Further Validation of the Response Inconsistency Scale for the Personality Inventory for DSM-5

Lowmaster, Sara E.; Hartman, Michael J.; Zimmermann, Johannes; Baldock, Zachary C.; Kurtz, John E.

doi:10.1080/00223891.2019.1674320

Cited by 8 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To ensure valid data, we systematically employed the PID-5 Response Inconsistency Scale (PID-5-RIS) for all samples to detect and exclude cases with random responding. The PID-5-RIS was developed by Keeley et al [38] and subsequently validated in different studies [35, 39, 40]. We consistently excluded cases with a PID-5-RIS score of 17 or above, which is supported by the aforementioned findings.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 62%

International Assessment of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Traits: Toward a Common Nosology in DSM-5.1

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD) and the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders (PD) are largely commensurate and, when combined, they delineate 6 trait domains: negative affectivity, detachment, antagonism/dissociality, disinhibition, anankastia, and psychoticism. Objective: The present study evaluated the international validity of a brief 36-item patientreport measure that portrays all 6 domains simultaneously including 18 primary subfacets. Methods: We developed and employed a modified version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Brief Form Plus (PID5BF+). A total of 16,327 individuals were included, 2,347 of whom were patients. The expected 6-factor structure of facets was initially investigated in samples from Denmark (n = 584), Germany (n = 1,271), and the USA (n = 605) and subsequently replicated in both patient-and community samples from Italy,

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 62%

International Assessment of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Traits: Toward a Common Nosology in DSM-5.1

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To ensure the validity of data in Sample 1, we used the PID-5-RIS developed by Keeley et al (24), which has proven successful in detecting random responses in the original version of PID-5 and has been verified by a number of recent studies (25)(26)(27). In line with these studies, we excluded respondents with a PID-5-RIS score ≥ 17.…”

Section: Plan Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric Properties of the Independent 36-Item PID5BF+M for ICD-11 in the Czech-Speaking Community Sample

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Empirical soundness and international robustness of the PID5BF+M, a shortened version of the PID-5 developed for simultaneous evaluation of maladaptive personality traits in the DSM-5 AMPD and ICD-11 models for personality disorders, was recently confirmed in 16 samples from different countries. Because the modified PID5BF+ scale (36 items) was extracted from the complete 220-item PID-5, an independent evaluation of psychometric properties of a stand-alone PID5BF+M is still missing.Objectives: The present study evaluated the validity and reliability of the 36-item PID5BF+M in comparison with the extracted version from the original PID-5. It also assessed associations between the Borderline Pattern qualifier and trait domain qualifiers.Methods: Two non-clinical samples meeting the inclusion criteria were employed in the study. Sample 1 (n = 614) completed the 220-item PID-5; Sample 2 (n = 1,040) completed the independent 36-item PID5BF+M. Participants were from all 14 regions of the Czech Republic. The Borderline Pattern qualifier was evaluated using a shortened IPDEQ screener.Results: The proposed latent structure of the independent PID5BF+M was confirmed, with an exception of the Disinhibition domain. The results confirmed good internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the measure, as well as some support for the measurement invariance of the independent PID5BF+M in comparison with the extracted version from the original PID-5. Significant associations between the Negative affectivity, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism qualifiers and the IPDEQ items for the emotionally unstable personality disorder of both impulsive and borderline types confirmed good predictive validity of the PID5BF+M in pursuing borderline psychopathology within the ICD-11 model.Conclusions: The independent PID5BF+M was found to be a valid and reliable tool for evaluation of the ICD-11 trait model. However, the Disinhibition domain deserves further investigation in clinical samples as well as in international community samples.

show abstract

“…Computation of domain scores was based on APA's (2013) procedure, that is, using three facets per domain (as recommended by Watters et al, 2019). Of note, the PID-5 Response Inconsistency Scale (Keeley et al, 2016), which was also validated for the PID-5-FBF (Lowmaster et al, 2020), was used in the cleaning of data. 2…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stalking perpetration through the lens of the alternative DSM‐5 model for personality disorders

Gamache

Cloutier

Faucher

et al. 2022

Personality & Mental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Emerging dimensional models of personality disorders such as the Alternative DSM‐5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) provide new opportunities to explore the associations between personality pathology and harmful interpersonal behaviours such as stalking perpetration. Two goals are pursued by this study: (a) To document associations between stalking, level of personality pathology, and pathological personality domains/facets; and (b) to determine the relative importance of maladaptive personality facets in the statistical prediction of stalking. Data from 1489 young adults (18–30 years old) from a community sample were analysed. Moderate positive significant correlations were found between stalking, level of personality pathology, and maladaptive personality domains. A clear gradient of severity of stalking behaviours was found across five severity degrees of personality pathology. Dominance analyses revealed that Deceitfulness was the most dominant statistical predictor in women. Unusual Beliefs and Experiences, a facet from the Psychoticism domain, made an important contribution in the prediction of stalking in men only. Impulsivity was a key predictor in both genders but more markedly in men. Results suggest that the AMPD represents a useful framework to study stalking perpetration. Identification of key personality predictors might prove relevant for identifying risk factors, underlying motives, and treatment targets for stalking perpetrators.

show abstract

Further Validation of the Response Inconsistency Scale for the Personality Inventory for DSM-5

Cited by 8 publications

References 19 publications

International Assessment of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Traits: Toward a Common Nosology in DSM-5.1

International Assessment of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Personality Disorder Traits: Toward a Common Nosology in DSM-5.1

Psychometric Properties of the Independent 36-Item PID5BF+M for ICD-11 in the Czech-Speaking Community Sample

Stalking perpetration through the lens of the alternative DSM‐5 model for personality disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About