Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh.
Department of Psychology, University of Zurich.
Am Psychol. 2023 Jul-Aug;78(5):716-717. doi: 10.1037/amp0001172.
We reply to Wright et al.'s (2023) commentary and suggestion that personality trait models would be the preferred way to reconfigure the personality disorders (PDs). Though we agree that personality trait models are powerful descriptive tools, we highlight that they lack definitional or explanatory power, and that is why they have not been able to define or distinguish what PDs are (Hopwood, 2018; Mõttus et al., 2020; Pincus, 2011). Scientific models must do more than describe; they must define. This is why we propose a specific interpersonal model, contemporary integrative interpersonal theory, and why a generic interpersonal model has been formally adopted in psychiatric classification (e.g., International Classification of Diseases; 11th ed.; World Health Organization, 2019) but traits remain optional adjunct descriptors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
我们回复了 Wright 等人（2023 年）的评论和建议，即人格特质模型将是重新配置人格障碍（PD）的首选方法。虽然我们同意人格特质模型是强大的描述性工具，但我们强调它们缺乏定义或解释力，这就是为什么它们一直无法定义或区分 PD 是什么（Hopwood，2018 年；Mõttus 等人，2020 年；Pincus，2011 年）。科学模型必须不仅仅是描述；它们必须定义。这就是为什么我们提出了一个特定的人际模型，当代综合人际理论，以及为什么一个通用的人际模型已在精神病学分类中正式采用（例如，国际疾病分类；第 11 版；世界卫生组织，2019 年），但特质仍然是可选的附加描述符。（PsycInfo 数据库记录（c）2023 APA，保留所有权利）。
