Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Assessment
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Miller, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Lynam, D. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Miller, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Lynam, D. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Dependent Personality Disorder

Comparing an Expert Generated and Empirically Derived Five-Factor Model Personality Disorder Count

Joshua D. Miller

The University of Georgia, jdmiller{at}uga.edu

Donald R. Lynam

Purdue University

Assessment of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Ed.; DSM-IV ) personality disorders (PDs) using five-factor model (FFM) prototypes and counts has shown substantial promise, with a few exceptions. Miller, Reynolds, and Pilkonis suggested that the expert-generated FFM dependent prototype might be misspecified in relation to the DSM-IV because of the overemphasis of high Agreeableness and underemphasis of low Conscientiousness in the experts' conception. A meta-analytic review of the relations between the FFM facets and Dependent PD (DPD) was conducted and used to create a revised, empirically based FFM DPD profile and count. The revised profile and count were more strongly correlated with DSM and non-DSM conceptualizations of maladaptive dependency. In addition, the revised FFM DPD profile was able to recreate the patterns of comorbidity typically found when using DSM-IV measures of DPD. Possible explanations for the discrepancy between the expert ratings and the meta-analytic results are offered.

Key Words: five-factor model • dependent personality disorder • prototypes • dependency • meta-analysis

Assessment, Vol. 15, No. 1, 4-15 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1073191107306095
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?