Comparing Personality Disorder Models: FFM and DSM-IV

描述(由申请人提供)：拟议的研究将允许当前的DSM-IV人格障碍分类模型直接与人格的五因素模型(FFM)进行比较，基础是临床环境中的时间稳定性、收敛和区分有效性以及临床实用性。FFM是作为当前DSM-IV系统的替代方案而被提出的维度模型中研究最多的。DSM-IV和FFM评级将在一组75名目前正在接受人格障碍门诊心理治疗的自我转介个人中使用临床实践中使用的四种主要评估方法进行评估：客户治疗师的非结构化临床访谈、训练有素的研究人员的半结构化访谈、自我报告表和告密者报告。此外，同样的参与者将在六个月后再次接受评估，以检查每个模型的时间稳定性。最后，治疗这些客户并提供非结构化临床访谈评分的治疗师也将就每种模型的临床应用提供反馈。希望这项研究将有助于更好地概念化人格困难，并最终建立一个更连贯和更有用的诊断系统。

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): The proposed study will allow the current DSM-IV categorical model of personality disorders to be compared directly to the Five-Factor model (FFM) of personality, on the basis of temporal stability within a clinical setting, convergent and discriminant validity, and clinical utility. The FFM is the most heavily researched of the dimensional models that have been proposed as an alternative for the current DSM-IV system. The DSM- IV and FFM ratings will be assessed in a group of 75 self-referred individuals who are currently receiving outpatient psychotherapy for a personality disorder using the four primary methods of assessment used in clinical practice: unstructured clinical interview by the client's therapist, semi-structured interview by a trained researcher, self-report inventory and informant report. Additionally, the same participants will be assessed again after six months to examine the temporal stability of each model. Finally, the therapists who are treating these clients and providing the unstructured clinical interview ratings will also provide feedback on the clinical utility of each model. It is hoped that this research will help to better conceptualize personality difficulties and ultimately a more coherent and useful diagnostic system.