The DSM-5 Trait Measure in a Psychiatric Sample of Late Adolescents and Emerging Adults: Structure, Reliability, and Validity

Abstract

The inclusion of a dimensional trait model of personality pathology in DSM-5 creates new opportunities for research on developmental antecedents of personality pathology. The traits of this model can be measured with the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), initially developed for adults, but also demonstrating validity in adolescents. The present study adds to the growing body of literature on the psychometrics of the PID-5, by examining its structure, validity, and reliability in 187 psychiatric-referred late adolescents and emerging adults. PID-5, Big Five Inventory, and Kidscreen self-reports were provided, and 88 non-clinical matched controls completed the PID-5. Results confirm the PID-5's five-factor structure, indicate adequate psychometric properties, and underscore the construct and criterion validity, showing meaningful associations with adaptive traits and quality of life. Results are discussed in terms of the PID-5's applicability in vulnerable populations who are going through important developmental transition phases, such as the step towards early adulthood.

Understanding adolescent personality pathology from growth trajectories of childhood oddity

“…All adolescents filled out the PID-5 (American Psychiatric Association), which is the official copyrighted measure of the American Psychiatric Association for describing the DSM-5 personality pathology traits (Krueger et al, 2012) adopted in Section III (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Although this measure was initially developed for adults, it also shows acceptable psychometric properties and a comparable factor structure in both community (De Clercq et al, 2014) and referred adolescents (De Caluwé, Verbeke, van Aken, Van der Heijden, & De Clercq, 2017). The PID-5 consists of 220 items that have to be rated on a 4-point rating scale.…”

Personality Inventory for DSM-5 in China: Evaluation of DSM-5 and ICD-11 Trait Structure and Continuity With Personality Disorder Types

“…These findings are consistent with prior research, including a Czech study showing non-dimensionality of the noncontributed facets of callousness, risk-taking, depressivity, and suspiciousness (41), as well as a French study reporting nondimensionality of callousness and depressivity (12). Additionally, prior exploratory factor analysis studies of the 25 PID-5 facets have shown that some facets exhibit cross-loading over the five-factor higher-order structure [e.g., rigid perfectionism loading primarily on psychoticism instead of disinhibition; (22)]. Some facets exhibit pure relationships with their corresponding domains, while others share meaningful features across domains (50,51), which is reflected in the DSM-5 domain scoring rubric.…”

“…Several studies employing various methods, including exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (21), have confirmed the five-factor, 25-facet structure of the PID-5 (16,17). Recently, this structure has been supported by studies of vulnerable populations, including adolescent and youngadult psychiatric patients (22). However, consistent findings of cross-loading between non-contributing facets (e.g., restricted affect, depressivity, hostility, rigid perfectionism, perseveration, and callousness) have raised questions about distinctions between contributing and non-contributing facets (16,23).…”

A Brief but Comprehensive Review of Research on the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders

“…Third, considerable evidence has accumulated in favor of the hypothesis that the PID-5 trait domains can be conceived of as maladaptive variants of general personality traits [77,84,144,149,152,165,168,[173][174][175][176][177][178][179][180][181][182]. Specifically, negative affectivity was consistently associated with low emotional stability, detachment with low extraversion, antagonism with low agreeableness, and disinhibition with low conscientiousness.…”

“…Finally, maladaptive traits have been found to be associated with a range of other variables, including age [75]; gender [75,217]; general symptom distress [66,77,84,172,[218][219][220]; psychotic disorder [221,222]; dissociative experiences [223]; bipolar disorder [224]; attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [225]; problematic alcohol use [66, 226•]; substance use [140,227,228]; self-harm [229]; pathological gambling [230]; internet-gaming disorder [231]; problematic internet use [223]; posttraumatic stress disorder [232, 233•]; physical illness [233•]; disability [57, [234][235][236]; quality of life [149,236]; self-esteem [150]; alexithymia [150]; empathy, self-reflection, and insight [150]; maladaptive schemas [237]; interpersonal problems [150,238,239]; pathological beliefs [240]; defensive styles [241]; emotion dysregulation [150,242]; anxiety mindset [205]; impulsivity [227]; aggression…”