Premium
The Validity of Cloninger's Psychobiological Model Versus the Five‐Factor Model to Predict DSM‐IV Personality Disorders in a Heterogeneous Psychiatric Sample: Domain Facet and Residualized Facet Descriptions
Author(s) -
Fruyt Filip,
Clercq Barbara J.,
Wiele Lieve,
Heeringen Kees
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of personality
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.082
H-Index - 144
eISSN - 1467-6494
pISSN - 0022-3506
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00382.x
Subject(s) - psychology , facet (psychology) , personality disorders , personality , temperament and character inventory , clinical psychology , personality assessment inventory , big five personality traits , psychiatry , social psychology
The validity of Cloninger's psychobiological model and the Five‐Factor Model of personality to predict DSM‐IV personality disorders was examined in a psychiatric in‐patient sample of 130 individuals. Patients completed Dutch authorized versions of the TCI (Cloninger, Svrakic, & Przybeck, 1993) and the NEO PI‐R (Costa & McCrae, 1992) and were also administered the ADP‐IV (Schotte & De Doncker, 1994), a Dutch self‐report questionnaire to assess Axis‐II disorders. No personality‐descriptive model proved to be superior in explaining personality disorder symptoms at the higher‐order level: the TCI dimensions better explained the Obsessive‐Compulsive and the Narcissistic disorders, whereas the FFM accounted for more variance of the Avoidant disorder. However, differences were apparent at the lower‐order level with the NEO facets out performing the TCI subscales for six to four personality disorders. FFM facet‐level predictions of Widiger, Trull, Clarkin, Sanderson, and Costa (2002) were partially confirmed, with substantially better results using residualized facet scores. A set of TCI subscale personality disorder relationships is suggested.