Introducing a short self-report for the assessment of DSM–5 level of personality functioning for personality disorders: the self and interpersonal functioning scale.

In the present study, we report on the development and validation of the Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale (SIFS), a 24-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess the four core elements of personality pathology (Identity, Self-direction, Empathy, and Intimacy) from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Level of Personality Functioning for personality disorders. Participants from a community sample (n = 280) and patients from a specialized treatment facility for personality disorders (n = 106) were included in the validation sample. Overall, the SIFS showed sound psychometric properties. A second-order factor solution, which consisted of the four Level of Personality Functioning elements and an overarching personality pathology factor, showed the best fit indices. The four SIFS elements showed a well-differentiated and conceptually meaningful pattern of associations with related constructs. In light of these results, the SIFS should be considered as a promising, concise measure of Criterion A for clinical screening and research purposes. Its relative strengths and limitations in contrast with other existing self-report measures of Criterion A are discussed

Associations between the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 trait facets and aggression among outpatients with personality disorder: A multimethod study

Background Most research on the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) was conducted with self-reports. One of the specific areas for which a multimethod design has yet to be implemented is for the PID-5's associations with aggression. The main objectives of this study were to (a) compare the PID-5 associations with self-reported and file-rated aggression, (b) compare these associations between women and men, and (c) identify the relative importance of PID-5 facet predictors. Methods A sample of outpatients with personality disorder (N = 285) was recruited in a specialized public clinic to complete questionnaires, and a subsample was assessed for file-rated aggression (n = 227). Multiple regression analyses were performed with PID-5 facets as statistical predictors but using distinct operationalizations of aggression (self-reported vs. file-rated). Moderation analyses were performed to identify the moderating effect of biological sex. Dominance analyses were computed to identify the relative importance of predictors. Results PID-5 facet predictors of self-reported and file-rated aggression were very consistent in both conditions. However, the amount of explained variance was reduced in the latter case (from 39% to 14%), especially for women (from 40% to 2%). The most important predictors were Hostility, Risk Taking, and Callousness. Conclusion Pertaining to the statistically significant facets associated with aggression, strong evidence of multimethod replication was found. The women-men discrepancies were not most obvious in their specific associations with aggression, but rather in their amount of explained variance, maybe reflecting examiners' or patients' implicit biases, and/or different manifestations of aggression between women and men

Latent profiles of patients with borderline pathology based on the alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders

Background: There have been multiple attempts to try to parse out heterogeneity within borderline pathology by identifying patient subtypes; thus far, these works have yielded few consistent results. Recent developments in the operationalization of borderline pathology may provide new opportunities to identify clinically and conceptually meaningful subgroups of patients. The Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) offers a categorical-dimensional operationalization of Borderline personality disorder (BPD) that has yet to be tested for identification of patient subgroups. The purpose of the present study is to test whether the combination of the Criterion A elements (pertaining to level of severity) and the seven pathological facets from Criterion B that define BPD in the AMPD can yield meaningful patient profiles. Methods: A total of 211 outpatients from a specialized PD treatment program (133 women, Mage = 33.66, SD = 10.97) were selected based on the presence of at least moderate borderline pathology according to cutoffs recently proposed for the Borderline Symptom List-23. Valid Criterion A (Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale) and B (Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Faceted Brief Form) self-reports were administered to measure elements and facets that define BPD in the AMPD model; these variables were used as indicators in a latent profile analysis (LPA). Results: The optimal solution generated by LPA yielded four distinct profiles: (a) Borderline traits; (b) Moderate pathology with Impulsivity; (c) Moderate pathology with Identity problems and Depressivity; and (d) Severe pathology. Clinically meaningful distinctions emerged among profiles on AMPD indicators and external variables relevant to PD, especially aggression and impulsivity. Conclusions: Profiles reflected both the “severity” and “style” components imbedded within Criterion A and B of the AMPD, as they were mainly distinguished by a continuum of severity but also by some meaningful qualitative differences that may have important clinical implications for treatment planning and contracting. Results also suggest that the four Criterion A elements have independent value to identify important differences in patients with borderline pathology. They also highlight that some Criterion B facets that define BPD in the AMPD may be especially important to identify subgroups of patients, mainly Impulsivity and Depressivity

Analysis of the interaction between personality dysfunction and traits in the statistical prediction of physical aggression: results from outpatient and community samples

Abstract : The Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD), included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) and the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (11th ed.; ICD-11) are, respectively, hybrid categorical-dimensional and dimensional frameworks for personality disorders (PDs). Both models emphasize personality dysfunction and personality traits. Previous studies investigating the links between the AMPD and ICD-11, and self-reported physical aggression have mostly focused on traits and did not take into account the potential interaction between personality dysfunction and traits. Thus, the aim of this study is to identify dysfunction*trait interactions using regression-based analysis. Outpatients with personality disorder from a specialized public clinic (N = 285) and community participants (N = 995) were recruited to complete self-report questionnaires. Some small-size, albeit significant and clinically/conceptually meaningful personality dysfunction*trait interactions were found to predict physical aggression in both samples. Interaction analyses might further inform, to some degree, about the current discussion pertaining to the potential redundancy between dysfunction and traits, the optimal personality dysfunction structure (in the case of the AMPD), as well as clinical assessment based on AMPD/ICD-11 PD frameworks

Reducing bias in auditory duration reproduction by integrating the reproduced signal

Duration estimation is known to be far from veridical and to differ for sensory estimates and motor reproduction. To investigate how these differential estimates are integrated for estimating or reproducing a duration and to examine sensorimotor biases in duration comparison and reproduction tasks, we compared estimation biases and variances among three different duration estimation tasks: perceptual comparison, motor reproduction, and auditory reproduction (i.e. a combined perceptual-motor task). We found consistent overestimation in both motor and perceptual-motor auditory reproduction tasks, and the least overestimation in the comparison task. More interestingly, compared to pure motor reproduction, the overestimation bias was reduced in the auditory reproduction task, due to the additional reproduced auditory signal. We further manipulated the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in the feedback/comparison tones to examine the changes in estimation biases and variances. Considering perceptual and motor biases as two independent components, we applied the reliability-based model, which successfully predicted the biases in auditory reproduction. Our findings thus provide behavioral evidence of how the brain combines motor and perceptual information together to reduce duration estimation biases and improve estimation reliability

The HITRAN2016 molecular spectroscopic database

This paper describes the contents of the 2016 edition of the HITRAN molecular spectroscopic compilation. The new edition replaces the previous HITRAN edition of 2012 and its updates during the intervening years. The HITRAN molecular absorption compilation is composed of five major components: the traditional line-by-line spectroscopic parameters required for high-resolution radiative-transfer codes, infrared absorption cross-sections for molecules not yet amenable to representation in a line-by-line form, collision-induced absorption data, aerosol indices of refraction, and general tables such as partition sums that apply globally to the data. The new HITRAN is greatly extended in terms of accuracy, spectral coverage, additional absorption phenomena, added line-shape formalisms, and validity. Moreover, molecules, isotopologues, and perturbing gases have been added that address the issues of atmospheres beyond the Earth. Of considerable note, experimental IR cross-sections for almost 300 additional molecules important in different areas of atmospheric science have been added to the database. The compilation can be accessed through www.hitran.org. Most of the HITRAN data have now been cast into an underlying relational database structure that offers many advantages over the long-standing sequential text-based structure. The new structure empowers the user in many, ways. It enables the incorporation of an extended set of fundamental parameters per transition, sophisticated line-shape formalisms, easy user-defined output formats, and very convenient searching, filtering, and plotting of data. A powerful application programming interface making use of structured query language (SQL) features for higher-level applications of HITRAN is also provided. Published by Elsevier Ltd

A Proposed Classification of ICD-11 Severity Degrees of Personality Pathology Using the Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale

Background: The 11th version of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) has adopted a dimensional approach to personality disorder (PD) nosology. Notably, it includes an assessment of PD degree of severity, which can be classified according to five categories. To date, there is no gold standard measure for assessing degree of PD severity based on the ICD-11 model, and there are no empirically-based anchor points to delineate the proposed categories. With the operationalization of PD degrees of severity in the ICD-11 PD model now being closely aligned with Criterion A of the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD), sharing a focus on self and interpersonal dysfunction, self-report instruments developed for the latter model might prove useful as screening tools to determine degrees of severity in the former.Methods: The Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale, a brief validated self-report questionnaire originally designed to assess level of personality pathology according to the AMPD framework, was used to derive anchor points to delineate the five severity degrees from the ICD-11 PD model. Data from five clinical and non-clinical samples (total N = 2,240) allowed identifying anchor points for classification, based on Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis, Latent Class Analysis, and data distribution statistics. Categories were validated using multiple indices pertaining to externalizing and internalizing symptoms relevant to PD.Results: Analyses yielded the following anchor points for PD degrees of severity: No PD = 0–1.04; Personality Difficulty = 1.05–1.29; Mild PD = 1.30–1.89; Moderate PD = 1.90–2.49; and Severe PD = 2.50 and above. A clear gradient of severity across the five categories was observed in all samples. A high number of significant contrasts among PD categories were also observed on external variables, consistent with the ICD-11 PD degree of severity operationalization.Conclusions: The present study provides potentially useful guidelines to determine severity of personality pathology based on the ICD-11 model. The use of a brief self-report questionnaire as a screening tool for assessing PD degrees of severity should be seen as a time-efficient support for clinical decision and treatment planning