Saulsman Lisa M, Page Andrew C
School of Psychology, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Perth, Western Australia 6009, Crawley, Australia.
Clin Psychol Rev. 2004 Jan;23(8):1055-85. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2002.09.001.
The current meta-analysis reviews research examining the relationships between each of the five-factor model personality dimensions and each of the 10 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) personality disorder diagnostic categories. Effect sizes representing the relationships between these two constructs were compiled from 15 independent samples. Results were analyzed both within each individual personality disorder category and across personality disorders, indicating how personality disorders are different and similar, respectively, with regard to underlying personality traits. In terms of how personality disorders differ, the results showed that each disorder displays a five-factor model profile that is meaningful and predictable given its unique diagnostic criteria. With regard to their similarities, the findings revealed that the most prominent and consistent personality dimensions underlying a large number of the personality disorders are positive associations with Neuroticism and negative associations with Agreeableness. Extraversion appears to be a more discriminating dimension, as indicated by prominent but directionally variable associations with the personality disorders. The implications of these meta-analytic findings for clinical application and the advancement of future research are discussed.
当前的荟萃分析回顾了关于五因素模型人格维度与《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版（DSM-IV）中10种人格障碍诊断类别之间关系的研究。从15个独立样本中汇总了代表这两种结构之间关系的效应量。分别在每种人格障碍类别内和跨人格障碍对结果进行了分析，表明人格障碍在潜在人格特质方面分别有何不同和相似之处。就人格障碍的不同之处而言，结果显示，鉴于其独特的诊断标准，每种障碍都呈现出有意义且可预测的五因素模型概况。关于它们的相似之处，研究结果表明，大量人格障碍背后最突出且一致的人格维度是与神经质呈正相关，与宜人性呈负相关。外向性似乎是一个更具区分性的维度，与人格障碍的关联显著但方向多变。讨论了这些荟萃分析结果对临床应用和未来研究进展的意义。
