Empathy has been considered a central feature of our temperamental dispositions in childhood and adolescence. It plays a central role in the development of prosocial behavior and moral reasoning. However, the links between empathy and the major factors of personality have not yet been well described. This study explores the relationships between an index of empathy and the Big-Five personality model in a sample of 832 Spanish adolescents. As expected, results show that empathy correlates strongly with Friendliness. Positive correlations with Conscientiousness, Energy, and Openness traits have also been observed, but regression analyses show that relationships of empathy with those three factors were of negligible importance. Contrary to expectations, empathy did not correlate with Emotional stability. This pattern of results was replicated across boys and girls.
Abstract. This study compared the Spanish (Castilian) and French versions of the 16PF5 and of the NEO-PI-R in Spanish and Swiss samples. The five-factor solution for the 16PF5 only seems clear for the Castilian version, but not for the French version. Indeed, the congruence coefficients for the Tough-Mindedness and the Self-Control dimensions are low. On the other hand, the five-factor solutions are highly similar for both countries concerning the NEO-PI-R, and the congruence coefficients are above .95 for all five dimensions. The low cross-cultural replicability for the 16PF5 makes it difficult to analyze the differences at the mean level for this inventory. For the NEO-PI-R, the differences are generally very small and globally account for 2.6% of the total variance. Spaniards seem to have slightly lower scores on Actions and slightly higher scores on Dutifulness. These differences could either be due to translation problems, sample selection, or cultural differences.
In the last 10 years, 2 instruments (the Personality Inventory for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition [PID-5] and the Personality Inventory for International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision [PiCD]) have been developed to measure the dimensional approach to personality disorders (PDs). Several studies have analyzed the relationships between both instruments and the five-factor model, although the PiCD has received less attention than the PID-5, given its more recent publication. For instance, the PiCD has never been related to the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). The aims of the present article were to explore the convergent validity of the NEO-PI-R, a short version of the PID-5 (PID-5-SF), and the PiCD, to compare these dimensional approaches as for their ability to predict categorical PDs measured through the screening questionnaire of the International Personality Disorder Examination and to explore the nature of 2 controversial pathological domains: Psychoticism (from the PID-5-SF) and Anankastia (from the PiCD). A total of 1,565 people from the Spanish general population completed the NEO-PI-R, PID-5-SF, and PiCD. A total of 758 also filled out the International Personality Disorder Examination. Results show a high convergent validity of the five-factor model, the PID-5-SF, and the PiCD. Especially relevant from a clinical perspective is the great convergence between the 2 measures of dimensional PDs. In light of the results, the personality correlates of Psychoticism are reconsidered, and the location of Anankastia as the opposite pole of Disinhibition instead of as a separate domain, suggested by previous authors, is supported. The advantages of a dimensional approach to PDs and the practical implications for their assessment are discussed.
The inclusion of the borderline pattern in the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) dimensional classification of personality disorders (PDs) has caused controversy. Unease about leaving out these clinically challenging patients seems to conflict with the need of an evidence-based and credible diagnostic system. However, the accommodation of borderline within the new diagnostic system has not yet been studied in depth. To this end, we examine in a sample of 1799 general population and clinical subjects the joint structure of the five initial ICD-11 domains and the borderline pattern. Regression and item-level factor analyses reveal that borderline criteria do not form a separate construct and are indissociable from negative affectivity. Furthermore, borderline adds nothing to the remaining domains when it comes to predict PD severity. The borderline pattern appears as largely superfluous and even misguiding, unless their criteria are properly integrated within the structure of personality pathology.
The psychometric properties of the original version of the Sensation Seeking Scale (Form V) were analyzed in a sample of 1,006 Spanish university students. The total sample was randomly split into two halves. Exploratory factor analyses were conducted on the calibration sample (n=504), whereas confirmatory factor analysis procedures were performed on the validation sample (n=502). As previous studies have suggested, exploratory factor structure indicated that several items load on a different factor or have loadings lower than .30. Those problems were surpassed when the best five items per factor were factor analyzed again. The confirmatory factor analyses showed that a 4-factor simple structure model gave a clearly imperfect fit. A model of 20 items (5 items per factor) gave a better fit, although with similar problems regarding the low reliabilities of the Experience Seeking and Boredom Susceptibility subscales. The need for improvement of the four-factor structure is discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.