A comparison of the DSM-5 Section II and Section III personality disorder structures

Jaime Anderson, Stephen Snider, Martin Sellbom, Robert Krueger, Christopher Hopwood

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

63 Scopus citations

Abstract

The DSM-5 Section III includes a hybrid model for the diagnosis of personality disorders, in which sets of dimensional personality trait facets are configured into personality disorder types. These PD types resemble the Section II categorical counterparts with dimensional traits descriptive of the Section II criteria to maintain continuity across the diagnostic systems. The current study sought to evaluate the continuity across the Section II and III models of personality disorders. This sample consisted of 397 undergraduate students, administered the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (Krueger et al., 2012) and the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-IV Axis II Disorders-Personality Questionnaire (First et al., 2013). We examined whether the DSM-5 Section III trait facets for the PDs would be associated with their respective Section II counterparts, as well as determining whether additional facets could augment the prediction of the Section II disorders. Results revealed that, generally, the DSM-5 Section II disorders were most strongly associated with their Section III traits. Results also showed evidence to support the addition of facets not included in the Section III diagnostic criteria in the prediction of most disorders. These results show general support for the Section III model of personality disorders, however, results also show that additional research is needed to replicate these findings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)363-372
Number of pages10
JournalPsychiatry Research
Volume216
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 30 2014

Keywords

  • DSM-5
  • PID-5
  • Personality disorders
  • Personality traits

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of the DSM-5 Section II and Section III personality disorder structures'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this