Elaborating Borderline and Psychopathic Personality with the Computerized Adaptive Test of Personality Disorder in a Female Correctional Sample

Most of what we know about Psychopathic Personality Disorder (PPD) is based upon research with males. Considerably less research has examined female manifestations of the construct, however, some research suggests that Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) may represent a female phenotypic expression of PPD, particularly among incarcerated offenders. The current study examined distinction and convergence between PPD and BPD. Utilizing a sample of 146 female correctional inmates as well as 109 female college students, the current study employed the Computerized Adaptive Test of Personality Disorder (CAT-PD) as well as other specific indices to explore the extent to which these two personality disorders overlap from a dimensional trait perspective, which the CAT-PD provides. Steiger’s T-tests were calculated to determine whether there was a difference in the magnitude of the correlations between CAT-PD traits and these two personality disorders. Hierarchical linear regression analysis were also conducted to determine whether additional traits could augment the prediction of these two personality disorders beyond the selected traits in the DSM-5 alternative trait model, located in Section III of the DSM-5. Implications of these results in light of explaining the overlap between BPD and PPD among females are explained

The DSM–5 section III personality disorder criterion a in relation to both pathological and general personality traits.

Following the introduction of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM–5), section III alternative model of personality disorder, much of the empirical attention has been directed toward testing the performance of Criterion B (i.e., pathological traits). Much more recently, with the development of assessment tools related to Criterion A (i.e., personality impairment), a burgeoning literature base is forming for it as well. A closer look at the Criterion A component, however, reveals disagreements around its structure, discriminant validity, ability to distinguish between personality-based and nonpersonality-based forms of psychopathology, overlap between the two criteria, and incremental validity. The goal of the current study (N = 365 undergraduates) was to test Criterion A in relation to both pathological personality traits, as specified in the DSM–5, and general personality traits, as some scholars suggested that might be more appropriate. The results suggest that impairment domains overlap substantially with pathological and general traits, and these traits account for considerable variance in impairment domains. Most importantly, the findings suggest that general and pathological traits functioned in nearly identical ways, as evidenced by the similar relations that they evinced with traditional DSM–5 personality disorder constructs. In line with previous work, the present findings demonstrate limited discriminant validity among impairment domains and an inability to distinguish between Axis I and II symptoms. Further research on the alternative model of personality disorder is needed to test the necessity and sufficiency of its constituent components

The DSM-5 Section III Personality Disorder Criterion A in relation to both pathological and general personality traits

Following the introduction of the DSM-5 Section III Alternative Model of Personality Disorder (AMPD), much of the empirical attention has been directed towards testing the performance of Criterion B (i.e., pathological traits). Much more recently, with the development of assessment tools related to Criterion A (i.e., personality impairment), a burgeoning literature base is forming for it as well. A closer look at the Criterion A component, however, reveals disagreements around its structure, discriminant validity, ability to distinguish between personality-based and non-personality-based forms of psychopathology, overlap between the two criteria, and incremental validity. The goal of the current study (N = 365 undergraduates) was to test Criterion A in relation to both pathological personality traits, as specified in the DSM-5, as well as general personality traits as suggested might be more appropriate by some scholars. The results suggest that impairment domains overlap substantially with pathological and general traits, and these traits account for considerable variance in impairment domains. Most importantly, the findings suggest that general and pathological traits functioned in nearly identical ways, as evidenced by the similar relations that they evinced with traditional DSM-5 PD constructs. In line with previous work, the present findings demonstrate limited discriminant validity among impairment domains, and an inability to distinguish between Axis I and II symptoms. Further research on the AMPD is needed to test the necessity and sufficiency of its constituent components

Mechanisms Belying Perceptions of American Narcissism

Previous research has indicated that Americans tend to rate the average American as very narcissistic. The overall objective of this project is to understand some of the reasons why the average American feels this way. Thus, we seek to understand if individuals who view media that depicts the lives of celebrities (whom are typically seen as more narcissistic) rate the average American as more narcissistic than individuals who view media about consumer reports (e.g. relative quality of new vehicles)