22
Personality and Personality Disorders Please find below a list of disorders in the diagnostic class Personality Disorders. The Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group has been responsible for addressing these disorders. You will find that the work group has recommended a significant reformulation of the approach to the assessment and diagnosis of personality psychopathology, including the proposal of a revised general category of personality disorder, and the provision for clinicians to rate dimensions of personality traits, a limited set of personality types, and the overall severity of personality dysfunction. Accordingly, the structure of this section of the Web site is necessarily somewhat different from those of the other disorders. Changes to the Reformulation of Personality Disorders for DSM-5 (Updated January 21, 2011) A hybrid dimensional-categorical model for personality and personality disorder assessment and diagnosis has been proposed for DSM-5 field testing. Since its original posting on the APA’s DSM-5 Web site in February of 2010, the model has been simplified and streamlined in response to comments received and to critiques in the published literature. In its current iteration, ratings from three assessments combine to comprise the essential criteria for a personality disorder : (1) A rating of mild impairment or greater on the Levels of Personality Functioning (criterion A), (2) A rating of (a) a “good match” or “very good match” to a Personality Disorder Type or (b) “quite a bit” or “extremely” descriptive on one or more of six Personality Trait Domains (criterion B). (3) Diagnosis also requires relative stability of (1) and (2) across time and situations, and excludes culturally normative personality features and those due to the direct physiological effects of a substance or a general medical condition.

APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

Personality and Personality DisordersPlease find below a list of disorders in the diagnostic class Personality Disorders. The Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group has been responsible for addressing these disorders. You will find that the work group has recommended a significant reformulation of the approach to the assessment and diagnosis of personality psychopathology, including the proposal of a revised general category of personality disorder, and the provision for clinicians to rate dimensions of personality traits, a limited set of personality types, and the overall severity of personality dysfunction. Accordingly, the structure of this section of the Web site is necessarily somewhat different from those of the other disorders.

Changes to the Reformulation of Personality Disorders for DSM-5 (Updated January 21, 2011)

A hybrid dimensional-categorical model for personality and personality disorder assessment and diagnosis has been proposed for DSM-5 field testing. Since its original posting on the APA’s DSM-5 Web site in February of 2010, the model has been simplified and streamlined in response to comments received and to critiques in the published literature.

In its current iteration, ratings from three assessments combine to comprise the essential criteria for a personality disorder:

(1)  A rating of mild impairment or greater on the Levels of Personality Functioning (criterion A),

(2)  A rating of

(a)  a “good match” or “very good match” to a Personality Disorder Type or (b)  “quite a bit” or “extremely” descriptive on one or more of six Personality Trait Domains (criterion B).

(3)  Diagnosis also requires relative stability of (1) and (2) across time and situations, and excludes culturally normative personality features and those due to the direct physiological effects of a substance or a general medical condition.

The levels of personality functioning are based on the severity of disturbances in self and interpersonal functioning. Disturbances in thinking about the self are reflected in dimensions of identity and self-directedness. Interpersonal disturbances consist of impairments in empathy and intimacy. The five disorder types (e.g., borderline, obsessive compulsive) are combinations of core personality pathology, personality traits, and behaviors. Six broad personality trait domains (e.g., disinhibition and compulsivity) are defined, as well as component trait facets (e.g., impulsivity and perfectionism). Levels of personality functioning, the degree of correspondence between a patient’s personality (disorder) and a type, and personality trait domains and facets are all dimensional ratings.

The personality domain in DSM-5 is intended to describe the personality characteristics of all patients, whether they have a personality disorder or not. The assessment “telescopes” the clinician’s attention from a global rating of the overall severity of impairment in personality functioning through increasing degrees of detail and specificity in describing personality psychopathology that can be pursued depending on constraints of time and information and on expertise.

Page 2: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

Personality Disorder Types

The essential features of a personality disorder are impairments in identity and sense of self and in the capacity for effective interpersonal functioning. To diagnose a personality disorder, the impairments must meet all of the following criteria:

A.    A rating of mild impairment or greater in self and interpersonal functioning on the Levels of Personality Functioning.

B.    Associated with a “good match” or “very good match” to a personality disorder type or with a rating of “quite a bit like the trait” or “extremely like the trait” on one or more personality trait domains.

C.    Relatively stable across time and consistent across situations.

D.    Not better understood as a norm within an individual’s dominant culture.

E.    Not solely due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, medication) or a general medical condition (e.g., severe head trauma).

Rationale for Definition and General Diagnostic Criteria for Personality Disorder 

Prepared by W. John Livesley, M.D., Ph.D.

