You are on page 1of 12

Journal of Personality Disorders, 21(6), 626–637, 2007  2007 The Guilford Press

Andrew G. Ryder, PhD, Paul T. Costa, Jr., PhD, and R. Michael Bagby, PhD, C Psych

The utility of the DSM personality disorder (PD) system remains a concern. The strategy employed represents one approach designed to evaluate and improve the diagnostic efficiency of the SCID-II PDs. Using a sample of 203 patients, SCID-II PD items—based on the criterion sets of the 10 DSM-IV PDs—were evaluated with respect to (a) convergent validity; (b) divergent validity; (c) relation to general personality traits; and (d) association with functional impairment. Only Borderline PD items were satisfactory on all four evaluation criteria. Histrionic and Obsessive-Compulsive PD items met criteria for convergent and divergent validity and relation to personality dimensions of the Five-Factor Model of Personality (FFM) but were not related to functional impairment, suggesting they might be reconsidered as disorders. Schizotypal PD items met three of the four criteria but showed no relation to FFM dimensions, suggesting that it may be a candidate for reassignment to Axis I.

The flaws of the DSM PD system are well known and include excessive within-disorder diagnostic heterogeneity, poor reliability and validity, high rates of between disorder diagnostic overlap (both Axis I and II), poor relation to impairment, and failure to capture the full domain of personality psychopathology (Widiger, 1997; Widiger & Frances, 2002). Previous investigators have examined the coherence of the traits within each PD criterion set as well as overlap with other PD criteria (Blais, Hilsenroth, & Castlebury, 1997; Blais & Norman, 1997; Grilo et al., 2001; Maffei et al., 1997; McGlashan et al., 2000). These studies provided information on which individual PD traits contribute significantly to the overall diagnostic inclu-

From Concordia University (A. G. R.); National Institute of Aging (P. T. C.); and Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto (R. M. B.). Address correspondence to R. Michael Bagby, Ph.D., C. Psych., Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Clarke Site, 250 College Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5T 1R8; E-mail:


2004..g. Warner and colleagues (2004) demonstrated that most of the stability observed for individual PDs over a two year interval is accounted for by FFM traits associated with individual PDs. & Morey.. 1997. Borderline. internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of the DSM-IV personality disorder criteria meet or exceed standard cut-offs (Blais & Norman. an aspect of clinical utility. Widiger. Overall. 1997). and Obsessive-Compulsive obtained using multiple interview measures. There is considerable evidence that the DSM-IV PD traits have a structure mostly compatible with the Five-Factor Model (FFM). Blais et al. 1997. 1997. From a clinical perspective. that the personality dimensions underlying the PDs have more clinical validity than do the the PDs themselves. 2002. According to the DSM-IV. revealing that many individual PD traits lack utility. Saulsman & Page. PD traits that are not related to impairment may well represent important . 2001). A steadily increasing number of reports by personality and PD researchers suggest that the problematic PD categories should ultimately be replaced by dimensional alternatives (e. this study considers whether each constituent PD trait can be said to relate in some way to the broad domain of personality. Although previous studies have looked at the relation between PDs and the FFM. Establishing the relation between PDs and personality dimensions is important. Skodol et al. Livesley. the assignment of a PD diagnosis is predicated on the assumption that each of the traits in the criterion set is related to significant impairment. suggesting that PD traits may be pathological variants of core personality features (Bagby et al. We believe that these earlier studies left unexamined two important issues—the relation of PD traits to general personality trait dimensions and the association of PD traits with functional impairment. as the traits that compose the FFM were derived in nonpathological populations and thus are not conflated with Axis I psychopathology.. 1999. 1997. 2002. Bagby. or whether certain PD traits are better seen as Axis I psychopathology. each of these diagnoses was on average co-morbid with 1. Skodol and colleagues (2005) report. Avoidant. Ryder. the FFM can be used to describe adequately the characteristic features of individual PDs (Lynam & Widiger. Instances in which PD traits are not linked to the FFM will require future investigation to determine whether our understanding of personality requires broadening to include additional content. Blais and colleagues (Blais & Norman.. especially including a much greater degree of temporal stability.4 other PD diagnoses. meanwhile. Maffei et al. Clark. 2005).. 1999). Blais et al. & Schuller.EVALUATION OF THE SCID-II 627 sion criteria. 1997) reported several significant correlations between individual DSM-IV PD criteria and nonparent scales indicating a lack of discriminant validity. McGlashan and colleagues (2000) found that despite high retest and inter-rater reliability for diagnoses of Schizotypal. The major concern is instead with co-morbidity across diagnoses. Costa & Widiger.. Perhaps the cardinal attribute of a PD criterion is its association with overall impairment.

First et al.6). First. Patients also completed the SCID-II Personality Questionnaire (SCID-II/PQ.628 RYDER.5).e. 1997) and the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R). and substance dependence and use. AND BAGBY features of personality. Williams. First.2 years. (b) divergent validity.8. 167 (82%) were outpatients (M age = 37. Spitzer. Of these. schizophrenia. psychiatric facility (M age = 39. One could argue that these traits should nonetheless be retained because it is only necessary for collections of traits (i. This sample was diagnostically heterogeneous. Costa & McCrae.. if not all. SD = 10.. Investigating the relation of individual PD traits to impairment is consistent with First and colleagues’ (2004) call for increased attention to clinical utility. 1997). medical-school affiliated. affective disorders. (c) association with FFM personality traits. Seventy patients (35%) also met criteria for one or more Axis II PD diagnoses—all ten PDs were represented. Moreover. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R. Spitzer. METHOD PARTICIPANTS The sample consisted of 203 patients (108 men. & Williams. MEASUREMENT AND PROCEDURE Patients were evaluated in an assessment and consultation service and interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. it is important to consider whether these indicators describe psychopathology. composed of patients with a variety of Axis I diagnoses. most. In this study we attempt to replicate previous investigations examining the PD criterial traits. and (d) ratings of functional impairment. including alcohol dependence. Axis I Disorders (SCID-I/P. specific PDs) to be associated with impairment.8) and 36 were inpatients (M age = 35. We would argue that as researchers increasingly cast doubt on the integrity of the DSM-IV PDs and instead turn to the individual traits as pathological trait indicators. 95 women) assessed at a large tertiary care. Gibbon. 1995) and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (SCID-II. of the individual PD traits are written in such a way to imply maladjustment and clinicians will in part decide whether a trait should be recorded as being present based on the extent to which it interferes with normal functioning. COSTA. SD = 11.4. but it is questionable whether they should be labeled pathological and regarded as such. somatoform disorder. anxiety disorders. 1992) is a 240-item questionnaire designed to measure the five major factors or domains of personality: Neuroticism (N). Extraversion (E). Open- . SD = 11. Gibbon. We extend evaluation of these earlier efforts beyond the issue of symptom-to-disorder diagnostic validity by examining each criterion in terms of (a) convergent validity. & Benjamin.

For Criterion . (II) the distinctiveness of each PD symptom relative to other PDs. Studies using the NEO PI-R and other measures have established that all five traits (a) show high rank-order stability over periods of many years. representing adequate symptom-todisorder coherence. Persons meeting self-report criteria for any given PD are then administered the corresponding portions of the SCID-II interview in order to assign a formal diagnosis. which did not include results from the personality assessment. (b) can be assessed by self-reports or the ratings of knowledgeable informants. and (d) are useful in the prediction of a variety of behaviors and outcomes. from vocational interests to longevity. the corrected item-total r. (c) are strongly heritable. For Criterion I. and Conscientiousness (C). Only scores for the main text PDs were used in this study.001.94. The inter-rater agreement was calculated using the intraclass reliability coefficient and was statistically significant. EVALUATION CRITERIA Each SCID-II/PQ item/symptom was examined using four evaluation criteria: (I) symptom-to-disorder coherence within a given PD. with modest to moderate agreement across these different sources. Each of the questions corresponds to a diagnostic criterion for either one of the main text PDs or the two additional PDs listed in Appendix B of DSM–IV (i. developmental. The GAF ratings were done after the SCID assessments and based on the information obtained during the interview and patients’ medical record file. After respondents have completed the questionnaire. Inter-rater reliability for the GAF was assessed using a sub-sample (n = 50) of the patient record files that were randomly extracted and then examined by an independent rater. and industrial/organizational psychology. First. For Criterion II. p < . Agreeableness (A). Interviewers also rated each of the patients using the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF)..20 were considered acceptable (Nunnally & Bernstein. traits of the FFM have assumed an increasingly prominent role in clinical. Each factor is defined further by six specific traits. Administration of the SCID-II follows a two-tiered procedure.e. the corrected item-total r calculated above was compared with the correlations between the symptom and other PDs. the interviewer identifies those personality disorders for which respondents endorsed sufficient criteria for a particular PD diagnosis. which uses a Yes/No response format.e. Interviewers were trained extensively in the SCID-I and SCID-II interviews. Because of these properties. Coefficients ≥ .EVALUATION OF THE SCID-II 629 ness to Experience (O). intraclass r = . each SCID-II symptom was correlated with the total score for the relevant PD— i. health.. 1994). and (IV) the association of each PD symptom with impairment. or facets. Passive-Aggressive and Depressive PD). (III) the relation of each PD symptom to one or more personality dimensions of the FFM. Symptoms correlating more highly with their own PD as compared with other PDs were considered sufficiently discriminating. respondents complete the 119-item SCID-II/PQ.

