Evaluating a Trait Profile Approach to Personality Pathology Erika N' Carlson and R' Michael Furr Wa

1
Evaluating a Trait Profile Approach to
Personality PathologyErika N. Carlson and R.
Michael FurrWake Forest University
Table 1 Personality Disorder
Standard Regression Weights

R2 ßelev
ßscat ßshap Schizoid
.28 -.19 .04
.50 Avoidant .41
-.12 .11 .64 Dependent
.30 .06 .02
.54 Histrionic .28
.28 -.03 .50 Narcissistic
.36 .00 .09
.60 Antisocial .37
-.12 -.03 .56 Compulsive
.50 .30 -.06
.63 Schizotypal .30 -.01
.17 .55 Borderline
.42 .14 -.02
.67 Paranoid .23
-.09 .01 .46 Mean
.35 .03 .03
.57 p lt .05 p lt .01 plt.001
plt.10

• INTRODUCTION
• A contemporary approach to personality pathology
  views personality disorders as extreme variants
  of normal personality
• Conceptualization and assessment of personality
  pathology can occur through profile matching,
  reflecting the similarity between an individuals
  trait profile and a prototypical trait profile
  describing a personality disorder.
• Omnibus measures of profile similarity combine
  the three indices of profile similarity
  elevation, scatter, and shape (Cronbach
  Glesser, 1953). See Figure 1 (below) and Figure
  2 (to the right) for an illustration of the three
  indices.

Figure 1

• METHOD
• Participants (n 219) completed
• 1)The NEO-PI-R, a measure of the five-factor
  traits. It has been used in a profile approach
  to personality pathology.
• 2) The MCMI, a widely used measure of personality
  disorders. 3) The BIDR, a measure of socially
  desirable responding.
• Obtaining similarity indices from NEO-PI-R scores
• 1. Elevation mean across all NEO-PI-R facets
• 2. Scatter standard deviation across all
  NEO-PI-R facets.
• 3. Ten Shape indices of profile similarity (one
  for each
• disorder) were computed for each participant
• Participants of NEO-PI-R trait profiles were
  correlated with expert-generated personality
  disorder profiles based on the NEO-PI-R traits
  (Lynam Widiger, 2001).

Table 2 Personality Correlation with
Correlation with Disorder SDE scale
IM scale
MCMI NEO MCMI NEO
Schizoid -.23 -.12
-.14 .19 Avoidant
-.36 -.33 -.12 .11
Dependent -.49 -.30
-.12 .20 Histrionic .20
-.09 -.02 -.40
Narcissistic .24 .07
-.21 -.40 Antisocial -.24
-.01 -.57 -.48
Compulsive .21 .12
.50 .33 Schizotypal -.26
-.40 -.19 -.17 Borderline
-.42 -.37 -.38
-.53 Paranoid -.30 -.17
-.32 -.22 Elevation
-- .06 --
.37 Scatter --
.36 --
.32 Mean -.17 -.16
-.16 -.14 p lt
.05 p lt .01 plt.001 plt.10

• RESULTS
• Profile Similarity (Table 1)
• Multiple regression analyses were conducted for
  each of the ten personality disorders. The three
  indices of profile similarity entered
  simultaneously as predictors of MCMI scale
  scores.
• Profile shape contributed the most predictive
  information across the ten disorders. Elevation
  was overall, weakly predictive and scatter was
  almost completely uninformative.
• Biased Responding (Table 2)
• Self-deceptive enhancement (SDE) is associated
  more strongly, in general, with the direct
  approach than with the indirect, profile-based
  approach.  This difference is not as evident for
  impression management (IM).

PRESENT STUDY 1) Which element of profile
similarity provides the most unique
contribution? We isolated the three indices of
profile similarity and evaluated the information
that each index provided when assessing
profile-based correspondence between abnormal
personality and normal personality traits. 2) Is
biased responding more closely associated with
the direct or indirect (profile-based) measure of
pathology? Socially desirable responding (SDR)
was measured to assess its association with a
direct personality pathology measure (the MCMI)
and an indirect profile-based approach (the
NEO-based profile).
DISCUSSION This study suggests that the specific
pattern of an individuals trait profile (shape)
provides more information than the overall trait
level or variability among an individuals trait
levels when assessing personality pathology from
a profile prototype approach. Socially
desirable responding, specifically self-deceptive
enhancement appears to be more strongly
associated with the direct measure of personality
pathology. As the profile-based approach to
pathology assessment expands to new areas of
personality assessment, future research is needed
to address the influence of SDR on this indirect
measurement approach.
Contact carlen6_at_wfu.edu OR furrrm_at_wfu.edu