Advanced search
1 file | 135.33 KB Add to list

Validation of the FFM PD count technique for screening personality pathology in later middle-aged and older adults

(2013) AGING & MENTAL HEALTH. 17(2). p.180-188
Author
Organization
Abstract
Research on the applicability of the five factor model (FFM) to capture personality pathology coincided with the development of a FFM personality disorder (PD) count technique, which has been validated in adolescent, young, and middle-aged samples. This study extends the literature by validating this technique in an older sample. Five alternative FFM PD counts based upon the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) are computed and evaluated in terms of both convergent and divergent validity with the Assessment of DSM-IV Personality Disorders Questionnaire (shortly ADP-IV; DSM-IV, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – Fourth edition). For the best working count for each PD normative data are presented, from which cut-off scores are derived. The validity of these cut-offs and their usefulness as a screening tool is tested against both a categorical (i.e., the DSM-IV – Text Revision), and a dimensional (i.e., the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology; DAPP) measure of personality pathology. All but the Antisocial and Obsessive-Compulsive counts exhibited adequate convergent and divergent validity, supporting the use of this method in older adults. Using the ADP-IV and the DAPP – Short Form as validation criteria, results corroborate the use of the FFM PD count technique to screen for PDs in older adults, in particular for the Paranoid, Borderline, Histrionic, Avoidant, and Dependent PDs. Given the age-neutrality of the NEO PI-R and the considerable lack of valid personality assessment tools, current findings appear to be promising for the assessment of pathology in older adults.
Keywords
OBSERVERS, VALIDITY, DISORDERS, ADP-IV, 5-FACTOR MODEL, SAMPLES, QUESTIONNAIRE, INSTRUMENTS, PERSPECTIVE, PROTOTYPES, assessment, screening, personality pathology, five-factor model, older adults

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 135.33 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Van den Broeck, Joke, Gina Rossi, Barbara De Clercq, et al. “Validation of the FFM PD Count Technique for Screening Personality Pathology in Later Middle-aged and Older Adults.” AGING & MENTAL HEALTH 17.2 (2013): 180–188. Print.
APA
Van den Broeck, Joke, Rossi, G., De Clercq, B., Dierckx, E., & Bastiaansen, L. (2013). Validation of the FFM PD count technique for screening personality pathology in later middle-aged and older adults. AGING & MENTAL HEALTH, 17(2), 180–188.
Chicago author-date
Van den Broeck, Joke, Gina Rossi, Barbara De Clercq, Eva Dierckx, and Leen Bastiaansen. 2013. “Validation of the FFM PD Count Technique for Screening Personality Pathology in Later Middle-aged and Older Adults.” Aging & Mental Health 17 (2): 180–188.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Van den Broeck, Joke, Gina Rossi, Barbara De Clercq, Eva Dierckx, and Leen Bastiaansen. 2013. “Validation of the FFM PD Count Technique for Screening Personality Pathology in Later Middle-aged and Older Adults.” Aging & Mental Health 17 (2): 180–188.
Vancouver
1.
Van den Broeck J, Rossi G, De Clercq B, Dierckx E, Bastiaansen L. Validation of the FFM PD count technique for screening personality pathology in later middle-aged and older adults. AGING & MENTAL HEALTH. 2013;17(2):180–8.
IEEE
[1]
J. Van den Broeck, G. Rossi, B. De Clercq, E. Dierckx, and L. Bastiaansen, “Validation of the FFM PD count technique for screening personality pathology in later middle-aged and older adults,” AGING & MENTAL HEALTH, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 180–188, 2013.
@article{4415776,
  abstract     = {Research on the applicability of the five factor model (FFM) to capture personality pathology coincided with the development of a FFM personality disorder (PD) count technique, which has been validated in adolescent, young, and middle-aged samples. This study extends the literature by validating this technique in an older sample. Five alternative FFM PD counts based upon the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) are computed and evaluated in terms of both convergent and divergent validity with the Assessment of DSM-IV Personality Disorders Questionnaire (shortly ADP-IV; DSM-IV, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – Fourth edition). For the best working count for each PD normative data are presented, from which cut-off scores are derived. The validity of these cut-offs and their usefulness as a screening tool is tested against both a categorical (i.e., the DSM-IV – Text Revision), and a dimensional (i.e., the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology; DAPP) measure of personality pathology. All but the Antisocial and Obsessive-Compulsive counts exhibited adequate convergent and divergent validity, supporting the use of this method in older adults. Using the ADP-IV and the DAPP – Short Form as validation criteria, results corroborate the use of the FFM PD count technique to screen for PDs in older adults, in particular for the Paranoid, Borderline, Histrionic, Avoidant, and Dependent PDs. Given the age-neutrality of the NEO PI-R and the considerable lack of valid personality assessment tools, current findings appear to be promising for the assessment of pathology in older adults.},
  author       = {Van den Broeck, Joke and Rossi, Gina and De Clercq, Barbara and Dierckx, Eva and Bastiaansen, Leen},
  issn         = {1360-7863},
  journal      = {AGING & MENTAL HEALTH},
  keywords     = {OBSERVERS,VALIDITY,DISORDERS,ADP-IV,5-FACTOR MODEL,SAMPLES,QUESTIONNAIRE,INSTRUMENTS,PERSPECTIVE,PROTOTYPES,assessment,screening,personality pathology,five-factor model,older adults},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {180--188},
  title        = {Validation of the FFM PD count technique for screening personality pathology in later middle-aged and older adults},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2012.717258},
  volume       = {17},
  year         = {2013},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: