DSM-5 Assessments of the Level of Personality Functioning: Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Functioning
| Autor: | Patrick Luyten, Bart Jansen, Carmen De Grave, Lieve Beheydt, Didier Schrijvers, Bernard Sabbe |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male 050103 clinical psychology Adolescent Personality Inventory media_common.quotation_subject INVENTORY ORGANIZATION Interpersonal communication Personality Assessment Personality Disorders DSM-5 Young Adult 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine mental disorders medicine Humans Personality Interpersonal Relations 0501 psychology and cognitive sciences media_common Psychiatry Psychiatric Status Rating Scales Inpatients Science & Technology 05 social sciences Personality pathology Reproducibility of Results Middle Aged DEPRESSION medicine.disease Personality disorders 030227 psychiatry Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Psychiatry and Mental health Distress Scale (social sciences) Female Human medicine Psychology Life Sciences & Biomedicine Intrapersonal communication Clinical psychology |
| Zdroj: | Psychiatry : journal for the study of interpersonal processes |
| ISSN: | 1943-281X 0033-2747 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/00332747.2019.1650411 |
| Popis: | Objective: In DSM-5, Section III, the Level of Personality Functioning (LPF) was proposed as a severity index of personality disorders (PDs), but as it reflects both trait-like (availability) and state-like (accessibility) features, of which, moreover, the relationship with the experience of patients is unclear, we critically examined LPF in patients with general psychopathology. Method: This study compared the validity of the direct Inventory of Personality Organization (IPO), and the indirect Differentiation-Relatedness Scale (DRS) LPF-measure, in relation to measures of intrapersonal and interpersonal functioning. The sample consisted of 70 inpatients with general psychopathology and no primary PDs. Associations of both measures with DSM-PDs were examined, with and without controlling for clinical distress. Results: The IPO was significantly related to age and clinical distress. When controlling for clinical distress, the IPO was still associated with cluster A (odd) and B (erratic) PD features, high levels of self-criticism, conflict in relationships and low levels of adaptive coping strategies. The DRS was only related to the schizotypical PD. Conclusions: In patients with general psychopathology, both the IPO and the DRS, appear to have limitations in measuring LPF. The IPO seems to be prone to state effects, although correlations with PDs remained significant when controlling for clinical distress. The DRS seemed to be more independent from clinical distress but was unexpectedly unrelated to features of personality pathology. DRS reflects availability, while IPO also reflects different degrees of accessibility of LPF in PDs. ispartof: PSYCHIATRY-INTERPERSONAL AND BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES vol:83 issue:1 pages:84-93 ispartof: location:United States status: published |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|