The proposed classification will retain the diagnosis of personality disorder but change diagnostic criteria because the DSM-IV criteria are poorly defined and not specific to personality disorder.  Incorporation of dimensional classification into DSM-V necessitates the use of criteria for general personality disorder that are distinct from trait dimensions, because an extreme position on a trait dimension is a necessary but not sufficient condition to diagnose personality disorder (Wakefield, 1992; 2008). Literature reviews revealed a few systematic definitions that clearly differentiated personality disorder from trait extremity (Livesley, 2003; Livesley & Jang, 2005).  A literature review indicated that personality disorder implies pervasive disorganization in personality structure and functioning that is manifested as a broad failure to develop important personality structures and capacities needed for adaptive functioning. These adaptive failures are manifested as: (1) the failure to develop coherent sense of self or identity; and (2) chronic interpersonal dysfunction (Livesley, 1998). Evaluation of self pathology will be based on criteria indexing three major developmental dimensions in the emergence of a sense of self: differentiation of self-understanding or self-knowledge (integrity of self-concept), integration of this information into a coherent identity (identity integration), and the ability to set and attain satisfying and rewarding personal goals that give direction, meaning, and purpose to life (self-directedness). These dimensions capture important aspects of self and identity problems described in the clinical literature (see Cloninger, 2000; Horowitz, 1979; Kernberg, 1984; Kohut, 1971) in a format that is consistent with cognitive approaches to personality. Interpersonal pathology is evaluated using criteria indexing failure to develop the capacity for empathy, sustained intimacy and attachment (labeled intimacy in the proposal), prosocial and cooperative behavior (labeled cooperativeness in the proposal) and complex and integrated representations of others. This component reflects a second emphasis in the clinical literature (see Rutter, 1987; Benjamin, 1996).

Page 3: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

Levels of Personality Functioning

The Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group has simplified its measure of severity of impairment in personality functioning in response to feedback from the original posting in February 2010. 

Personality psychopathology fundamentally emanates from disturbances in thinking about self and others. Because there are greater and lesser degrees of disturbance of the self and interpersonal domains, the following continuum comprised of levels of self and interpersonal functioning is provided for assessing individual patients.

Each level is characterized by typical functioning in the following areas:

Self1.     Identity: Experience of oneself as unique, with clear boundaries between self and others; coherent sense of

time and personal history; stability and accuracy of self-appraisal and self-esteem; capacity for a range of emotional experience and its regulation

2.     Self-direction: Pursuit of coherent and meaningful short-term and life goals; utilization of constructive and prosocial internal standards of behavior; ability to self-reflect productively

Interpersonal1.     Empathy: Comprehension and appreciation of others’ experiences and motivations; tolerance of differing

perspectives; understanding of social causality

2.     Intimacy: Depth and duration of connection with others; desire and capacity for closeness; mutuality of regard reflected in interpersonal behavior

In applying these dimensions, self and interpersonal difficulties should not be better understood as a norm within an individual’s dominant culture.

Self and Interpersonal Functioning Continuum

Although the degree of disturbance of the self and interpersonal domains is continuously distributed, in practice it is useful to consider levels of impairment in functioning for efficient clinical characterization and for treatment planning and prognosis. Patients’ conceptualization of self and others affects the nature of interaction with mental health professionals and can have a significant impact on treatment efficacy and outcome. The following continuum uses each of the dimensions listed above to differentiate five levels of self-interpersonal functioning impairment: No, Mild, Moderate, Serious, and Extreme.

Please indicate the level that most closely characterizes the patient’s functioning in the self and interpersonal realms:

_____ 0 = No Impairment 

_____ 1 = Mild Impairment 

_____ 2 = Moderate Impairment 

_____ 3 = Serious Impairment 

_____ 4 = Extreme Impairment

Page 4: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

  

Definitions of Levels:

0 = No Impairment:

Self:

Identity: Has ongoing awareness of a unique, volitional self, integrated into past and ongoing personal history. Sense of individuality is not compromised in relationships. Able to recognize and maintain role-appropriate boundaries. Relatively consistent and self-regulated level of positive self-esteem. Accurate or slightly positively biased self-appraisal. Capable of experiencing, tolerating, and regulating a range of emotions.

Self-direction: Able to set and aspire to reasonable goals based on a realistic assessment of personal capacities. Utilizes appropriate and effective standards of behavior, and is able to attain fulfillment in multiple realms. Can reflect on, and make constructive meaning of, internal experience.

Interpersonal:

Empathy: Capable of accurately understanding the full range of others’ experiences in most situations. Comprehends and appreciates others’ perspectives, even if disagreeing. Is aware of the effect of own actions on others.

Intimacy: Desires and engages in multiple caring, close and reciprocal relationships in personal and community life. Flexibly responds to a range of others’ ideas, emotions and behaviors, striving for cooperation and mutual benefit.

 

1 = Mild Impairment:

Self:

Identity: Relatively intact sense of self that is unique and grounded in personal history, with some decrease in effectiveness and clarity of interpersonal boundaries when strong emotions and mental conflict are experienced. Self-esteem is somewhat well-regulated, although self-appraisal may be overly or insufficiently self-critical. Emotional experience may be inhibited or restricted in range, and strong emotions may be distressing.

Self-direction: Goal-directed, but may be excessively or somewhat maladaptively so, somewhat goal-inhibited, or conflicted. May have an unrealistic or socially inappropriate set of personal standards, limiting some aspects of fulfillment. Able to reflect upon internal experiences, but may overemphasize a single (e.g., intellectual, emotional) type of self-knowledge rather than integrate all types.

