Personality disorders (PDs) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ( DSM-5) are conceptualized as distinct clinical syndromes. However, debate persists about the clinical utility of this categorical model, with many researchers supporting a dimensional model that focuses on pathological personality traits and personality dysfunction. This model was published in Section III of DSM-5 and named the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD). This study evaluated the AMPD by examining relationships between traits and dysfunction with traditional categorical PD constructs among older adults. Older adults ( N = 202) completed the Personality Inventory for DSM-5, Levels of Personality Functioning Scale-Self-Report, and Coolidge Axis II Inventory. Results indicated that pathological personality traits do not relate to categorical PDs in directions predicted by the AMPD. Personality functioning related to categorical PDs in expected theoretical patterns according to the AMPD but lacked incremental validity above pathological personality traits. An implication of these findings is that the AMPD does not fully resolve the age-related issues with the traditional categorical PD model.

The Levels of Personality Functioning Scale—Brief Form 2.0 (LPFS-BF 2.0) is a new measure of personality functioning according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition’s, alternative model of personality disorders, containing a total personality functioning score and two subscales (Self and Interpersonal). The LPFS-BF 2.0 has limited evidence of validity among older adults. Subsequently, this study examined relationships between the LPFS-BF 2.0 and anxiety, interpersonal functioning, and normative personality traits to establish convergent validity. In all, 130 community-dwelling older adults (Mage = 64.61) completed the LPFS-BF 2.0, Geriatric Anxiety Scale, Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Problems (CSIP), and Big Five Inventory–2 (BFI-2). Internal consistency (Cronbach’s α) was acceptable to good for each of the LPFS-BF 2.0 scale scores (Self, α = .74; Interpersonal, α = .85; Total Personality Functioning, α = .79). Correlations were computed between the LPFS-BF 2.0 scales and the Geriatric Anxiety Scale, CSIP, and BFI-2. Overall, significant correlations were detected in expected directions. Additionally, to further establish convergent validity, regression analyses were conducted with the CSIP and BFI-2 scales predicting each of the LPFS-BF 2.0 scales. The models accounted for significant variance, and significant predictors were found in anticipated and theoretically consistent directions. Results provide strong but initial psychometric support for the use of the LPFS-BF 2.0 as an assessment tool for measuring personality functioning among older adults. An implication is that this measure may be used to identify important personality features that are part of a full assessment of personality pathology.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract