همخوانی مقیاس‌های آسیب‌شناسی شخصیت (PSY-5) پرسشنامه MMPI-2-RF با صفات پیشنهادی محور دوم DSM-5

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی مقطع دکتری رشته سنجش و اندازه گیری دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی

2 دانشیار دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی

3 استاد دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی

4 استادیار دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تهران

5 استادیار دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی

6 استادیار دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد اسلام‌شهر

چکیده

این پژوهش با هدف کلی مطالعه انطباق ساختار پنج عاملی شخصیت مرضی (PSY-5) با محور دوم DSM-5 در قالب یک پژوهش پیمایشی پرسشنامه­ای انجام گرفته است. پژوهش از جمله مطالعات روش­شناسی و آزمون­سازی به حساب می­آید. در این تحقیق ابتدا حمایت تجربی داده­های ایرانی برای ساختار پنج عاملی شخصیت مرضی (PSY-5) و ساختار عاملی صفات و حیطه­های کلی شخصیت DSM-5 مطالعه شدند. سپس همخوانی بین مقیاس­های شخصیت مرضی (PSY-5) با حیطه­های پنج‌گانه محور دوم DSM-5 در یک فضای مکنون چندمتغیری با بررسی ساختار عاملی مشترک مقیاس­های PSY-5 و صفات PID-5مطالعه شده است. به منظور گردآوری اطلاعات، پرسشنامه­های MMPI-2-RF و PID-5 در اختیار نمونه­ای به حجم 793 نفر (متشکل از نمونه دانشجویی، غیردانشجویی و کلینیکی) از جامعه بالای 16 سال شهر تهران قرار گرفت که نهایتاً 452 پروتکل از موارد پاسخ داده شده جهت انجام تحلیل­های آماری معتبر تشخیص داده شدند. به تناسب سؤالات پژوهش از روش­های بسته­بندی سوالات، تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی، تحلیل مولفه­های اصلی با چرخش واریماکس، تحلیل عاملی مشترک، برآورد بیشینه درست­نمایی با چرخش پروماکس، تحلیل موازی هورن، تحلیل عاملی تاییدی، شاخص نیکویی برازش(GFI)، نسبت (X2 / d.f.)، شاخص نیکویی برازش اصلاح­شده(AGFI)، شاخص برازش تطبیقی(CFI)، ریشه دوم میانگین مجذورات خطای تقریب­(RMSEA) و نرم­افزارهای SPSS و AMOS استفاده شده است. یافته­ها حاکی از برازش مطلوب مدل تحلیل عاملی تاییدی هر دو مقیاس PSY-5 و PID-5 با داده­ها بوده است. نتایج تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی مشترک نیز با مبانی نظری مورد انتظار انطباق نسبتاً مطلوبی داشته و نشان داده است که هر کدام از مقیاس­های PSY-5 بر روی حیطه­هایی مورد انتظار DSM-5 دارای بار عاملی معنادار بوده­اند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Consistency between the Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) Scales of the MMPI-2-RF Questionnaire and the Characteristics Proposed by DSM-IV Axis II

نویسندگان [English]

  • Azad Hemmati 1
  • Mahmoud Dezhkam 2
  • ali delavar 3
  • Mohammad Kazem Atef Vahid 4
  • Ahmad Borj’ali 5
  • kambiz kamkari 6
1 PhD Candidate of Educational Measurement, Allameh Tabataba’i University
2 Associate Professor, Shahid Beheshti University
3 Professor, Allameh Tabataba’i University
4 Assistant Professor, Tehran University of Medical Sciences
5 Assistant Professor, Allameh Tabataba’i University
6 Assistant Professor, Islamic Azad University- Islamshahr Branch
چکیده [English]

