Intermittent Explosive Disorder-Integrated Research Diagnostic Criteria: Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Research on intermittent explosive disorder (IED) has been hindered by vague and restrictive DSM-IV diagnostic criteria. Integrated research criteria have been developed for IED (IED-IR) that address the DSM-IV criteria\u27s shortcomings. The purpose of this study was to examine the convergent and discriminant validity of the IED-IR criteria set by comparing adults meeting these criteria (n = 56) to healthy controls (it = 56) and to individuals with an Axis I major mental disorder (n = 33) or an Axis II personality disorder (n = 22) diagnoses on measures of aggression (self-report and behavioral) and global functioning. IED-IR individuals demonstrated higher levels of aggression compared to the other three groups, and were rated as more impaired than the healthy control and Axis I individuals. Subgroup analyses showed that IED-IR subjects who did not meet DSM IED criteria did not differ from DSM IED subjects on self-report measures of aggressiveness or global functioning. Furthermore, the IED-IR subjects evidenced more behavioral aggression than their DSM-IED counterparts. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

The Relationship Between Impulsive Verbal Aggression and Intermittent Explosive Disorder

Intermittent explosive disorder (IED) is the sole psychiatric diagnostic category for which aggression is a cardinal symptom. IED focuses on physical aggression, but researchers have argued for the inclusion of verbal aggression (VA) (e.g., arguing, threatening) as a part of the IED criteria set. The utility of VA in identifying clinically relevant aggression, however, is unknown. IED participants were compared to individuals without a marked history of physical aggression, but who report frequent (two or more times a week) VA, and non-aggressive personality-disorder individuals on behavioral and self-report measures of aggression, self-report measures of related constructs (e.g., anger, affective lability), and a clinician assessment of psychosocial impairment. Both the IED and VA groups were more aggressive, angry, and clinically impaired than personality-disorder individuals, while the IED and VA groups did not differ from each other on these measures. These results support the clinical importance of frequent VA for future iterations of the IED criteria set