70. Fewer than 60. fewer than 60.0 62.4 Schizotypal (SZT) 17 63. range = 42. Schizoid.8 0.0% of the constituent items. Only one further diagnosis. COSTA. divergent validity. Finally.7%). symptoms were correlated with the 30 facets of the NEO-PI-R.9%.6 45.0 46.6 60. p < .6 Narcissistic (NAR) 17 64.5 42.7 70.630 RYDER. to personality dimension(s).0%).6 18. For the second criterion. Symptoms that correlated significantly (Bonferroni corrected (. Results for individual PD symptoms.5 85.6% of the SCID-II symptoms met the standard (Median = 64.0 Paranoid (PAR) 8 62.3 28. Criterion I = convergent validity. relation with personality traits. For the third criterion.7 Dependent (DEP) 8 62.0 11. with no PD criterion set showing an association with impairment for every symptom. RESULTS & DISCUSSION Table 1 displays the summary statistics for the four evaluation criteria as applied to each of the ten PDs.9 35.0 100. 57. can be reviewed in the appendices. including every criterion of Obsessive-Compulsive PD and Schizoid PD.6 44. showed divergent validity for more than 60. Obsessive-Compulsive.0 Avoidant (AVD) 7 57.3%. for Criterion IV.9 36. relation to functional impairment. TABLE 1.5 Obsessive-Compulsive (OBC) 9 100.5 50.5 37.0%). For the first criterion. range = 18.5 0.4%. Summary of Criteria Evaluation Set for 10 DSM-IV Personality Disorders Personality Disorders SCID-II PD Scale # Items Criterion I Criterion II Criterion III Criterion IV 13. On the other hand. Significant correlations were considered to show adequate evidence of a relation with functional impairment.0 Histrionic (HST) 7 42.9% to 100. 53.0 71.1 57.2% to 87.2% of the SCID-II symptoms met the standard (Median = 56. Every diagnosis other than Borderline PD showed a lack of association with impairment for the majority of its constituent items. for the fourth criterion.6% to 100. Criterion II = divergent validity. with no PD criterion set showing an association with FFM traits for every symptom. range = 28.4 relation Antisocial (ATS) 15 73. Paranoid.0% to 60.05/30). symptoms were correlated with the GAF ratings.8% of the SCID-II symptoms met the standard (Median = 12. Finally. range = 0.0 12.0 60.2% of the SCID-II symptoms met the standard (Median = 48. and no association was found for any symptom of Histrionic or Obsessive-Compulsive PD. Criterion IV = relation to impairment.0 28. convergent validity.9 28.7 80.0 12.1 Borderline (BDL) 15 80.2%.4 Note.0% of the Histrionic PD and Avoidant PD items did so.7 85.002) with one or more facets were considered adequately related to the universe of general personality traits. and Schizotypal PDs were associated with FFM traits.5 Schizoid (SCZ) 7 100.4 50. including every symptom of Obsessive-Compulsive PD. AND BAGBY III.0%). Schizoid PD. 46.0% of the items for Antisocial.2 Criterion III = . grouped within each of the 10 PDs. 21.

