< Back to previous page
Publication
Revisiting the Structure of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Section II Personality Disorder Criteria Using Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis
Journal Contribution - Journal Article
Abstract:The factor structure of personality disorder (PD) criteria has long been debated, but due to previous heterogeneous
findings, a common structure to represent covariation among the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV)/DSM-5 Section II PD criteria remains an open question. This
study integrated individual participant data from 25 samples (N= 30,545) to conduct factor analyses of PD
criteria. Measurement invariance tests across gender, clinical status, and assessment method indicated substantial
structural differences between interview-based and self-report measures. In interviews, a confirmatory
10-factor model with factors representing specific DSM-5 PDs showed a major misfit, with results from
exploratory factor analyses suggesting that this was due to a relatively small number of substantial secondary
loadings. In self-reports, a confirmatory 10-factor model showed greater misfit than in interviews, and
exploratory solutions were more complex. When five factors were extracted, the factors showed some similarity
to maladaptive trait domains such as Negative Affectivity and Disinhibition, but therewere substantial
differences in factor content between interviews and self-reports. In bifactor models, a general factor
explained more common variance in self-reports, whereas the content of general factors was similar in
both assessment methods. Our findings suggest that interview and self-report measures of PD criteria are
not structurally equivalent. To advance research on the structure of PD, it may be useful to consequently
focus on the shared variance of multiple methods. For this purpose, future multimethod studies should combine
interviews and self-reports with other assessment methods such as informant reports.
findings, a common structure to represent covariation among the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV)/DSM-5 Section II PD criteria remains an open question. This
study integrated individual participant data from 25 samples (N= 30,545) to conduct factor analyses of PD
criteria. Measurement invariance tests across gender, clinical status, and assessment method indicated substantial
structural differences between interview-based and self-report measures. In interviews, a confirmatory
10-factor model with factors representing specific DSM-5 PDs showed a major misfit, with results from
exploratory factor analyses suggesting that this was due to a relatively small number of substantial secondary
loadings. In self-reports, a confirmatory 10-factor model showed greater misfit than in interviews, and
exploratory solutions were more complex. When five factors were extracted, the factors showed some similarity
to maladaptive trait domains such as Negative Affectivity and Disinhibition, but therewere substantial
differences in factor content between interviews and self-reports. In bifactor models, a general factor
explained more common variance in self-reports, whereas the content of general factors was similar in
both assessment methods. Our findings suggest that interview and self-report measures of PD criteria are
not structurally equivalent. To advance research on the structure of PD, it may be useful to consequently
focus on the shared variance of multiple methods. For this purpose, future multimethod studies should combine
interviews and self-reports with other assessment methods such as informant reports.
Published in: Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment [=PDTRT]
ISSN: 1949-2715
Publication year:2025
Keywords:Factor structure, Individual participant meta-analysis, Item-level analysis, Meta-analytic factor analysis, Personality disorder criteria, Psychology & behavioral sciences
Accessibility:Closed
Review status:Peer-reviewed