bipolar spectrum, and reinforcing the joint use of symptom-related pathological functioning and normal-range personality traits. Alongside the bipolar spectrum, borderline pathology sheds light upon a hypothetical overlap along the depressive and schizoaffective/schizophrenia spectra, representing a borderland space at a crossroads with the psychopathology of a meta-spectrum.

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Brief Form: An Examination of Internal Consistency, Factor Structure, and Relationship to Aggression in an Incarcerated Offender Sample.

This study evaluated the internal consistency and factor structure of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Brief Form (PID-5-BF), and its relationship to aggression in 438 incarcerated Australian male offenders. Results provide support for the internal consistency and five-factor and bifactor structure of the PID-5-BF. The PID-5-BF total score, as well as the domains of Antagonism, Disinhibition, and Negative Affect (low), demonstrated significant relationships with aggression. These results provide preliminary support for the psychometric properties of the PID-5-BF within prison settings, and suggest that a PID-5-BF assessment may be useful within forensic settings to screen for broad maladaptive personality characteristics that are indicative of a greater propensity for aggressive behavior.

The hierarchical structure of error-related negativities elicited from affective and social stimuli and their relations to personality traits.

Psychophysiological measures have become increasingly accessible to researchers and many have properties that indicate their use as individual difference indicators. For example, the error-related negativity (ERN), an event-related potential (ERP) thought to reflect error-monitoring processes, has been related to individual differences, such as Neuroticism and Conscientiousness traits. Although various tasks have been used to elicit the ERN, only a few studies have investigated its variability across tasks when examining the relations between the ERN and personality traits. In this project, we examined the relations of the ERN elicited from four variants of the Flanker task (Arrow, Social, Unpleasant, and Pleasant) that were created to maximize the differences in their relevance to personality traits. A sample of 93 participants with a history of treatment for psychopathology completed the four tasks as well as self-report measures of the general and maladaptive five-factor model (FFM) traits. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) of ERN amplitudes indicated that three of the four tasks (Arrow, Social, and Unpleasant) were unidimensional. Another set of CFAs indicated that a general factor underlies the ERN elicited from all tasks as well as unique task-specific variances. The correlations of estimated latent ERN scores and personality traits did not reflect the hypothesized correlation patterns. Variability across tasks and the hierarchical model of the ERN may aid in understanding psychopathology dimensions and in informing future endeavors integrating the psychophysiological methods into the study of personality. Recommendations for future research on psychophysiological indicators as individual differences are discussed.

DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder Dysfunctional Personality Traits as Predictors of Self-Reported Aggression in an Italian Sample of Consecutively Admitted, Personality-Disordered Psychotherapy Patients.

In order to assess the relationships between DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD) maladaptive personality traits and self-reports of aggression, 508 Italian adult participants who met at least one DSM-IV Axis II/DSM-5 Section II personality disorder (PD) diagnosis were administered the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ). Analysis results showed that multiple regression results, PID-5 Hostility, Callousness, and Risk Taking trait scale scores explained a large amount of variance in AQ Physical Aggression (PA) scores. Moreover, PID-5 Hostility, Callousness, and Risk Taking explained more than 20% of the variance in the AQ Physical Aggression scale scores that was left unexplained by selected continuously scored DSM-IV Axis II/DSM-5 Section II PDs, whereas SCID-II Paranoid, Narcissistic, Borderline, and Antisocial PDs added only 4% of variance to the amount of variance in AQ Physical Aggression scores that was already explained by the PID-5 trait scale scores.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity of Personality Inventory for DSM-5-BF in a Primary Care Sample.

A growing body of research supports the validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in evaluating community and psychiatric samples. Although maladaptive personality also has significant relevance in primary care settings, research on the PID-5 in primary care samples is limited. In this study, the authors examined the intercorrelations, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the brief form of the PID-5 (PID-5-BF) in 100 primary care outpatients. Results are consistent with findings in other samples in suggesting that PID-5 domains are moderately intercorrelated and associated with a variety of mental health variables. Smaller associations with physical health variables support the discriminant validity of the instrument. Overall, results suggest that the PID-5-BF can provide a useful psychiatric screening tool in primary care settings.

Tracking Psychopathy in Female Italian Inmates: The Role of the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders Dysfunctional Personality Domains.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed at testing the relationships between measures of psychopathy and measures of the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) domains in a sample of female offenders who were serving their sentences in Italian prisons. METHOD: Thirty-eight Italian adult female inmates were underwent the Italian versions of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) and of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Informant Report Form (PID-5-IRF). RESULTS: According to MM robust regression analysis results, high scores on the PID-5-IRF Disinhibition domain scale and low scores on the PID-5-IRF Anxiousness trait scale were significant and substantial predictors of the PCL-R total score. CONCLUSIONS: As a whole, our findings support the hypothesis that assessing the DSM-5 AMPD domains (and traits) may be important for tracking psychopathy in female inmates.