To do so. The result of this process might be a revised set of symptoms that preserve the current PDs while simultaneously responding to many of the criticisms that have been leveled at this system. Many of the PD traits were related to FFM personality traits.e. Specific traits that were unrelated to their parent disorder and/or were more closely related to a different disorder should be modified or even eliminated from the PD system. compromising their clinical utility (i. rewriting. The goal here would not be to generate a set of more coherent PDs to facilitate categorical diagnosis. we would recommend focusing first on Criteria I and II. The next step would be to examine Criteria III and IV. Such an undertaking would expand our understanding of personality psychopathology beyond the PDs while grounding this understanding in a wellestablished and thoroughly research model of personality traits. At the same time. This study provides a strategy.. A few disorders do show a more tenuous link with personality.EVALUATION OF THE SCID-II 631 In general.. to ensure that each PD criterion relates both to personality and to disorder—i. but it would no longer be necessary for them to defer to the current problematic PD categories. More problematic was divergent validity (i. We believe that the strategy could be used to modify and improve the PD system where needed. Many of the traits showing acceptable associations with their parent disorder had higher associations with other disorders.e. we have doubts about whether this goal could be achieved. given that more than half of the symptoms currently fail to meet both Criteria I and II—suggesting that a significant overhaul would be required to ‘rebuild’ the ten PDs needed to retain the current structure. and might require the addition.. Criterion III). suggesting at least that a qualitative difference exists between these constructs and extremes of normal personality and raising the possibility that perhaps these constructs are not. Indeed. Criterion IV).e. Far fewer PD symptoms were related to impairment. most of the PD traits were found to be related to their parent disorder (i. and focus exclusively on Criteria III and IV. suggesting that most PDs are composed of symptoms that reflect personality (i. for evaluating PD traits. Criterion II). our knowledge of basic personality and the FFM would be enriched by explicit inclusion of psychopathology. should be moved to Axis I. We would instead hope to identify PD traits that could be integrated into a comprehensive dimensional system incorporating both normal and abnormal personality.. Such overlap surely contributes to the high rates of co-occurrence among PDs that are commonly reported..e. An alternative strategy might be to abandon the effort to relate PD traits to the existing 10 disorders. Criterion I).e. Such traits should be related to FFM traits (Criterion III) and to impairment (Criterion IV). anchored to fundamental principles related to diagnostic validity. Changes in the item pool might also be required. or elimination of items. . to traits associated with impairment. Doing so would ensure that each PD is composed of a coherent and relatively nonoverlapping set of symptoms.

Are there many people you can’t forgive because they did or said something to you a long time ago? 1 47. do you often get the feeling that you are being watched or stared at? 52. Have you often suspected that your spouse or partner has been unfaithful? 0 Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits 5/8 Percentage of traits meeting criterion 62.5% 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 7/7 100% 1 1 1 1 0 5/7 71. Does it seem that objects or shadows are really people or animals or that noises are actually people’s voices? 56. Do you believe that you have a “sixth sense” that allows you to know and predict things that others can’t? 55. Have you had personal experiences with the supernatural? 54. Have you had the sense that some person of force is around you. Do you often have to keep an eye out to stop people from using you or hurting you? 1 42. When you are around people.5% 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 4/8 50. do you often feel that they are talking about you? 50. Do you often get the feeling that things that have no special meaning to most people are really meant to give you a message? 51. even though you cannot see anyone? 57. Do you find that it is best not to let other people know much about you because they will use it against you? 1 44. Does it NOT matter to you what people think of you? 65. Do you often see auras or energy fields around people? 58. When you are out in public and see people talking.4% 1 0 1 0 0 2/7 28. Are there very few people that you’re really close to outside of your immediate family? 60. Is it NOT important to you whether you have any close relationships? 61. Do you spend a lot of time wondering if you can trust your friends or the people that you work with? 1 43. Are there really very few things that give you pleasure? 64. AND BAGBY APPENDIX SCID-II-Q Self-Report Question (PD trait) I Paranoid Personality 41.6% 0 0 1 0 1 3/7 42.9% 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .632 RYDER.0% 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1/8 12. COSTA. Do you often detect hidden threats or insults in things people say or do? 1 45. Could you be content without ever being sexually involved with anyone? 63. Do you find that nothing makes you very happy or very sad? Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits Percentage of traits meeting criterion Schizotypal Personality 49. Would you almost always rather do things alone than with other people? 62. Do you often get angry or lash out when someone criticizes or insults you in some way? 0 48. Are there very few people that you’re really close to outside of your immediate family? II III IV 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 3/8 37.5% Schizoid Personality 58. Are you the kind of person who holds grudges or takes a long time to forgive people who have insulted or slighted you? 0 46. Have you ever felt that you could make things happen just by making a wish or thinking about them? 53.

