A Hierarchical Multiple-Level Approach to the Assessment of Interpersonal Relatedness and Self-Definition: Implications for Research, Clinical Practice, andDSMPlanning

Abstract

Extant research suggests there is considerable overlap between so-called two-polarities models of personality development, that is, models that propose that personality development evolves through a dialectic synergistic interaction between two key developmental tasks across the life span -the development of self-definition on the one hand and of relatedness on the other. These models have attracted considerable research attention and play a central role in DSM planning. This paper provides a researcher-and clinician-friendly guide to the assessment of these personality theories. We argue that current theoretical models focus on issues of relatedness and self-definition at different hierarchically organized levels of analysis, that is, (a) at the level of broad personality features, (b) at the motivational level, that is, the motivational processes underlying the development of these dimensions, and (c) at the level

Personality, Psychopathology, and Health Through the Lens of Interpersonal Relatedness and Self-Definition

“…Consistent with basic psychoanalytic assumptions, for Blatt there is no neat distinction between -normal‖ and -abnormal‖ or disrupted personality development (Blatt, 2008;Blatt and Luyten, 2009;Blatt and Shichmann, 1983). His views also do not assume a neat distinction between normal variations in personality development, -symptom disorders‖, and -personality disorders.‖ As I will discuss in more detail later, mainstream psychology and psychiatry have rediscovered the validity of both of these latter assumptions, and Blatt's work in this context has had a profound influence, not least on the most recent formulations in DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013;Luyten and Blatt, 2015;Skodol and Bender, 2009). Briefly, Blatt viewed personality development as proceeding through a continuous dialectic interaction between the capacities for interpersonal relatedness and self-definitionthat is, the capacity to establish and maintain, respectively, (a) reciprocal, meaningful, and personally satisfying interpersonal relationships, and (b) a coherent, realistic, differentiated, and essentially positive sense of self or an identity (see Figure 1).…”

Protective factors for depressive symptoms in adolescents: Interpersonal relationships and perceived social support

“…As an important external environmental factor, interpersonal relationships have significant associations with various psychological outcomes among adolescents, such as emotional distress (Bámaca‐Colbert, Umaña‐Taylor, & Gayles, ; Kenny, Dooley, & Fitzgerald, ), self‐definition (Luyten & Blatt, ), and physical well‐being (Adam et al., ). A large number of prospective studies have shown that good‐quality interpersonal relationships can decrease the risk of depressive symptoms (e.g., Desjardins & Leadbeater, ; Ehrlich, Cassidy, Lejuez, & Daughters, ; Pössel et al., ).…”

The effect of childhood emotional maltreatment on romantic relationships in young adulthood: A double mediation model involving self-criticism and attachment.

“…RUNNING HEAD: MALTREATMENT, PERSONALITY, ATTACHMENT, RELATIONSHIPS 6 Recent research in this context suggests that personality and attachment perspectives can be integrated into a hierarchical model, ranging from relatively broad schemas to more relationship-specific working models of self and others (Luyten & Blatt, 2011;Sibley, 2007). Accordingly, the assessment measures that have been developed from within each perspective (e.g., personality, attachment) can be hierarchically organized, as such measures assess the same constructs at varying levels of abstraction (Luyten & Blatt, 2015).…”