Interpersonal:

Empathy: Somewhat compromised in the ability to appreciate and understand others’ experiences and differing perspectives. May tend to see others as having unreasonable expectations or a wish for control. Inconsist awareness of the effect of own behavior on others.

Intimacy: Capacity and desire to form intimate and reciprocal relationships, but may be inhibited in meaningful expression and sometimes constrained by any intense emotion or conflict. Ability to cooperate may be constrained by unrealistic standards. Somewhat limited in the ability to respect or respond to the full range of others’ ideas, emotions and behaviors.

Page 5: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

 

2 = Moderate Impairment:

Self:

Identity: Excessive other-dependent identity definition, with somewhat compromised boundary delineation, a less differentiated sense of uniqueness, and inconsistency in sense of personal history. Vulnerable self-esteem controlled by exaggerated attunement to external evaluation, with a wish for approval and admiration from other people. Sense of incompleteness or inferiority, with inflated or deflated self-appraisal. Emotional regulation is predicated on the availability of others in specific ways and/or success in situations that bring external positive appraisal. Threats to self-esteem may engender strong emotions such as rage and shame.

Self-direction: Goals are more often a means of gaining external approval than self-generated, and thus may lack coherence and/or stability. Personal standards may be unreasonably high (e.g., a need to be special or please others) or too low (e.g., not consonant with prevailing social values). Fulfillment is compromised by a sense of lack of authenticity. Impaired capacity to reflect upon internal experience.

Interpersonal:

Empathy: Compromised ability to consider alternative perspectives; hyper-attuned to the experience of others, but only with respect to perceived relevance to self. Generally unaware of or unconcerned about effect of own behavior on others, or unrealistic appraisal of own effect.

Intimacy: Capacity and desire to form relationships, but connections may be superficial and limited to meeting self-regulatory and self-esteem needs. Compromised in ability to respond appropriately to others; conversely has unrealistic expectation of being magically and perfectly understood by others. Tends not to view relationships in reciprocal terms, and cooperates predominantly for personal gain.

 

3 = Serious Impairment:

Self:

Identity: Sense of unique personal attributes is dysregulated, accompanied by confusion or lack of continuity in personal history. Weak sense of autonomy/agency, and may experience a lack of identity, or emptiness. Boundary definition is poor or rigid; may be over identification with others, overemphasis on independence from others, or vacillation between these. Fragile self-concept, easily influenced by events and circumstances, and lacking coherence. Self-appraisal is un-nuanced: self-loathing, self-aggrandizing, or an illogical, unrealistic combination. Emotions may be rapidly shifting or a chronic, unwavering feeling of despair.

Self-direction: Difficulty establishing and/or achieving personal goals. Internal standards for behavior are unclear, contradictory, and/or circumstantial. Life is experienced as meaningless or dangerous. Compromised ability to reflect upon and understand one’s own mental processes.

Interpersonal:

Empathy: Ability to consider and understand the thoughts, feelings and behavior of other people is significantly limited. May discern very specific aspects of others’ experience, particularly vulnerabilities and suffering, and destructive motivations are often misattributed to others. Generally unable to consider alternative perspectives, or threatened by a different perspective. Confusion or unawareness of social causality, including the impact of one’s actions on others.

Page 6: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

Intimacy: Relationships are based on a strong belief in the absolute need for the intimate other(s), and/or expectations of instability, abandonment, and/or abuse. Feelings about intimate involvement with others are unstable, alternating between fear/ rejection and desperate desire for connection. Little mutuality: others are conceptualized primarily in terms of how they affect the self (negatively or positively); focused on what (negative or positive) others have to offer. Cooperative efforts are often disrupted due to the perception of slights from others.

 

4 = Extreme Impairment:

Self:

Identity: Experience of a unique self is virtually absent as is any sense of continuity of personal history. A sense of agency/autonomy is virtually absent, or is organized around perceived external persecution. Boundaries with others are confused or lacking. Diffuse self-concept, prone to significant distortions in self-appraisal. Personal motivations may be unrecognized and/or experienced as external to self. Hatred and aggression may be dominant affects, are disorganizing, and often disavowed and projected.

Self-direction: Poor differentiation of thoughts from actions, so goal-setting ability is severely compromised, goals often are unrealistic, and goal-setting is incoherent. Internal standards for behavior are virtually lacking. Genuine fulfillment is elusive and virtually inconceivable. Profound inability to constructively reflect upon one’s experience. 

Interpersonal:

Empathy: Pronounced inability to consider and understand others’ experience and motivation. Attention to others' perspectives virtually absent (attention is hypervigilant, focused on need-fulfillment and harm avoidance). Social interactions can be confusing and disorienting.

Intimacy: Desire for affiliation is limited because of profound disinterest or expectation of harm. Engagement with others is detached, disorganized, or consistently negative. Relationships are conceptualized primarily as power based, and considered in terms of their ability to provide comfort or inflict pain and suffering. Social/interpersonal behavior is not reciprocal; rather, it represents fundamental approach (e.g., fulfillment of basic needs) and avoidance (e.g., escape from pain) tendencies.