like a bat. or forge someone’s signature? 0 117. would you bully or threaten other kids? 1 106. Before you were 15. or touch you sexually? 0 112. Before you were 15.45 III 1 2/11 18. long after the time you were supposed to be home? 1 119. Have you often done things impulsively? 97. Have you ever cut. did you torture or hurt animals on purpose? 0 110. and so on? 96. Have you often become frantic when you thought that someone you really cared about was going to leave you? 91. did you sometimes steal or shoplift things. Do your relationships with people you really care about have lots of extreme ups and downs? 92. Before you were 15. did you rob. or cars? 1 115. Before you were 15. so that you sometimes don’t know who you really are? 95. Do you have a lot of sudden mood changes? 100.6% Antisocial Personality 105. Before you were 13. did you often skip school? 1 Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits 11/15 Percentage of traits meeting criterion 73% Borderline Personality 90. Are you different with different people or in different situations. did you run away from home and stay away overnight? 1 118. did you often stay out very late. Before you were 15. Before you were 15. brick. Before you were 15. did you deliberately torture someone or cause someone physical pain and suffering? 1 109. religious beliefs. Before you were 15. broken bottle. Have you tried to hurt or kill yourself or threatened to do so? 98.2% 633 IV 1 4/11 36. Before you were 15. career plans. to get undressed in front of you. mug. Have there been lots of sudden changes in you goals. Does your sense of who you are often change dramatically? 94. Before you were 15. or forcibly take something from someone by threatening him or her? 1 111. Do you often feel nervous when you are with other people? 1 Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits 7/11 Percentage of traits meeting criterion 63. Before you were 15. did you lie a lot or “con” other people? 1 116. Do you often feel empty inside? II 0 5/11 45. Before you were 15.EVALUATION OF THE SCID-II SCID-II-Q Self-Report Question (PD trait) I 59. did you break into houses.7% 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2/15 13. would you start fights? 1 107. did you hurt or threaten someone with a weapon. did you force someone to have sex with you.3% 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 . Have you all of a sudden changed your sense of who you are and where you are headed? 93. Before you were 15. burned or scratched yourself on purpose? 99. knife or gun? 1 108. other buildings. did you deliberately destroy things that weren’t yours? 0 114.4% 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 9/15 60% 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 7/15 46. did you set fires? 1 113. Before you were 13.

COSTA.6% III 1 1 1 1 12/15 80% 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 6/7 85. Is it important to you that people pay attention to you or admire you in some way? 0 80. Do you think that it’s not necessary to follow certain rules or social conventions when they get in your way? 1 81. AND BAGBY I 1 1 1 1 12/15 80% II 0 0 0 0 7/15 46. Have people told you that you have too high an opinion of yourself? 1 75. When you are under a lot of stress.3% 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 12/17 70. Do you think a lot about the power. Do you try to draw attention to yourself by the way you dress or look? 1 70. do you get suspicious of other people or feel especially spaced out? Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits Percentage of traits meeting criterion RYDER. Have people complained to you that you don’t listen to them or care about their feelings? 1 87. Do you often have to put your needs above other people’s? 1 84. When you have a problem.8% . Do you think about the perfect romance that will be yours someday? 0 77. Are you NOT really interested in other people’s problems or feelings? 0 86. Do you feel it is important to spend time with people who are special or influential? 1 79. Do you feel that you are the kind of person who deserves special treatment? 0 82. Do you often make a point of being dramatic and colorful? 1 71. Do you feel that others are often envious of you? 1 89. Do you flirt a lot? 0 68.7% 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2/7 28.7% IV 1 1 0 1 9/15 60% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0/7 0% Histrionic Personality 66. Do you often expect other people to do what you ask without question because of who you are? 1 85. Do you hit people or throw things when you get angry? 103.9% Narcissistic Personality 73. do you almost always insist on seeing the top person? 1 78. Do you find that there are very few people that are worth your time and attention? 0 Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits 11/17 Percentage of traits meeting criterion 64. Do you often find it necessary to step on a few toes to get what you want? 1 83. Do you like to be the center of attention? 0 67. Do people often fail to appreciate your very special talents or accomplishments? 0 74. Do even little things get you very angry? 104. Are you often envious of others? 1 88. Do you often find yourself “coming on” to people? 1 69.7% 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6/17 35. Do you often change your mind about things depending on the people you’re with or what you have just read or seen on TV? 0 72.634 SCID-II-Q Self-Report Question (PD trait) 101. fame or recognition that will be yours someday? 1 76. Do you often have temper outbursts or get so angry that you lose control? 102. Do you have a lot of friends that are you very close to? 0 Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits 3/7 Percentage of traits meeting criterion 42.6% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 3/17 11.

