Traditional categorical personality disorder diagnoses are plagued with issues related to high rates of diagnostic co-morbidity, arbitrary diagnostic thresholds, and within-category heterogeneity.
However, across editions of the DSM diagnoses have remained categorical, despite identified limitations of this diagnostic scheme. To address these issues, the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) emerged and has demonstrated sound psychometrics. Similarly, the new ICD-11 PD scheme uses a dimensional classification which also includes a severity dimension. Criterion A draws from the psychodynamic, attachment, and social-cognitive traditions and captures personality pathology in the areas of self (identify and self-direction) and interpersonal (empathy and intimacy) functioning. Criterion B draws from the multivariate and empirical assessment paradigms, and personality dysfunction is assessed using 25 maladaptive trait-facets that can be examined via the five higher-order factors of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism.
To date, significant research attention has focused upon the psychometric properties of measures to assess the AMPD, particularly related to the pathological traits of Criterion B and empirical connections between A and B. However, less studied are clinical applications that address the clinical utility of the model and its measures.
The goal of this Research Topic is to assemble reports investigating the AMPD or the ICD-11 PD scheme in clinical settings and which speak to applied practice. We are particularly interested in empirical works that advance the use of these measures in treatment (e.g., psychotherapy process and outcomes, psychopharmacology, psychiatric treatment facilities), multi-method psychological assessment, forensic practice (e.g., measures of Criteria A and B in court-ordered evaluations, forensic treatment facilities), and ecologically valid applications of the model. It is our hope that an examination of the clinical utility of the model and its measures will encourage clinicians to incorporate this approach into their practice, which we argue is a significant advance in the field.
Specifically, we would like contributors to address the usefulness of the model and measures of Criteria A and B in the detection of personality pathology within clinical settings and relationships to relevant variables (e.g., use of the AMPD/ICD-11 measures in forensic assessment, relationships with psycho-legal opinions). We are also interested in the study of the model and measures of Criteria A and B / ICD-11 pertaining to careful differential diagnosis and investigating relationships with other forms of psychopathology, and psychotherapy process and outcome (e.g., if personality functioning, as assessed by Criterion A, improves following a course of treatment, such mentalization-based, transference-focused, Dialectical Behavior Therapy, etc.). We invite authors to submit original research articles or systematic reviews. Field research with ecological relevance to the practitioner as well as to clinical theory is particularly desired. Case reports which are multi-method, innovative, and offer a substantial contribution to the literature, as well as investigation of the model and measures with respect to the mental health consumer stakeholder, also are desired.
Traditional categorical personality disorder diagnoses are plagued with issues related to high rates of diagnostic co-morbidity, arbitrary diagnostic thresholds, and within-category heterogeneity.
However, across editions of the DSM diagnoses have remained categorical, despite identified limitations of this diagnostic scheme. To address these issues, the Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) emerged and has demonstrated sound psychometrics. Similarly, the new ICD-11 PD scheme uses a dimensional classification which also includes a severity dimension. Criterion A draws from the psychodynamic, attachment, and social-cognitive traditions and captures personality pathology in the areas of self (identify and self-direction) and interpersonal (empathy and intimacy) functioning. Criterion B draws from the multivariate and empirical assessment paradigms, and personality dysfunction is assessed using 25 maladaptive trait-facets that can be examined via the five higher-order factors of Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism.
To date, significant research attention has focused upon the psychometric properties of measures to assess the AMPD, particularly related to the pathological traits of Criterion B and empirical connections between A and B. However, less studied are clinical applications that address the clinical utility of the model and its measures.
The goal of this Research Topic is to assemble reports investigating the AMPD or the ICD-11 PD scheme in clinical settings and which speak to applied practice. We are particularly interested in empirical works that advance the use of these measures in treatment (e.g., psychotherapy process and outcomes, psychopharmacology, psychiatric treatment facilities), multi-method psychological assessment, forensic practice (e.g., measures of Criteria A and B in court-ordered evaluations, forensic treatment facilities), and ecologically valid applications of the model. It is our hope that an examination of the clinical utility of the model and its measures will encourage clinicians to incorporate this approach into their practice, which we argue is a significant advance in the field.
Specifically, we would like contributors to address the usefulness of the model and measures of Criteria A and B in the detection of personality pathology within clinical settings and relationships to relevant variables (e.g., use of the AMPD/ICD-11 measures in forensic assessment, relationships with psycho-legal opinions). We are also interested in the study of the model and measures of Criteria A and B / ICD-11 pertaining to careful differential diagnosis and investigating relationships with other forms of psychopathology, and psychotherapy process and outcome (e.g., if personality functioning, as assessed by Criterion A, improves following a course of treatment, such mentalization-based, transference-focused, Dialectical Behavior Therapy, etc.). We invite authors to submit original research articles or systematic reviews. Field research with ecological relevance to the practitioner as well as to clinical theory is particularly desired. Case reports which are multi-method, innovative, and offer a substantial contribution to the literature, as well as investigation of the model and measures with respect to the mental health consumer stakeholder, also are desired.