Comparison of alternative models for personality disorders.
BACKGROUND
The categorical classification system for personality disorder (PD) has been frequently criticized and several alternative dimensional models have been proposed.


METHODS
Antecedent, concurrent and predictive markers of construct validity were examined for three models of PDs: the Five-Factor Model (FFM), the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP) model and the DSM-IV in the Collaborative Study of Personality Disorders (CLPS) sample.


RESULTS
All models showed substantial validity across a variety of marker variables over time. Dimensional models (including dimensionalized DSM-IV) consistently outperformed the conventional categorical diagnosis in predicting external variables, such as subsequent suicidal gestures and hospitalizations. FFM facets failed to improve upon the validity of higher-order factors upon cross-validation. Data demonstrated the importance of both stable trait and dynamic psychopathological influences in predicting external criteria over time.


CONCLUSIONS
The results support a dimensional representation of PDs that assesses both stable traits and dynamic processes.
Morey
Leslie C
LC
Psychology Department, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-4235, USA. lcm@psyc.tamu.edu
Hopwood
Christopher J
CJ
Gunderson
John G
JG
Skodol
Andrew E
AE
Shea
M Tracie
MT
Yen
Shirley
S
Stout
Robert L
RL
Zanarini
Mary C
MC
Grilo
Carlos M
CM
Sanislow
Charles A
CA
McGlashan
Thomas H
TH
D039721:Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008960:Models, Psychological; D010554:Personality Disorders / Q000145:classification*; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D015203:Reproducibility of Results