The General Criteria for Personality Disorders Assessed by Interview: Do They Still Have a Role to Play?

On the path to developing dimensional models of personality disorder, we are at risk of leaving key diagnostic aspects behind

Josep M. Peri; Ana Muñoz-Champel; Rafael Torrubia; Fernando Gutiérrez

2018

Scholarcy highlights

  • On the path to developing dimensional models of personality disorder, we are at risk of leaving key diagnostic aspects behind
  • The general criteria for PD may be important ones because they reflect the defining aspects of personality pathology: long duration, independence from psychopathological states, and harmfulness. We assessed these criteria by interview in a sample of 362 psychiatric outpatients after administering the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire–4+
  • The result was a 42.5% fall in self-reported endorsements, due to misinterpretations, short duration of traits or contamination by state psychopathology, and traits being non-harmful
  • Not all personality traits and disorders underwent correction to the same extent, and the interview did not improve the prediction of clinical variables
  • Self-report methodology is insufficient for improving the assessment and classification of Axis II personality disorders
  • Transitioning to a dimensional model of personality disorder in DSM 5.1 and beyond

Need more features? Save interactive summary cards to your Scholarcy Library.