Department of Psychology, University of Kassel.
Personal Disord. 2022 Jul;13(4):321-324. doi: 10.1037/per0000561.
In their target article, Morey et al. (2022) provided a comprehensive overview of research on Criterion A of the alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders over the past 10 years. Although this overview is undoubtedly informative and helpful, it offers little guidance on both certain weaknesses of Criterion A and research gaps and needs. A structural reason for this could be that the scientific field is divided into 2 camps with respect to Criterion A: Some authors focus mainly on confirmatory results and want to defend Criterion A in its current form, whereas others take the same results as an opportunity to call for its abolition. In this situation, there is little room for a nuanced and constructive discussion of the empirical and conceptual strengths and weaknesses of Criterion A. In this commentary, I use 2 examples to illustrate what research aimed at revising Criterion A might look like. From an empirical point of view, studies that take into account the peculiarities of the latent structure of the Level of Personality Functioning Scale are important because they can reveal local misspecification and challenges for the assessment of single cases. From a conceptual point of view, a more consistent definition of Criterion A in terms of impairments in "capacities" could allow for a more coherent distinction from maladaptive "traits." This commentary hopes to strengthen a discourse that moves beyond the alternatives of defense or abolition toward the concrete improvement of Criterion A. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
在他们的目标文章中，Morey 等人（2022 年）全面回顾了过去 10 年中替代 DSM-5 人格障碍模型标准 A 的研究。尽管这一综述无疑具有信息性和帮助性，但它几乎没有提供关于标准 A 的某些弱点以及研究差距和需求的指导。造成这种情况的一个结构原因是，科学界在标准 A 问题上分为 2 个阵营：一些作者主要关注确证性结果，并希望以当前形式捍卫标准 A，而另一些作者则将相同的结果视为废除标准 A 的机会。在这种情况下，几乎没有余地对标准 A 的经验和概念优势和弱点进行细致和建设性的讨论。在这篇评论中，我使用了 2 个例子来说明修订标准 A 的研究可能是什么样子。从经验的角度来看，考虑到人格功能水平量表的潜在结构特点的研究非常重要，因为它们可以揭示局部不精确和对单个案例评估的挑战。从概念的角度来看，用“能力”方面的障碍来更一致地定义标准 A，可以更一致地区分适应不良的“特质”。本评论希望加强一种超越防御或废除替代方案的讨论，朝着具体改进标准 A 的方向发展。（美国心理协会，2022 年）。
