Two hundred and eighty-three chronic pain patients, consecutive admissions to the Comprehensive Pain Center of the University of Miami School of Medicine, received an extensive psychiatric evaluation based upon the American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III) criteria and flowsheets. All patients received the following type of diagnoses: DSM-III axis I; DSM-III axis II, and personality type. The distribution of assigned diagnoses for the entire patient sample was reviewed and a statistical comparison between male and female patients was performed with regards to the prevalence of each diagnosis. Anxiety syndromes and depression of various diagnostic types were the most frequently assigned axis I diagnoses with over half the patient sample receiving each of these diagnoses. Males were significantly overrepresented in the axis I diagnoses of intermittent explosive disorders, adjustment disorders with work inhibitions, and alcohol abuse and other drug dependence, while females were significantly overrepresented in disorders of current depression of various diagnostic types and somatization disorders. 58.4% of the patients fulfilled criteria for axis II personality disorder diagnoses. The most frequently personality disorders found in the patient group were dependent (17.4%), passive aggressive (14.9%), and histrionic (11.7%). Males were significantly overrepresented in paranoid and narcissistic disorders while females were overrepresented in histrionic disorder. The most frequent personality types found in the patient group were compulsive (24.5%) and dependent (10.6%). All personality types were similarly distributed between the sexes. The results of the present study were compared to a previous study of DSM-III diagnoses in chronic pain patients and are discussed in terms of the prevalence of DSM-III diagnoses in the general population. Questions are raised as to the applicability of certain DSM-III diagnoses in the chronic pain population.
Recent scholarship in intellectual humility (IH) has attempted to provide deeper understanding of the virtue as personality trait and its impact on an individual's thoughts, beliefs, and actions. A limitations-owning perspective of IH focuses on a proper recognition of the impact of intellectual limitations and a motivation to overcome them, placing it as the mean between intellectual arrogance and intellectual servility. We developed the Limitations-Owning Intellectual Humility Scale to assess this conception of IH with related personality constructs. In Studies 1 (n = 386) and 2 (n = 296), principal factor and confirmatory factor analyses revealed a three-factor modelowning one's intellectual limitations, appropriate discomfort with intellectual limitations, and love of learning. Study 3 (n = 322) demonstrated strong test-retest reliability of the measure over 5 months, while Study 4 (n = 612) revealed limitations-owning IH correlated negatively with dogmatism, closed-mindedness, and hubristic pride and positively with openness, assertiveness, authentic pride. It also predicted openness and closed-mindedness over and above education, social desirability, and other measures of IH. The limitations-owning understanding of IH and scale allow for a more nuanced, spectrum interpretation and measurement of the virtue, which directs future study inside and outside of psychology.
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.