Personalized models of personality disorders: using a temporal network method to understand symptomatology and daily functioning in a clinical sample

Abstract

BackgroundAn ongoing challenge in understanding and treating personality disorders (PDs) is a significant heterogeneity in disorder expression, stemming from variability in underlying dynamic processes. These processes are commonly discussed in clinical settings, but are rarely empirically studied due to their personalized, temporal nature. The goal of the current study was to combine intensive longitudinal data collection with person-specific temporal network models to produce individualized symptom-level structures of personality pathology. These structures were then linked to traditional PD diagnoses and stress (to index daily functioning).MethodsUsing about 100 daily assessments of internalizing and externalizing domains underlying PDs (i.e. negative affect, detachment, impulsivity, hostility), a temporal network mapping approach (i.e. group iterative multiple model estimation) was used to create person-specific networks of the temporal relations among domains for 91 individuals (62.6% female) with a PD. Network characteristics were then associated with traditional PD symptomatology (controlling for mean domain levels) and with daily variation in clinically-relevant phenomena (i.e. stress).ResultsFeatures of the person-specific networks predicted paranoid, borderline, narcissistic, and obsessive-PD symptom counts above average levels of the domains, in ways that align with clinical conceptualizations. They also predicted between-person variation in stress across days.ConclusionsRelations among behavioral domains thought to underlie heterogeneity in PDs were indeed associated with traditional diagnostic constructs and with daily functioning (i.e. stress) in person-specific networks. Findings highlight the importance of leveraging data and models that capture person-specific, dynamic processes, and suggest that person-specific networks may have implications for precision medicine.

Connections that characterize callousness: Affective features of psychopathy are associated with personalized patterns of resting-state network connectivity

“…In fact, there were no connections among ROIs that were common across participants. This may seem unsurprising because it is consistent with previous research that has applied GIMME to samples marked by significant heterogeneity (e.g., mixed gender sample with varying levels of psychiatric comorbidities; Dotterer et al, 2019 ). However, it emphasizes the dangers of relying on averaging approaches (i.e., relying on combining neural metrics across individuals) that dominate the extant literature (i.e., they mask important individual differences in neural mechanisms).…”

Bridging the gap between complexity science and clinical practice by formalizing idiographic theories: a computational model of functional analysis

“…The network perspective to psychopathology [5][6][7][8], conceptualizing psychological disorders as complex interactions of symptoms and related mental health factors, provides a framework to address this movement. Statistical procedures that allow for the estimation of psychopathological networks have been developed [9][10][11] and applied across a wide range of mental disorders [12][13][14][15].…”

Descriptive, Predictive and Explanatory Personality Research: Different Goals, Different Approaches, but a Shared Need to Move beyond the Big Few Traits

“…Beck & Jackson, 2020), which further complicates connecting them with population–level variance in individual differences constructs (cf. Beltz, Wright, Sprague, & Molenaar, 2016; Dotterer, Beltz, Foster, Simms, & Wright, in press; Lazarus, Sened, & Rafaeli, 2020; Woods et al, 2020; Wright & Zimmermann, 2019). The more idiosyncratic the associations are, the less practical and even plausible it is to identify the specific causes of individual differences, at least as long as these are defined as dimensions along which individuals vary.…”