Do you have trouble throwing things out because they might come in handy some day? 1 1 1 0 21. Have other people told you that you are stubborn or rigid? 1 1 0 0 Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits 9/9 9/9 4/9 0/9 Percentage of traits meeting criterion 100% 100% 44.7% 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2/8 28. Do you depend on other people to handle important areas in your life such as finances. IV = relation to impairment. do you feel you immediately have to find someone else to take care of you? 0 15.1% Dependent Personality 8. III = relation to personality dimension(s). or as attractive as most other people? 1 7. Do you avoid getting involved with people unless you are certain they like you? 1 3. Are you usually quiet when you meet new people? 0 6. Are you often so sure you are right that it doesn’t matter what other people say? 1 1 0 0 24.5% Obsessive—Compulsive Personality 16. Do you or other people feel that you are so devoted to work (or school) that you have no time left for anyone else or for just having fun? 1 1 1 0 19. Do you worry a lot about being left alone to take care of yourself? 1 Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits 5/8 Percentage of traits meeting criterion 62.EVALUATION OF THE SCID-II SCID-II-Q Self-Report Question (PD trait) I Avoidant Personality 1. II = divergent validity. as smart.5% II III 635 IV 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 4/7 57. Is it hard for you to spend money on yourself and other people even when you have enough? 1 1 0 0 23. Is it hard for you to let other people help you unless they agree to do things exactly the way you want? 1 1 0 0 22. Do you have trouble finishing jobs because you spend so much time trying to get things exactly right? 1 1 0 0 18. Do you find it hard to be “open” even with people you are close to? 0 4. or living arrangements? 1 10. childcare. .5% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1/8 12. Do you need a lot of advice or reassurance from others before you can make everyday decisions—like what to wear or what to order in a restaurant? 1 9. Do you usually feel uncomfortable when you are by yourself? 1 14. Do you find it hard to start or work on tasks when there is no one to help you? 1 12. Have you often volunteered to do things that are unpleasant? 0 13. Have you avoided jobs or tasks that involved having to deal with a lot of people? 1 2. order. I = convergent validity. Do you believe that you’re not as good.1% 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 6/7 85. and organization or likes to make lists and schedules? 1 1 1 0 17. Do you have very high standards about what is right and what is wrong? 1 1 1 0 20.4% 0% Note. When a close relationship ends. Do you often worry about being criticized or rejected in social situations? 1 5. Are you the kind of person who focuses on details. Do you find it hard to disagree with people even when you think they are wrong? 0 11.6% 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 4/8 50% 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 5/8 62. Are you afraid to try new things? 0 Ratio: Number of traits meeting criterion to overall number of traits 4/7 Percentage of traits meeting criterion 57.

D.. Shea. Depression and Anxiety. (1997). & McCrae... Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. Jr. Nunnally. H. Skodol. borderline.. Pincus.. L. 1135–1139. M. 10. T. M. J. Hilsenroth. 1055–1085.. Revised NEO personality inventory: Professional manual. 175–182. H. & Williams. Livesley... A. and diagnostic efficiency of criteria sets for DSM-IV schizotypal. H. Odessa. (2003). Skodol... Journal of Personality Disorders. T. & Costa. A. & Bernstein. M. M.. 256–264.W.. C. avoidant. J. and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders. 27. C.. Blais. A. E.. Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality. & Widiger. J. 161.). P. S. C.. H. A. Costa. COSTA. Agostoni. Ryder. Spitzer. (1997).. S.. DC: American Psychiatric Press. D. M.B.. M. M. L. B. Version 2. Using clinical utility as a criterion for revising psychiatric diagnoses. G. Replicating the five-factor model of personality in a psychiatric sample. Blais. Interrater reliability and internal consistency of the structured clinical interview for DSM-IV axis II personality disorders (SCID-II). L.. A. Joffe. AND BAGBY REFERENCES Bagby. T. L. & Morey... R. G. M. (2001). Psychometric Theory (3rd ed. A. A. First. & Benjamin. Clark. Journal of Personality Disorders. & Castlebury. version 2. B. T.. et al. G. Personality disorder assessment: The challenge of construct validity. M. Co-occurrence of mood and personality disorders: A report from the collaborative longitudinal personality disorders study (CLPS). (2002). I. Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective (2nd ed. (1999).. & Schuller.. The five-factor model and personality disorder empirical literature: A meta-analytic review. Jr. Williams.. T. (1995). McGlashan. Sanislow. D.). R. Saulsman.. L. McCrae. T. M.. R. 337–352... J.0. (1997).. (2004). T. P. T. Barraco. T. & Widiger. 11. C. 10. Gunderson. (2001). G. Skodol. FL: Psychological Assessment Resources... 168–176. Stout. Fossati. Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV Axis I disorders—Patient edition. Gunderson... Morey. D. Morey. L. A. C. C. F. 23. A..B. 401–412. A psychometric evaluation of the DSM-IV personality disorder criteria. M.. 205–231. et al. Washington. First. R. B. 279–284.. Psychometric characteristics of the cluster B personality disorders under DSM-III-R and DSM-IV. R. The collaborative longitudinal personality disorders study: Baseline Axis I/II and II/II diagnostic co-occurrence.. et al. H. Gibbon. Journal of Abnormal Psychology.. Spitzer. T. R. G. & Norman. T. (2000). Shea.. R. Shea. intercriterion overlap. McGlashan. Harvard Review of Psychiatry.. 19. & Young... R. An expert consensus approach. M. & Peele. 11. E. B. (1997). The overlap of depressive personality disorder and dysthymia: A categorical problem with a dimensional solution. E. Deborah. Bagnato. P. C. M. L. Journal of Personality Disorders. Gunderson.. 946–954. E. A. T. 11. H. H. 104. Jr. McGlashan.B. McCrae. Williams. & Page.. C. D. R. Personality and Individual Differences. L. Costa Jr. (1997). J. The collaborative longitudinal personality disorders study (CLPS): Overview and implications. First. et al. Journal of Personality Disorders. L. Grilo. Ustun. C. Grilo. Gunderson. Journal of Personality Disorders. Shea. Costa.0. R. SCID-II Personality Questionnaire. J. M.. C. Levine. New York: Guilford. Clinical Psychology Review. A. Bagby.. Livesley. 102. (1994). M. DC: American Psychological Association. Kennedy. 11. J. T.. J. R.. 487–504. I. 264–272. New York: McGraw-Hill. A. A. Grilo.. J. W. J. T. Maffei... 270–278. R... P. (1992). M. et al. A. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. R. Using the five-factor model to represent the DSM-IV personality disorders.W. New York: New York Biometrics Research Department. 110. (2005). American Journal of Psychiatry..W. Skodol. L. R. Morey. (2002). J. B. McGlashan.. Gibbon.. W. Internal consistency. (1999)... A.636 RYDER. Levitan.. T.. J... A. Washington. M. K... L. M. M. . (2004). Lynam. T.. R. J.

. A.. M. 23–44). A. Widiger. C. Widiger. 113. 39. (2004). F. Jr.. J. M. DC: American Psychological Association. T.. Widiger (Eds. Gunderson. Costa. (1997). Skodol. T. Finch. 637 Widiger. . & T. & Frances. A. A. & M. Adult Psychopathology and Diagnosis (3rd ed.. T. Sanislow. 3–23). (2005).. pp. Hersen (Eds. E. J. Journal of Research in Personality.. Mental disorders as discrete clinical conditions: Dimensional versus categorical classification. et al. G. T.. 67–83. Five factor model of personality disorder: Integrating science and practice. In S. C.. Toward a dimensional model for the personality disorders. Turner. A.) Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality (2nd ed. New York: Wiley. pp. B. 217–227. Washington. (2002). Morey.EVALUATION OF THE SCID-II Warner. The longitudinal relationship of personality traits and disorders.. A. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. A.). L. In P.