• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

比较《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(第五版)第三部分人格病理学特质模型和《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(第五版)第二部分人格障碍模型的可靠性及其与功能的关联。

Comparing the dependability and associations with functioning of the DSM-5 Section III trait model of personality pathology and the DSM-5 Section II personality disorder model.

作者信息

Chmielewski Michael, Ruggero Camilo J, Kotov Roman, Liu Keke, Krueger Robert F

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Southern Methodist University.

Department of Psychology, University of North Texas.

出版信息

Personal Disord. 2017 Jul;8(3):228-236. doi: 10.1037/per0000213. Epub 2016 Sep 12.

DOI:10.1037/per0000213
PMID:27618342
Abstract

Two competing models of personality psychopathology are included in the fifth edition of the (; American Psychiatric Association, 2013); the traditional personality disorder (PD) model included in Section II and an alternative trait-based model included in Section III. Numerous studies have examined the validity of the alternative trait model and its official assessment instrument, the Personality Inventory for (PID-5; Krueger, Derringer, Markon, Watson, & Skodol, 2012). However, few studies have directly compared the trait-based model to the traditional PD model empirically in the same dataset. Moreover, to our knowledge, only a single study (Suzuki, Griffin, & Samuel, 2015) has examined the dependability of the PID-5, which is an essential component of construct validity for traits (Chmielewski & Watson, 2009; McCrae, Kurtz, Yamagata, & Terracciano, 2011). The current study directly compared the dependability of the traits, as assessed by the PID-5, and the traditional PD model, as assessed by the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4 (PDQ-4+), in a large undergraduate sample. In addition, it evaluated and compared their associations with functioning, another essential component of personality pathology. In general, our findings indicate that most traits demonstrate high levels of dependability that are superior to the traditional PD model; however, some of the constructs assessed by the PID-5 may be more state like. The models were roughly equivalent in terms of their associations with functioning. The current results provide additional support for the validity of PID-5 and the Section III personality pathology model. (PsycINFO Database Record

摘要

《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(美国精神病学协会,2013年)包含了两种相互竞争的人格精神病理学模型;第二章中的传统人格障碍(PD)模型和第三章中的另一种基于特质的模型。众多研究考察了这种基于特质的替代模型及其官方评估工具——人格特质问卷(PID - 5;克鲁格、德林杰、马克龙、沃森和斯科多尔,2012年)的有效性。然而,很少有研究在同一数据集中将基于特质的模型与传统的PD模型进行实证直接比较。此外,据我们所知,只有一项研究(铃木、格里芬和塞缪尔,2015年)考察了PID - 5的信度,而信度是特质结构效度的一个重要组成部分(赫米莱夫斯基和沃森,2009年;麦克雷、库尔茨、山形和泰拉恰诺,2011年)。本研究在一个大型本科样本中,直接比较了通过PID - 5评估的特质的信度和通过人格诊断问卷 - 4(PDQ - 4 +)评估的传统PD模型的信度。此外,研究还评估并比较了它们与功能(人格病理学的另一个重要组成部分)之间的关联。总体而言,我们的研究结果表明,大多数特质表现出高水平的信度,优于传统的PD模型;然而,PID - 5评估的一些构念可能更类似于状态特质。在与功能的关联方面,这两种模型大致相当。当前结果为PID - 5和第三章人格病理学模型的有效性提供了更多支持。(《心理学文摘数据库记录》

相似文献

1
Comparing the dependability and associations with functioning of the DSM-5 Section III trait model of personality pathology and the DSM-5 Section II personality disorder model.比较《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(第五版)第三部分人格病理学特质模型和《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》(第五版)第二部分人格障碍模型的可靠性及其与功能的关联。
Personal Disord. 2017 Jul;8(3):228-236. doi: 10.1037/per0000213. Epub 2016 Sep 12.
2
Testing whether the DSM-5 personality disorder trait model can be measured with a reduced set of items: An item response theory investigation of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5.检验DSM-5人格障碍特质模型能否通过精简项目集进行测量:对《DSM-5人格问卷》的项目反应理论研究
Psychol Assess. 2015 Dec;27(4):1195-210. doi: 10.1037/pas0000120. Epub 2015 Apr 6.
3
Examining the relations among the DSM-5 alternative model of personality, the five-factor model, and externalizing and internalizing behavior.探讨 DSM-5 人格替代模型、五因素模型以及外显和内隐行为之间的关系。
Personal Disord. 2018 Jul;9(4):379-384. doi: 10.1037/per0000240. Epub 2017 Jan 26.
4
Convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity of DSM-5 traits.DSM-5 特质的会聚、区别和效标效度。
Personal Disord. 2016 Oct;7(4):394-404. doi: 10.1037/per0000165. Epub 2016 Jan 18.
5
Measurement invariance of the DSM-5 Section III pathological personality trait model across sex.DSM-5 第三部分病理性人格特质模型在性别上的测量不变性。
Personal Disord. 2019 Mar;10(2):114-122. doi: 10.1037/per0000291. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
6
Discrepancies in self- and informant-reports of personality pathology: Examining the DSM-5 Section III trait model.个体自身报告与知情者报告的人格病理学差异:检验 DSM-5 第三部分特质模型。
Personal Disord. 2019 Sep;10(5):456-467. doi: 10.1037/per0000342. Epub 2019 Jul 1.
7
Pathological personality traits can capture DSM-IV personality disorder types.病理性人格特质能够涵盖《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版中的人格障碍类型。
Personal Disord. 2015 Jan;6(1):32-40. doi: 10.1037/per0000064. Epub 2014 Feb 10.
8
A Family Study of the Section III Personality Pathology Model Using the Personality Inventory for the (PID-5).采用《人格障碍检查表第五版》(PID-5)对 第三节人格病理学模型进行的家系研究。
J Pers Disord. 2018 Dec;32(6):753-765. doi: 10.1521/pedi_2017_31_323. Epub 2017 Oct 3.
9
A comprehensive comparison of the ICD-11 and DSM-5 section III personality disorder models.ICD-11 与 DSM-5 第三部分人格障碍模型的全面比较。
Psychol Assess. 2020 Jan;32(1):72-84. doi: 10.1037/pas0000772. Epub 2019 Oct 3.
10
The hierarchical structure and construct validity of the PID-5 trait measure in adolescence.青少年期人格解体-精神分裂症量表(PID-5)特质测量的层次结构和结构效度
J Pers. 2014 Apr;82(2):158-69. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12042. Epub 2013 Jul 7.

引用本文的文献

1
A dimensional approach to psychosis: identifying cognition, depression, and thought disorder factors in a clinical sample.一种针对精神病的维度方法:在临床样本中识别认知、抑郁和思维障碍因素。
Schizophrenia (Heidelb). 2025 Jul 14;11(1):97. doi: 10.1038/s41537-025-00641-x.
2
Measurement invariance of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 across sex.《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版人格量表在不同性别间的测量不变性。
Front Psychiatry. 2024 Mar 8;15:1328937. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1328937. eCollection 2024.
3
Psychosis superspectrum II: neurobiology, treatment, and implications.
精神病超谱 II:神经生物学、治疗及影响。
Mol Psychiatry. 2024 May;29(5):1293-1309. doi: 10.1038/s41380-024-02410-1. Epub 2024 Feb 14.
4
Psychometric study of the brazilian version of the personality inventory for DSM-5-paper-and-pencil version.《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版纸笔版人格问卷巴西版本的心理测量研究
Front Psychiatry. 2022 Sep 13;13:976831. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.976831. eCollection 2022.
5
Validity and utility of Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): III. Emotional dysfunction superspectrum.精神病理学层次分类法(HiTOP)的有效性和实用性:III. 情绪功能障碍超谱
World Psychiatry. 2022 Feb;21(1):26-54. doi: 10.1002/wps.20943.
6
Validity and utility of Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): II. Externalizing superspectrum.精神病理学层次分类法(HiTOP)的有效性和实用性:II. 外化超谱
World Psychiatry. 2021 Jun;20(2):171-193. doi: 10.1002/wps.20844.
7
Validity and utility of Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): I. Psychosis superspectrum.精神病理学层次分类法(HiTOP)的有效性和实用性:I. 精神病超谱
World Psychiatry. 2020 Jun;19(2):151-172. doi: 10.1002/wps.20730.
8
A Brief but Comprehensive Review of Research on the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders.DSM-5 人格障碍替代模型研究的简要但全面的综述。
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2019 Aug 13;21(9):92. doi: 10.1007/s11920-019-1079-z.
9
Maladaptive personality traits and romantic relationship satisfaction: A monozygotic co-twin control analysis.适应不良人格特质与浪漫关系满意度:同卵双生子对照分析。
J Abnorm Psychol. 2018 May;127(4):339-347. doi: 10.1037/abn0000343.