We tested predicted relationships (Widiger, 1993; Widiger, Trull, Clarkin, Sanderson, & Costa, 1994) between personality disorder scores and facets of the five-factor model, and evaluated the relative benefits of facet-level analyses over domain-level analyses. Data from 614 undergraduates indicated: (a) 63% of the predicted facet relationships were significant, although many unpredicted relationships also emerged; (b) facet-level analyses did not yield substantially stronger effect sizes than domain-level analyses; but (c) facet-level analyses provided much better discrimination between personality disorders than domain-level analyses. Facets of the openness to experience domain also helped discriminate between personality disorders, which is in contrast to previous domain-level findings that openness is not important.
In this study, the authors examined the degrees to which various models of personality disorder (PD) configuration are consistent with the primary data sets from clinical and community samples reported in the recent literature. Factor analyses were conducted on PD intercorrelation matrices, and the loading matrices were rotated to maximum possible fit with target matrices representing the PD configuration models. There was little support for the interpersonal circle or other circular orderings of PDs, or for T. Millon's (1990, 1996) biosocial learning theory. There was moderate support for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed., DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) dimensions, for C. R. Cloninger's (1987) tridimensional theory, and for S. Torgersen and R. Alnaes's (1989) decision tree. There was consistent, stronger support for the 5-factor model (T. A. Widiger, T. J. Trull, J. F. Clarkin, C. Sanderson, & P. T. Costa, 1994) and for an empirically derived 7-factor model by C. R. Cloninger and D. M. Svrakic (1994).
The factor structure of the Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS; Beck & Steer, 1988) was examined among 411 outpatients (male = 132, female = 272, unknown = 7). Varimax-rotated principal-components analysis extracted three factors greater than unity that accounted for 40.4%, 6.9%, and 5.6% of the variance. Because the structure was invariant across factor rotations and levels of hopelessness severity, it is concluded that the BHS consists of three factors (Expectations of Success, Expectations of Failure, and Future Uncertainty).
Personality disorder rigidity and extremity can be geometrically defined and operationalized within the 5-factor model (FFM) of personality. A series of geometric and substantive assumptions were derived and then tested in samples of college students (N = 1,323) and psychiatric patients (N = 86). Normal and disordered personalities were found to coexist in a variety of regions of the FFM multivariate space. Within regions, the profiles of normal and disordered personalities were very similar in characteristic configuration but notably different in profile variability. Personality-disordered individuals tended to be located in the perimeters or outer regions of the FFM space, as indicated by their longer vector lengths. These findings generalized across 2 measures of personality disorders and across 2 measures of normal personality traits.
In this study, the personality characteristics of rock and country musicians were examined. One hundred and seventy-one musicians completed Inter-personal Adjective Scale-Big Five (IASR-B5) measures of personality. The results suggest that such musicians tend to be more arrogant, dominant, ex-traverted, open to experience and neurotic than university males. However, no significant differences were found among singers, guitarists, bass players and drummers.
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.