No abstract

The Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) in the , fifth edition, Section III, presents a new approach to conceptualizing personality psychopathology and diagnosing personality disorders. The (PID-5) was designed to measure Criterion B of the AMPD and is composed of 25 lower-order facet trait scales that form 5 higher-order domain trait scales. Although the PID-5 has mostly adequate to strong psychometric qualities, the lower-order factor structure of PID-5 facet scales has shown considerable variability across studies, and several PID-5 facets scales show evidence of interstitiality-the cross-loading of facets onto more than 1 domain. This interstitiality is neither unexpected nor especially problematic because complex models of personality have traits that are by nature interstitial. What is problematic, however, is that the factor loadings of these interstitial facets vary across samples, suggesting that some PID-5 facet scales are likely susceptible to sampling error and sampling variability. Moreover, the magnitude of some cross-loadings in some studies is substantive (i.e., ≥ .30). The objective of the current study was to conduct a meta-analysis of the internal structure of the PID-5 to offset potential variability associated with sampling error and gain a clearer picture of the lower-order structure of PID-5 facet scales. This was accomplished using weighted mean factor loadings of the PID-5 facet scales across 14 independent samples ( = 14,743). Results supported that the level of interstitiality decreased when multiple samples were combined, and a clearer picture of the internal structure of the PID-5 facet scales emerged. (PsycINFO Database Record

No abstract

Given substantial rates of major depressive disorder among college and university students, as well as the growing cultural diversity on many campuses, establishing the cross-cultural validity of relevant assessment tools is important. In the current investigation, we examined the Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition (BDI-II; Beck, Steer, & Brown, 1996) among Chinese-heritage (n = 933) and European-heritage (n = 933) undergraduates in North America. The investigation integrated 3 distinct lines of inquiry: (a) the literature on cultural variation in depressive symptom reporting between people of Chinese and Western heritage; (b) recent developments regarding the factor structure of the BDI-II; and (c) the application of advanced statistical techniques to the issue of cross-cultural measurement invariance. A bifactor model was found to represent the optimal factor structure of the BDI-II. Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis showed that the BDI-II had strong measurement invariance across both culture and gender. In group comparisons with latent and observed variables, Chinese-heritage students scored higher than European-heritage students on cognitive symptoms of depression. This finding deviates from the commonly held view that those of Chinese heritage somatize depression. These findings hold implications for the study and use of the BDI-II, highlight the value of advanced statistical techniques such as multigroup confirmatory factor analysis, and offer methodological lessons for cross-cultural psychopathology research more broadly.

The objective of this study was to examine, by gender, whether emotional intelligence (EI), peer social support, and/or family social support partially mediated the influence of verbal IQ on Grade 10 grade point average (GPA) for 192 students (96 male, 96 female). For male students, EI and peer social support predicted GPA and EI mediated the association between verbal IQ and GPA. For female students, EI, peer social support, and family support predicted GPA but did not mediate the association between verbal IQ and GPA. This study further examined whether subscales of EI (intrapersonal, interpersonal, adaptability, and stress management abilities), peer social support and family social support (emotional, socialising, practical, financial, and advice) added to the prediction of GPA after verbal IQ, gender, and socioeconomic status were controlled. Adaptability, stress management and practical family social support each added to the explanation of variability. None of the peer social support subscales predicted additional variance in GPA.