A Bifactor Model of Personality Organization

Hörz-Sagstetter, Susanne; Volkert, Jana; Rentrop, Michael; Benecke, Cord; Gremaud-Heitz, Daniela J.; Unterrainer, ­Human-Friedrich; Schauenburg, Henning; Seidler, Daniel; Buchheim, Anna; Doering, Stephan; Feil, Markus G.; Clarkin, John F.; Dammann, Gerhard; Zimmermann, Johannes

doi:10.1080/00223891.2019.1705463

Cited by 27 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…), and one of the main challenges is that data obtained through different measures are hard to compare. For example, measures are available that are based on psychodynamic conceptualizations (e.g., Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis – Structure Questionnaire Short Form [OPD-SQS] [24, 25]; Inventory of Personality Organization [IPO] [26, 27]), AMPD criterion A (LPFS – Brief Form [LPFS-BF] [28]; LPFS – Self-Report [LPFS-SR] [29]), AMPD criterion B (PID-5) [22] and ICD-11 (Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder [SASPD] [30]). Despite their semantic similarities [31], it is not clear whether these measures assess the same construct and how scores obtained from these measures can be compared.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Common Metric for Self-Reported Severity of Personality Disorder

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Dimensional models of personality disorders (PD) in the DSM-5 and ICD-11 share a focus on impairments in self and interpersonal functioning to represent the general features and severity of PD. This new perspective has led to the development of numerous measures for assessing individual differences in PD severity. While this improves choices for researchers and practitioners, it also poses the challenge of an increasing lack of standardization. Objective: The aim of this study is to establish a common metric across 6 widely used self-report measures of PD severity using item response theory models. Methods: 849 participants completed a survey including the Inventory of Personality Organization-16-item version (IPO-16), the Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Brief Form 2.0, the Level of Personality Functioning Scale-Self-Report, the Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis-Structure Questionnaire Short Form, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5-Brief Form Plus and the Standardized Assessment of Severity of Personality Disorder (SASPD). We fitted exploratory multidimensional graded response models and used bifactor rotation to extract a general factor across measures. Factor scores were linked to representative T scores using data from a representative survey of 2,502 participants who completed the IPO-16. Results: When using bifactor rotation in a 7-factor model, all items loaded positively on the general factor, and the general factor explained 65.5% of the common variance. With the exception of the SASPD, all measures provided highly discriminating items (factor loadings > 0.70) for measuring the general factor and reached an acceptable reliability (> 0.80) across a wide range of the latent continuum. We constructed a crosswalk table linking total scores of the 6 measures to each other and to representative T scores. Conclusions: Our results suggest that 6 different self-report measures of the severity of PD capture a strong common factor and can therefore be scaled along a single latent continuum. Our results may facilitate instrument-independent assessment of severity of PD and increase comparability across studies.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Common Metric for Self-Reported Severity of Personality Disorder

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Com isso, as pessoas tendem a não endossar itens que descrevem comportamentos que indicam falha no desenvolvimento moral e prazer no sofrimento dos outros por serem socialmente indesejáveis. Outra hipótese que pode explicar essa diferença moderada no tamanho de efeito é o fato dos itens captarem comportamentos muito severos e/ou específicos de um único transtorno, no caso, o antissocial 19 . Desse modo, para a investigação específica destes fatores, seria importante que a amostra contasse com grupos previamente estabelecidos, como uma amostra de pessoas com transtorno da personalidade antissocial ou de réus confessos de crimes cometidos intencionalmente contra os outros.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Inventário de Organização da Personalidade – Brasil: evidências de validade baseadas em critérios externos

Silveira

Oliveira

Bandeira

2021

REFACS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este é um estudo quantitativo realizado entre 2014 a 2015 nas cidades de Erechim, Canoas e Porto Alegre com pacientes em tratamento psicoterápico e/ou psiquiátrico (amostra clínica) e estudantes da modalidade Ensino de Jovens e Adultos e de cursos superiores (amostra não clínica), com o objetivo de examinar a capacidade do Inventário de Organização de Personalidade – Brasil em discriminar pessoas com diferentes níveis de organização da personalidade. Participaram 180 indivíduos, sendo 69% pacientes em atendimento psiquiátrico ou psicológico e 31% estudantes. As médias do grupo clínico foram maiores em todas as escalas do que as médias do grupo não clínico (d variou de 0,60 a 1,30). Quando comparados os grupos de participantes de acordo com seus níveis de organização da personalidade, os escores não discriminaram todos os grupos, tendo sido observado um padrão de três níveis: normal; prejuízo leve; e, prejuízo grave. Os escores tenderam a diferenciar esses três grupos. Com isso, entende-se que há evidências de validade, baseadas em critérios externos, de que os escores são capazes de identificar níveis de prejuízo no funcionamento da personalidade.

show abstract

“…General factor models of different cerebral functions have become widely accepted 7 . These models range from general factors of fluid intelligence 1 , emotional intelligence 13 , psychopathology 3,4 , personality 14 , and personality disorder 15 to a general factor of personality organization 16 . While general factor models have not been fully undisputed, their validity results from two long-known observations: (i) high associations between different cognitive abilities (g factor) and (ii) high comorbidity between different psychological disorders (p factor).…”

Section: The G and P Factormentioning

confidence: 99%

The link between mitochondria, psychopathology, and intelligence: A bioenergetic model of cerebral function

Fissler¹,

Mavioğlu²,

Wenzel³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decomposing the structure of human cerebral function in its domains, such as affect regulation or cognition, forms the backbone of psychiatric diagnosis and treatment. Research continues to decipher the domains and hierarchical structure of cerebral function. So far, the findings strongly suggest two higher-order latent factors of general psychopathology (p factor) and general intelligence (g factor). Both general factors are functions of the same organ, covary, share risk factors as well as biomarkers, and benefit from the same treatments. However, to our knowledge, a model that connects both components of cerebral function within a higher-order latent factor and describes its potential biological underpinning is lacking. First, we suggest the general factor of cerebral function (c factor) as the shared variance of the measures of g and p in a bi-factor model. Second, we propose and provide evidence that mitochondrial bioenergetics (MB) is one core biological underpinning of c. Third, we describe how this c factor mito-bioenergetics (CMB) model may transform research and clinical practice by advancing knowledge of treatment effects, risk factors, biomarkers and clinical outcomes. Finally, we present a CMB model-based hypothesis stating that fatigue—as a phenotypical correlate of MB—directly loads on c.

show abstract

A Bifactor Model of Personality Organization

Cited by 27 publications

References 47 publications

A Common Metric for Self-Reported Severity of Personality Disorder

A Common Metric for Self-Reported Severity of Personality Disorder

Inventário de Organização da Personalidade – Brasil: evidências de validade baseadas em critérios externos

The link between mitochondria, psychopathology, and intelligence: A bioenergetic model of cerebral function

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About