Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, CAMH.
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto.
Personal Disord. 2018 Jul;9(4):346-353. doi: 10.1037/per0000246. Epub 2017 Apr 3.
Previous research has raised concerns that scores derived from the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Krueger, Derringer, Markon, Watson, & Skodol, 2012) may be compromised by response styles such as underreporting or overreporting. The informant-report form of the PID-5 (PID-5-IRF; Markon, Quilty, Bagby, & Krueger, 2013) has been recommended for use when response bias is an assessment concern. The purpose of the current investigation was to evaluate PID-5 and PID-5-IRF scale score elevations across participants exhibiting signs of overreporting or underreporting. A total of 245 adults completed the PID-5 and the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992). A family member or friend of at least 1 year's acquaintance completed the PID-5-IRF for 216 of these. A total of 211 target-informant pairs were available for analysis. Participants were categorized as overreporting and underreporting according to NEO PI-R validity scale cutoffs. The majority of PID-5 scale scores were elevated in those identified as overreporting; more than half of the PID-5-IRF scale scores were similarly elevated. The majority of PID-5 scale scores were lower in those scoring above underreporting cut-offs; however, PID-5-IRF scales were not as consistently or strongly impacted. PID-5 scales were strongly impacted by response bias, whereas PID-5-IRF scores were less strongly impacted overall, and more so by overreporting bias. Caution when using these instruments in the assessment of personality disorders prone to over- or underreporting may be warranted. (PsycINFO Database Record
先前的研究引起了人们的关注，即源自 DSM-5 人格量表（PID-5；美国精神病学协会，2013；Krueger、Derringer、Markon、Watson 和 Skodol，2012）的分数可能会受到报告风格的影响，例如少报或多报。PID-5 的知情者报告形式（PID-5-IRF；Markon、Quilty、Bagby 和 Krueger，2013）已被推荐用于当反应偏差成为评估关注点时使用。本研究的目的是评估在表现出多报或少报迹象的参与者中，PID-5 和 PID-5-IRF 量表分数的升高情况。共有 245 名成年人完成了 PID-5 和修订版 NEO 人格量表（NEO PI-R；Costa 和 McCrae，1992）。其中 216 人的至少 1 年熟人的家庭成员或朋友完成了 PID-5-IRF。共有 211 个目标知情者对进行了分析。根据 NEO PI-R 有效性量表的临界值，参与者被归类为多报或少报。在被确定为多报的人中，PID-5 量表的大部分分数都升高了；PID-5-IRF 量表的分数中有一半以上也升高了。在得分高于少报临界值的人中，PID-5 量表的大部分分数较低；然而，PID-5-IRF 量表的影响并不那么一致或强烈。PID-5 量表受到反应偏差的强烈影响，而 PID-5-IRF 分数受到的影响总体上较弱，多报偏差的影响更大。在评估易出现多报或少报的人格障碍时，使用这些工具可能需要谨慎。（PsycINFO 数据库记录）
