Clark L A, Livesley W J, Morey L
Department of Psychology, University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242-1407, USA.
J Pers Disord. 1997 Fall;11(3):205-31. doi: 10.1521/pedi.1997.11.3.205.
We begin with a review of the data that challenge the current categorical system for classifying personality disorder, focusing on the central assessment issues of convergent and discriminant validity. These data indicate that while there is room for improvement in assessment, even greater change is needed in conceptualization than in instrumentation. Accordingly, we then refocus the categorical-dimensional debate in assessment terms, and place it in the broader context of such issues as the hierarchical structure of personality, overlap and distinctions between normal and abnormal personality, sources of information in personality disorder assessment, and overlap and discrimination of trait and state assessment. We conclude that more complex conceptual models that can incorporate both biological and environmental influences on the development of adaptive and maladaptive personality are needed.
我们首先回顾那些对当前人格障碍分类的范畴系统提出挑战的数据，重点关注聚合效度和区分效度的核心评估问题。这些数据表明，虽然评估方面仍有改进空间，但概念化方面需要的改变比测量工具方面更大。因此，我们随后从评估角度重新聚焦范畴-维度之争，并将其置于更广泛的背景下，如人格的层次结构、正常与异常人格之间的重叠与区别、人格障碍评估中的信息来源，以及特质与状态评估的重叠与区分等问题。我们得出结论，需要更复杂的概念模型，以纳入生物和环境对适应性和适应不良人格发展的影响。