The present research aims to study the consistency between the Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) scales and DSM-IV axis II. The study was a questionnaire survey research applying methodological and testing methods. First, the experimental background of the Iranian data for PSY-5 as well as the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) were studied. Then, the consistency between PSY-5 and DSM-5 was investigated in a multivariate environment through examining the joint factor analysis of PSY-5 and PID-5. The data were collected using MMPI-2-RF and PID-5 questionnaires. The sample population included 793 (student, non-student, and clinical) subjects selected from among all people older than 16 in Tehran. At the end, 452 protocols of the answered items were recognized as valid for doing statistical analysis. Depending on the research questions, the methods of question categorization, exploratory factor analysis, principal component analysis with varimax rotation, common factor analysis, maximum-likelihood estimation with varimax rotation, Horn's parallel analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, goodness of fit index (GFI), X2 / d. f. ratio, adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI), comparative fit index (CFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and SPSS and AMOS software. The results were indicative of a good fitness of the research data with confirmatory factor analysis models for both PSY-5 and PID-5 scales. The results of the common exploratory factor analysis also confirmed the hypothesis, and showed that each scale of PSY-5 had a significant factor loading in the expected areas of DSM-5.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Personality disorders
  • PSY-5 Scale
  • DSM-5 Scale
  • PID-5 Scale
Allan R. Harkness, Jacob A. Finn, John L. McNulty, and Susan M. Shields (2012). The Personality Psychopathology—Five (PSY–5): Recent Constructive Replication and Assessment Literature Review Psychological Assessment 2011. American Psychological Association, Vol. 24, No. 2, 432–443.

A­merican Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition(DSM-5).

 A­merican Psychiatric Association (2012). Rationale for the Proposed Changes to the Personality Disorders Classification in DSM-5. Retrived form internet: http://www.dsm5.org/personalitydisorders.

Ashley M. Smith, (2010). Assessing Personality Disorders Using the MMPI-2-RF. A thesis submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts.

Bagby, R. M., Ryder, A. G., Ben-Dat, D., Bacchiochi, J., & Parker, J. D. A. (2002). Validation of the dimensional factor structure of thePersonality Psychopathology Five in clinical and nonclinicalsamples. Journal of Personality Disorders, 16, 304-316.

Bagby, R. M., Sellbom, M., Costa, P. T., & Widiger, T. A. (2008). Predicting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–Ivpersonality disorders with the five-factor model of personality and the Personality Psychopathology Five. Personality and Mental Health, 2, 55–69. Doi:10.1002/pmh.33

Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Tellegen, A. (2008). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form: Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis:  University of Minnesota Press.

Butcher, J. N., Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegen, A., Dahlstrom, W. G., & Kaemmer, B. (2001). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—2: Manual for administration and scoring (Rev. ed.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Cuijpers P, Smit F, Pennix BW, de Graaf R, ten Have M, Beekman AT(2010).Economic costs of neuroticism. Arch Gen Psychiatry; 67:1086-1093.

Eaton NR, Krueger RF, South SC, Simms LJ, Clark LA.(2011). Contrasting prototypes and dimensions in the classification of personality pathology: evidence that dimensions, but not prototypes, are robust. Psychol Med; 41:1151–1163

Grant BF, Stinson FS, Dawson DA, Chou SP, Ruan WJ (2005).Co-occurrence of DSM-IV personality disorders in the United States: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Compr Psychiatry; 46:1–5

Gutie´rrez-Zotes, J. A., Corte´s, M. J., Valero, J., Pen˜a, J., & Labad, A. (2005). Psychometric properties of the abbreviated Spanish version of TCI–R (TCI–140) and its relationship with the Psychopathological Personalityscales (MMPI–2 PSY–5) in patients. Actas Espan˜olas de Psiquiatrı´a, 33, 231–237.

Hambelton, R. K., Rovinelli, R. J. (1986). Assessing the Dimensionality of a Set of Test Items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 10, 287-302

Harkness A. R., Finn J A., John L. McNulty, and Susan M. Shields (2012). The Personality Psychopathology—Five (PSY–5): Recent Constructive Replication and Assessment Literature Review Psychological Assessment  2011 American Psychological Association, Vol. 24, No. 2, 432–443.

Harkness, A. R. & McNulty, J. L. (2007). Restructured Versions of the MMPI-2 Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) Scales. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, CA.

Harkness, A. R. (2002). Theory and measurement of personality traits. In J. N. Butcher (Ed.), Clinical personality assessment: Practical approaches  (2nd ed., pp. 24–39). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Harkness, A. R., & McNulty, J. L. (1994). The Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY–5): Issue from the pages of a diagnostic manual instead of a dictionary. In S. Strack & M. Lorr (Eds.), Differentiating normal and abnormal personality (pp. 291–315). New York, NY: Springer.