Page 7: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

Personality Disorder Types The Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group proposes five specific personality disorder types, to be rated on a dimension of degree of fit. The five specific types are as follows:

Antisocial/Psychopathic Type

Avoidant Type

Borderline Type

Obsessive-Compulsive Type

Schizotypal Type

Each type is comprised of core personality pathology, personality traits, and behaviors. The other DSM-IV Personality Disorders and the large residual category of Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified will be represented solely by the core components combined with specification by personality traits, based on their most prominent descriptive features. See DSM-IV Personality Disorder/DSM-5 Trait Cross-Walk for the representation of all DSM-IV Personality Disorders by the currently proposed set of DSM-5 traits.

Rationale for Proposing Five Specific Personality Disorder Types 

Prepared by Andrew E. Skodol, M.D.

The proposal for specified PD types in DSM-V has four main features: 1) a reduction in the number of specified types from 10 to 5; 2) description of the types in a narrative format that combines typical deficits in self and interpersonal functioning and particular trait configurations; 3) a dimensional graded membership rating of the degree to which a patient matches each type; and 4) a rating of the personality traits most commonly associated each personality type.  The justifications for these modifications in approach to diagnosing PD types include the excessive co-morbidity among DSM-IV personality disorders, the limited validity for some existing types, arbitrary diagnostic thresholds included in DSM-IV, and instability of current DSM-IV PD criteria sets. 

Considerable research has shown excessive co-occurrence among personality disorders diagnosed using the categorical system of the DSM (Oldham et al., 1992; Zimmerman et al., 2005).  In fact, most patients diagnosed with personality disorders meet criteria for more than one.  In addition, all of the personality disorder categories have arbitrary diagnostic thresholds, i.e., the number of criteria necessary for a diagnosis.  PD diagnoses have been shown in longitudinal follow-along studies to be significantly less stable over time than their definition in DSM-IV implies (e.g., Grilo et al., 2004). The reduction in the number of types is expected to reduce co-morbid PD diagnoses, the use of a dimensional rating of types recognizes that personality psychopathology occurs on continua, and the replacement of behavioral PD criteria with traits is anticipated to result in greater diagnostic stability.

Number and Specification of Types

Five specific PDs are being recommended for retention in DSM-V: borderline, antisocial/psychopathic (possibly with subtypes), schizotypal, avoidant, and obsessive-compulsive.  Borderline, antisocial/psychopathic, and schizotypal PDs have the most extensive empirical evidence of validity and clinical utility (e.g., Skodol et al., 2002a; 2002b; Patrick et al., 2009; Siever & Davis, 2004).  For example, severe PD types, such as schizotypal and borderline, have been found to have significantly more impairment at work, in social relationships, and at leisure than patients with less severe types, such as obsessive-compulsive disorder, or with major depressive disorder in the absence of personality disorder. Avoidant PD was in between.  Even the less impaired patients

Page 8: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

with personality disorders (e.g., obsessive-compulsive), however, have moderate to severe impairment in at least one area of functioning (or a Global Assessment of Functioning rating of 60 or less) (Skodol et al. 2002).  Patients with OCPD are also among the most common in community (Grant et al., 2004) and clinical (Stuart et al., 1998) populations, have increased levels of mental heath treatment utilization (Bender et al., 2001), and along with borderline PD, are associated with the highest total economic burden in terms of direct medical costs and productivity losses of all PDs (Soeteman et al., 2008).

With respect to current models of psychopathy (Patrick et al., 2009), the proposed trait-based prototype for antisocial/psychopathic PD would include both traits related to the disinhibition component (i.e., traits corresponding most directly to the adult features of DSM-IV ASPD) and traits related to the construct of meanness (i.e., traits related to callousness/lack of remorse, conning/manipulativeness, predatory aggression, and excitement seeking).  There is abundant evidence that the impulsive-antisocial (disinhibited-externalizing) and affective-interpersonal (boldness-meanness) components of psychopathy differ in terms of their neurobiological correlates and etiologic determinants. This existing evidence base provides a strong foundation formulating and testing questions in relation possible antisocial and psychopathic PD subtypes.

The other DSM-IV PDs (paranoid, schizoid, histrionic, narcissistic, dependent, depressive, and negativistic), and the residual category of PDNOS will be represented by the use of general PD criteria combined with descriptive specification by personality trait profiles, based on most prominent descriptive features, since the literature lends more support for conceptualizing them as one or more dimensions of personality psychopathology than as types.

Dimensional Representation of Types

A “person-centered” dimensional approach to existing categories is the prototype matching approach originally described by Shea et al. (1987).  Embedded in the Personality Assessment Form (PAF) are brief descriptive paragraphs emphasizing salient features of DSM-III personality disorders, with ratings of descriptiveness made for each disorder on a 6-point scale.  In the context of the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program, the factor structures of the clinician-rated PAF and an extensive self-report battery of personality traits were similar (Pilkonis & Frank, 1988) indicating construct validity. Patients with personality disorders according to the prototype matching had a significantly worse outcome in social functioning and were more likely to have residual symptoms of depression than were patients without personality disorders (Shea et al., 1990), similarly to results of longitudinal studies using standard DSM-IV diagnostic criteria assessed by semi-structured interview (Grilo et al., 2005; Skodol et al., 2005).