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Brief Form: Evidence for Reliability and Construct Validity in a Sample of Community-Dwelling Italian Adolescents.

To assess the reliability and construct validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Brief Form (PID-5-BF) among adolescents, 877 Italian high school students were administered the PID-5-BF. Participants were administered also the Measure of Disordered Personality Functioning (MDPF) as a criterion measure. In the full sample, Cronbach's alpha values for the PID-5-BF scales ranged from .59 (Detachment) to .77 (Psychoticism); in addition, all PID-5-BF scales showed mean interitem correlation values in the .22 to .40 range. Cronbach's alpha values for the PID-5-BF total score was .83 (mean interitem r = .16). Although 2-month test-retest reliability could be assessed only in a small ( n = 42) subsample of participants, all PID-5-BF scale scores showed adequate temporal stability, as indexed by intraclass r values ranging from .78 (Negative Affectivity) to .97 (Detachment), all ps <.001. Exploratory structural equation modeling analyses provided at least moderate support for the a priori model of PID-5-BF items. Multiple regression analyses showed that PID-5-BF scales predicted a nonnegligible amount of variance in MDPF Non-Cooperativeness, adjusted R2 = .17, p < .001, and Non-Coping scales, adjusted R2 = .32, p < .001. Similarly, the PID-5-BF total score was a significant predictor of both MDPF Non-Coping, and Non-Cooperativeness scales.

The role of DSM-5 borderline personality symptomatology and traits in the link between childhood trauma and suicidal risk in psychiatric patients.

BACKGROUND: Childhood traumas appear to be linked to suicidal behavior. However, the factors that mediate between these two phenomena are not sufficiently understood. Recent findings suggest that borderline personality disorder (BPD) may explain some of the association. METHOD: The present study investigated the potential mediating role of BPD symptomatology and traits between reported childhood trauma and suicidal risk in adult psychiatric outpatients (N = 124). BPD symptomatology was measured with DSM-5 Section II criterion-counts (SCID-II; Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II), whereas BPD traits were measured with specified DSM-5 Section III traits (PID-5; Personality Inventory for DSM-5). Childhood traumas were self-reported (CTQ; Childhood Trauma Questionnaire), whereas level of suicidal risk was measured with a structured interview (MINI Suicidality Module; Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview). Mediation effects were tested by bias-corrected (10.000 boot-strapped samples) confidence intervals. RESULTS: BPD features account for a considerable part of the cross-sectional association between childhood trauma and level of suicidal risk, even when controlling for the influence of gender, age, and educational level. This finding remained stable when testing the model without the suicidality-related BPD criterion and PID-5 items. DSM-5 Section II BPD criterion-counts explained 67% of the total effect, whereas DSM-5 Section III BPD traits accounted for 82% of the total effect. The specific DSM-5 Section III trait facets of "Depressivity" (52%) and "Perceptual Dysregulation" (37%) accounted for most of this effect. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide preliminary support for the proposed mediation model indicating that BPD features may help explain relations between childhood trauma and elevated suicidal risk in adult life, in particular for DSM-5 Section III personality traits of depressivity (e.g., pessimism, guilt, and shame) and perceptual dysregulation (e.g., dissociation). To reduce the suicidal risk among those with a history of childhood trauma, BPD features (including "Depressivity" and "Perceptual Dysregulation") might be an important target of assessment, risk management, and treatment. However, other factors are likely to be involved, and a longitudinal and more large-scale design is warranted for a conclusive test of mediation.

General and maladaptive traits in a five-factor framework for DSM-5 in a university student sample.

The relationships between two measures proposed to describe personality pathology, that is the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-3) and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), are examined in an undergraduate sample (N = 240). The NEO inventories are general trait measures, also considered relevant to assess disordered personality, whereas the PID-5 measure is specifically designed to assess pathological personality traits, as conceptualized in the DSM-5 proposal. A structural analysis of the 25 PID-5 traits confirmed the factor structure observed in the U.S. derivation sample, with higher order factors of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism. A joint factor analysis of, respectively, the NEO domains and their facets with the PID-5 traits showed that general and maladaptive traits are subsumed under an umbrella of five to six major dimensions that can be interpreted from the perspective of the five-factor model or the Personality Psychopathology Five. Implications for the assessment of personality pathology and the construction of models of psychopathology grounded in personality are discussed.