Harkness, A. R., McNulty, J. L., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (1995). The Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5): Constructs and MMPI-2 scales. Psychological Assessment, 7, 104-114.

Horn J. L. (1965). A Rationale and a Test for the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179-185.

Anderson J. L., Selbom M. R. Bagby M, Veltri O. C.,  Markon K. E., and Krueger R. F. (2012). On the Convergence Between PSY-5 Domains and PID-5 Domains and Facets: Implications for Assessment of DSM-5 Personality Traits. Assessment. DOI: 10.1177/1073191112471141.

Kendler K.S. (2009): An historical framework for psychiatric nosology. Psychol Med; 39:1935-1941 doi: 10.1017/S0033291709005753

Krueger R.F., Derringer J, Markon K.E., Watson D, Skodol AE.(2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive perso­nality trait model and inventory for DSM-5. Psychol Med; doi: 10.1017/S0033291711002674

Krueger RF, Eaton NR, Clark LA, Watson D, Markon KE, Derringer J, Skodol A, Livesley WJ(2011a) Deriving an empirical structure for personality pathology for DSM-5. J Pers Disord; 25:170-191

Krueger RF, Eaton NR, Derringer J, Markon KE, Watson D, Skodol AE(2011b). Personality in DSM-5: helping delineate personality disorder content and framing the meta-structure. J Pers Assess; 93: 325-331

Lahey BB. (2009). Public health significance of neuroticism. Am Psychol; 64:241-256

Lynam, D. R., & Widiger, T. A. (2001). Using the Five Factor Model to represent the DSM-IV personality disorders: An expert consensus approach. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 110(3), 401-412.

McCrae RR, Terracciano A, Costa PT Jr, Ozer DJ.(2006). Person factors in the California adult Q-set: Closing the door on personality trait types? Eur J Pers; 20:29-44 doi: 10.1002/per.553

Rapee RM. (2002). The development and modification of temperamental risk for anxiety disorders: prevention of a lifetime of anxiety? Biol Psychiatry; 52:947-957

Roberts BW, Kuncel NR, Shiner R, Caspi A, Goldberg LR. (2007). The power of personality: the comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspect Psychol Sci; 2:313-345

Tackett JL, Balsis S, Oltmanns TF, Krueger RF. (2009). A unifying perspective on personality pathology across the life span: developmental considerations for the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Model of Mental Disorders. Developmental Psychopathology; 21:687-713

Tackett, J. L., Silberschmidt, A. L., Krueger, R. F., & Sponheim, S. R. (2008). A dimensional model of personality disorder: Incorporating DSM Cluster A characteristics. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 1, 27-34.

Trull, T. J., & Durrett, C. A. (2005). Categorical and dimensional models of personality disorder. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 1, 355-380.

Vendrig, A. A., Derksen, J. J. L., & De Mey, H. R. (2000). MMPI–2 Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY–5) and prediction of treatment outcome for patients with chronic back pain. Journal of Personality Assessment, 74, 423–438. doi: 10.1207/ S15327752JPA7403_6

Watson, D., Clark, L. E., & Chmielewski, M. (2008). Structures of personality and their relevance to psychopathology: II. Further articulation of a comprehensive unified trait structure. Journal of Personality, 76, 1545-1585.

Wright AGC, Pincus AL, Hopwood CJ, Thomas KM, Markon KE, Krueger RF. (2012 a). An interpersonal analysis of pathological personality traits in DSM-5. Assessment,

Wright AGC, Thomas KM, Hopwood CJ, Markon KE, Pincus AL, Krueger RF(2012 b). The hierarchical structure of DSM-5 pathological personality traits. J Abnorm Psychol,

Wygant, D. B., Sellbom, M., Graham, J. R., & Schenk, P. W. (2006). Incremental validity of the MMPI-2 PSY-5 scales in assessing self-reported personality disorder criteria. Assessment, 13(2), 178-18.

Zimmerman M, Rothchild L, Chelminski I. (2005). The prevalence of DSM-IV personality disorders in psychiatric outpatients. Am J Psychiatry; 162:1911-1918.