The prototype dimensional model has subsequently been empirically derived and elaborated by Schedler and Westen (Schedler & Westen, 2004; Westen et al., 2006). Twelve personality syndromes were identified from a large national sample of patients who were rated by clinicians using the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure-200 (SWAP-200) (Shedler & Westen, 2004; Westen & Schedler, 1999a, 1999b).  Each syndrome was then represented by a paragraph-length prototype description.  Using this system, a clinician compares a patient to the description of the prototypic patient with each disorder and the “match” is rated on a 5-point scale from 5= “very good match” to 1 = “little or no match.”  Prototype ratings have been demonstrated to have good inter-rater reliability.  Spitzer et al. (2008) conducted a study of the clinical relevance and utility of five dimensional systems for personality disorders that have been proposed for DSM-V: (1) a criteria counting model based on current DSM-IV diagnostic criteria, (2) a prototype matching model based on current DSM-IV diagnostic criteria, (3) a prototype matching model based on the SWAP, (4) the Five-Factor Model, and (5) Cloninger’s Psychobiological Model.  A random national sample of psychiatrists and psychologists applied all five systems to a patient under their care and rated the clinical utility of each system.  The two prototype matching models were judged most clinically useful and relevant.  The authors concluded that prototype matching systems most faithfully capture personality syndromes seen in practice and allow for rich descriptions without a proportionate increase in time or effort.

Rottman et al. (2009) found that clinicians made fewer correct diagnoses of personality disorders and more incorrect diagnoses when given ratings of patients on a list of the 30 facet traits of the FFM than when given prototype descriptions based on either the SWAP or DSM-IV criteria.  And, on most questions about clinical utility, including about treatment planning and prognosis, the prototype systems were rated as superior. 

Page 9: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

According to the authors, these findings indicate that personality traits in the absence of clinical context are too ambiguous for clinicians to interpret: although it may be possible to describe personality disorders in terms of the FFM, mentally translating personality traits back into syndromes or disorders is cognitively challenging.

Hybrid Model of Personality Disorder Diagnosis

Given that multiple candidate models have been suggested for the assessment of personality pathology in DSM-V, Morey et al. (under review) compared the stability and long-term predictive validity of three such models, the five-factor model (FFM), the SNAP, and DSM-IV personality disorders.  Participants from the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorder Study were followed for 10 years.  Test-retest correlations were computed for measures of each model to assess their stabilities. Baseline data were used to predict long-term outcomes including functioning, Axis I psychopathology, and medication use.  Traits were found to be more stable than disorders, even after correcting for short-term assessment dependability. Each model significantly incremented the other models to predict important clinical outcomes.  Overall, an approach integrating normative traits and personality disorders was most valid.  Within this model, DSM-IV antisocial, borderline, and schizotypal disorders and FFM extraversion and agreeableness provided specific incremental validity over other constructs in these systems, while the other FFM traits and personality disorders appeared to capture overlapping predictive information.  The results argue for a hybrid model combining specific PD types and personality traits.

301.7 Antisocial Personality Disorder

The work group is recommending that this disorder be reformulated as the Antisocial/Psychopathic Type.

Individuals who resemble this personality disorder type seek power over others and will manipulate, exploit, deceive, con, or otherwise take advantage, in order to inflict harm or to achieve their goals. An arrogant, self-centered, and entitled attitude is pervasive, along with callousness and little empathy for others’ needs or feelings. Rights, property, or safety of others is disregarded, with little or no remorse or guilt if others are harmed. Emotional expression is mostly limited to irritability, anger, and hostility; acknowledgement and articulation of other emotions, such as love or anxiety, are rare. There is little insight into motivations and an impaired ability to consider alternative interpretations of experience.

Temperamental aggression and a high threshold for pleasurable excitement are typically associated with this type, linked to reckless sensation-seeking behaviors, impulsivity without regard for consequences, and a sense of invulnerability. Unlawful or unethical behavior is often pursued, including substance abuse and physical violence. Aggressive or sadistic acts are common in pursuit of personal agendas, and sometimes pleasure or satisfaction is derived from humiliating, demeaning, dominating, or hurting others. Superficial charm and ingratiation may be employed to achieve certain ends, and there is disregard for conventional moral principles. General irresponsibility about work obligations or financial commitments is commonly present, as well as problems with authority figures. 

301.82 Avoidant Personality Disorder

The work group is recommending that this disorder be reformulated as the Avoidant Type.

