Nestadt Gerald, Costa Paul T, Hsu Fang-Chi, Samuels Jack, Bienvenu O Joseph, Eaton William W
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
Compr Psychiatry. 2008 Jan-Feb;49(1):98-105. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2007.05.015. Epub 2007 Oct 23.
This study compared the latent structure of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition personality disorders (PDs) with the 5-factor model (FFM) of general personality dimensions. The subjects in the study were 742 community-residing individuals who participated in the Hopkins Epidemiology of Personality Disorders Study. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition PD traits were assessed by psychologists using the International Personality Disorder Examination, and PD dimensions were derived previously using dichotomous factor analysis. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory, a measure of the FFM, was administered to all subjects. The relationship between the 2 sets of personality-related constructs was examined using a construct validity framework and also using Pearson correlation coefficients, multiple linear regression models, and spline regression models. The 5 PD factors each exhibited small to moderate correlations with several NEO dimensions; together, the NEO domain and facet scores explained a fifth to a third of the variance in PD dimensions. Examples of nonlinear relationships between the personality dimensions were identified. There is a modest correspondence between the PD dimensions and FFM traits, and the traits of FFM only partially explain the variance of the PDs. Dimensional measures of general personality may be a suitable alternative to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Whether additional maladaptive traits would better define the domain of PDs remains an important objective for future research.
本研究比较了《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版（DSM-IV）中人格障碍（PDs）的潜在结构与一般人格维度的五因素模型（FFM）。研究对象为742名居住在社区的个体，他们参与了霍普金斯人格障碍流行病学研究。心理学家使用《国际人格障碍检查表》对DSM-IV的PD特质进行评估，并且先前使用二分法因子分析得出了PD维度。对所有受试者施测了测量FFM的《修订版NEO人格问卷》。使用结构效度框架以及皮尔逊相关系数、多元线性回归模型和样条回归模型来检验两组人格相关结构之间的关系。五个PD因子各自与几个NEO维度呈现出小到中等程度的相关性；NEO领域和层面分数共同解释了PD维度中五分之一到三分之一的方差。确定了人格维度之间非线性关系的实例。PD维度与FFM特质之间存在适度的对应关系，并且FFM特质仅部分解释了PDs的方差。一般人格的维度测量可能是DSM-IV的合适替代方法。额外的适应不良特质是否能更好地界定PDs的领域仍是未来研究的一个重要目标。