Individuals who resemble this personality disorder type have a negative sense of self, associated with profound feelings of inadequacy, and inhibition in establishing close interpersonal relationships. Anxiety, inferiority, social ineptness, and a personal lack of appeal are often experienced, along with shame, embarrassment, and self-criticism. Unrealistically high self-standards are held and there may exist a desire to be recognized by others as special and unique. On the other hand, self-blame for bad things that happen is common, and often little or no pleasure, satisfaction, or enjoyment in life’s activities is experienced. Emotions are inhibited or constricted, and difficulty acknowledging or expressing wishes, emotions (positive and negative), and impulses is present.

Page 10: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

Despite high standards, passivity may dominate, undermining pursuit of personal goals or achieving success. This tendency sometimes leads to inappropriately low aspirations or achievements. Risk aversion is characteristic. In social situations, behavior is shy or reserved, and sometimes social and occupational situations are avoided altogether because of fear of embarrassment or humiliation. Sensitivity toward potential criticism or rejection is high, with reluctance to disclose personal information. Basic interpersonal skills can appear to be lacking, resulting in few close friendships. Intimate relationships are avoided because of a general fear of attachments and intimacy, including sexual intimacy.

301.83 Borderline Personality Disorder

The work group is recommending that this disorder be reformulated as the Borderline Type.

Individuals who resemble this personality disorder type have an impoverished and/or unstable self-structure and difficulty maintaining enduring and fulfilling intimate relationships. Self-concept is easily disrupted under stress, and often associated with the experience of a lack of identity or chronic feelings of emptiness. Self-appraisal is filled with loathing, excessive criticism, and despondency. There is sensitivity to perceived interpersonal slights, loss or disappointments, linked with reactive, rapidly changing, intense, and unpredictable emotions. Anxiety and depression are common. Anger is a typical reaction to feeling misunderstood, mistreated, or victimized, which may lead to acts of aggression toward self and others. Intense distress and characteristic impulsivity may also prompt other risky behaviors, including substance misuse, reckless driving, binge eating, or dangerous sexual encounters.

Relationships are often based on excessive dependency, a fear of rejection and/or abandonment, and urgent need for contact with significant others when upset. Behavior may sometimes be highly submissive or subservient. At the same time, intimate involvement with another person may induce fear of loss of identity as an individual – psychological and emotional engulfment. Thus, interpersonal relationships are commonly unstable and alternate between excessive dependency and flight from involvement. Empathy for others is significantly compromised, or selectively accurate but biased toward negative characteristics or vulnerabilities. Cognitive functioning may become impaired at times of interpersonal stress, leading to concrete, black-and white, all-or-nothing thinking, and sometimes to quasi-psychotic reactions, including paranoia and dissociation.

301.4 Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder

The work group is recommending that this disorder be reformulated as the Obsessive-Compulsive Type.

Individuals who resemble this personality disorder type are ruled by need for order, precision, perfection, and control. There is an overdeveloped sense of duty and obligation, and significant insecurity, anxiety, guilt, or shame over real or perceived deficiencies or failures may arise. At the same time, behavior or attitudes are commonly controlling, competitive, and critical. There may be conflict about authority (e.g., pressure to submit to it or rebel against it), a tendency toward power struggles (overtly or covertly), and a self-righteous or moralistic attitude. Appreciation of the ideas, emotions, and behaviors of other people is compromised at times. For the most part, strong emotions – both positive (e.g., love) and negative (e.g., anger) – are not consciously experienced or expressed, although irritability over self or others falling short of expectations may be common.

Activities are often conducted in super-methodical and overly detailed ways, along with concerns with time, punctuality, schedules, and rules. The need to try to do things perfectly may result in a paralysis of indecision, as the pros and cons of alternatives are weighed, such that important tasks may not ever be completed. Tasks, problems, and people are approached rigidly, and there is limited capacity to adapt to changing demands or circumstances.

Page 11: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

301.22 Schizotypal Personality Disorder

The work group is recommending that this disorder be reformulated as the Schizotypal Type.

Individuals who resemble this personality disorder type have social deficits, marked by discomfort with and reduced capacity for interpersonal relationships; eccentricities of appearance and behavior, and cognitive and perceptual distortions. Anxiety in social situations (even when familiar with the situation), feeling like an outcast, difficulty in connecting with others, and suspiciousness of others’ motivations is typical. Despite any internal distress at being “set apart”, there appears to be detachment or indifference to others’ reactions. Emotional experience and expression is likely constricted. Appearance and manner can be eccentric or odd (e.g., grooming, hygiene, posture, and/or eye contact are strange or unusual), and speech may be vague, circumstantial, metaphorical, over elaborate, concrete, or stereotyped. These characteristics are all linked to a tendency to have few, if any, close friends and/or intimate relationships.

 Behavior may be influenced by magical thinking, such as superstitions, or belief in clairvoyance or telepathy. Perception of reality is sometimes impaired, and reasoning and perceptual processes may become odd and idiosyncratic (e.g., seemingly arbitrary inferences, or seeing hidden messages or special meanings in ordinary events), or quasi-psychotic, with symptoms such as pseudo-hallucinations, sensory illusions, over-valued ideas, mild paranoid ideation, or transient psychotic episodes. There usually is the ability, however, to “reality test” psychotic-like symptoms, along with intellectual acknowledgement of irrationality and false beliefs.

301.9 Personality Disorder Not Otherwise Specified

The work group is recommending that this disorder not be included in DSM-5. This disorder should be represented and diagnosed by a combination of core impairments in personality functioning and patients' unique pathological personality traits.

Prominent Personality Traits: Unique to each individual

Personality Traits

Page 12: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

The Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group proposes six broad, higher order personality trait domains – negative emotionality, detachment, antagonism, disinhibition, compulsivity, and schizotypy – each comprised of several lower order, more specific trait facets. The broad trait domains are listed below in boldface with the trait facets comprising each domain listed below the domain name. The proposed trait model is in the process of empirical validation.

Negative Emotionality is characterized by frequent experiences of high levels of a wide range of negative emotions (e.g., anxiety, depression, guilt/ shame, worry, anger, etc.), as well as the behavioral (e.g., self-harm) and interpersonal (e.g., clinginess, mistrustfulness) manifestations of these emotions.

Trait facets: Emotional lability, anxiousness, submissiveness, separation insecurity, pessimism, low self-esteem, guilt/shame, self-harm, depressivity, suspiciousness

Detachment is characterized by withdrawal from other people--ranging from withdrawal from intimate, friendly, and social relationships to withdrawal from the world at large; by restricted affective experience and expression; and by having limited hedonic capacity.

Trait facets: Social withdrawal, social detachment, intimacy avoidance, restricted affectivity, anhedonia

Antagonism is characterized by callous antipathy toward others (e.g., aggression, oppositionality, deceitfulness, manipulativeness), and a correspondingly exaggerated sense of self-importance (e.g., narcissism).

Trait facets: Callousness, manipulativeness, grandiose narcissism, histrionic style, hostility, aggression, oppositionality, deceitfulness

Disinhibition is characterized by an orientation towards immediate gratification, with behavior driven by current thoughts, feelings, and external stimuli, without regard for past learning or consideration of future consequences.

Trait facets: Impulsivity, distractibility, recklessness, irresponsibility

Compulsivity is characterized by perseverative, perfectionistic thinking, and by acting according to a narrowly defined and unchanging ideal, and by the rigid expectation that this ideal should be adhered to by everyone

Trait facets: Perfectionism, perseveration, rigidity, orderliness, risk aversion

Schizotypy is characterized by a wide range of culturally incongruent odd, eccentric, or unusual behaviors and cognitions, including both process (e.g., perception, dissociation) and content (e.g., beliefs).

Trait facets: Unusual perceptions, unusual beliefs, eccentricity, cognitive dysregulation, dissociation proneness

Rationale for a Six-Domain Trait Dimensional Diagnostic System for Personality Disorder 

Page 13: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

Prepared by Lee Anna Clark, Ph.D., and Robert F. Krueger, Ph.D.

 I.  For our terminological usage: 

Dimension: The term dimension refers to any scaled continuum and thus must always be modified (e.g., personality trait dimension) for clarity.   

Trait: Similarly, the term “trait” refers to any characteristic (e.g., curly hair is a trait), but we always use it to mean “personality trait.”   

Domain: The term domain is associated in the personality literature with “broad” or “higher order” trait dimensions, and we have adopted that terminology for consistency with that literature.  However, this term also is used to refer to distinct areas of functioning (e.g., “interpersonal domain”), so we modify the term (i.e., trait domain) when referring to higher order personality trait dimensions. 

Facet: The term facet is associated in the personality literature with “specific” or “lower order” trait dimensions, and we have adopted that terminology for consistency with that literature.  Again, however, because the term has other, generic meanings, we will use the term trait facets to refer to lower order personality trait dimensions. 

 

II. For proposing traits per se as the PD diagnostic criteria. The use of trait profiles:

A. Eliminates comorbidity and all PD-NOS by providing a specific trait profile for every patient with PD  (Clark, 2005, 2007; Krueger, Skodol, Livesley, Shrout, & Hunag, 2007; Trull & Durrett, 2005).

B. Clarifies within-diagnosis heterogeneity by providing a specific trait profile for every patient with PD (Clark, 2007; Trull & Durrett, 2005).

C. Increases diagnostic stability (traits are more stable than PD diagnoses; multiple references, see below).D. Acknowledges the continuous nature of personality and personality disorder; provides the option of

generating a personality trait profile for any patient (i.e., not just those with a PD diagnosis) Trull & Durrett (2005); O’Connor (2002, 2005); Saulsman & Page (2004).

E. Improves convergent and discriminant validity of PD assessment (Clark & Harrison, 2001; Clark, Livesley, & Morey, 1997).

 

III. For the specifically proposed trait set: 

Considerable evidence relates current DSM PDs to 4 broad, higher order trait domains of the five-factor model (FFM) of personality: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, & Conscientiousness (e.g., O’Connor, 2005; Saulsman & Page, 2004; Widiger & Simonsen, 2005), but meta-analyses also indicate that the 5 th factor, Openness, is not strongly related to PD (e.g., O’Connor, 2005; Saulsman & Page, 2004). 

Conversely, meta-analyses indicate that Obsessive-Compulsive PD is not well-covered by the FFM (Saulsman & Page, 2004) and that only the “social and interpersonal deficits” of Schizotypal PD, and not the “cognitive or perceptual distortions and eccentricities of behavior” is tapped by FFM traits.  Therefore, we added a domain of compulsivity and of schizotypy to address these missing elements.  The schizotypy domain also has been shown to form an important 6th factor in analyses of both normal and abnormal personality (Tackett et al., 2008; Watson et al., 2008). 

Finally, the proposed specific trait facets were selected as representative based on existing measures of normal and abnormal personality, as well as recommendations by experts in personality assessment.  Nonetheless, the

Page 14: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

proposed trait set is provisional, and currently is being tested for its structural validity before finalizing the DSM-V proposal. 

DSM-5 Type and Trait Cross-Walk    

DSM-IV-TR Personality Disorder to DSM-5 Type and Trait Cross-Walk

DSM-IV-TR Personality Disorder

DSM-5 Personality Disorder Type

Prominent Personality Traits/(Domains)1

Paranoid PD Trait Specified(PDTS)2 Suspiciousness (NE)Hostility (A)

Unusual beliefs (S)Intimacy avoidance (DT)

Schizoid PDTS Social withdrawal (DT)Social detachment (DT)Intimacy avoidance (DT)Restricted affectivity (DT)

Anhedonia (DT)Schizotypal Schizotypal

(Match level 4 or 5)3Eccentricity (S)

Cognitive dysregulation (S)Unusual perceptions (S)

Unusual beliefs (S)Social withdrawal (DT)

Restricted affectivity (DT)Intimacy avoidance (DT)

Suspiciousness (NE)Anxiousness (NE)

Antisocial Antisocial/Psychopathic (Match level 4 or 5)3

Callousness (A)Aggression (A)

Manipulativeness (A)Hostility (A)

Deceitfulness (A)Grandiose narcissism (A)

Oppositionality (A)Irresponsibility (DS)Recklessness (DS)

Impulsivity (DS)Borderline Borderline

(Match level 4 or 5)3Emotional lability (NE)

Self-harm (NE)Separation insecurity (NE)

Submissiveness (NE)Anxiousness (NE)

Low self-esteem (NE)Depressivity (NE)

Suspiciousness (NE)Hostility (A)

Aggression (A)Impulsivity (DS)

Recklessness (DS)Dissociation proneness (S)Cognitive dysregulation (S)

Page 15: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

Histrionic PDTS Emotional lability (NE)Manipulativeness (A)

Histrionic style (A)Narcissistic PDTS Grandiose narcissism (A)

Manipulativeness (A)Histrionic style (A)Callousness (A)

Avoidant Avoidant (Match level 4 or 5)3

Anxiousness (NE)Separation insecurity (NE)

Pessimism (NE) Low self-esteem (NE)

Guilt/shame (NE)Intimacy avoidance (DT)Social withdrawal (DT)

Restricted affectivity (DT)Anhedonia (DT)

Social detachment (DT)Risk aversion (DS)Perfectionism (DS)

Dependent PDTS Submissiveness (NE)Anxiousness (NE)

Separation insecurity (NE)Obsessive-Compulsive Obsessive-Compulsive

(Match level 4 or 5)3Perfectionism (C)

Rigidity (C)Orderliness (C)

Perseveration (C)Anxiousness (NE)Pessimism (NE)Guilt/shame (NE)

Low self-esteem (NE)Restricted affectivity (DT)

Oppositionality (A)Manipulativeness (A)

Depressive PDTS Pessimism (NE)Anxiousness (NE)Depressivity (NE)

Low self-esteem (NE)Guilt/shame (NE)Anhedonia (DT)

Passive-Aggressive PDTS Oppositionality (A)Hostility (A)

Guilt/shame (NE)PD Not Otherwise Specified

(PDNOS)PDTS Individual trait profile

Note: NE = Negative Emotionality, DT = Detachment, A = Antagonism, DS = Disinhibition, C = Compulsivity, S = Schizotypy

1 Several additional traits (compared to the original proposal posted in February 2010) have been listed for selected disorders, based on an analysis of the content of the personality disorder type descriptions.  A further revision of the list will be based on the results of field trials.  The list of traits includes those that map to the DSM-IV PD, the DSM-5 type, or both.

Page 16: APA - (2011) DSM-5 Development. Personality and Personality Disorders

2 Whenever a patient’s impairment in personality functioning is sufficiently severe to warrant a PD diagnosis, but the patterns of impairments and associated traits do not match one of the five types, a diagnosis of PD Trait Specified (PDTS) is made.

3 This PD type is diagnosed by matching a patient’s personality psychopathology to a narrative description.  In the revised proposal, the rating of traits is independent of the rating of the type, but also may be clinically useful.  The relationship of traits to types will be studied in the DSM-5 Field Trials.