Abstract
There is a fundamental change proposed for DSM-5 in the general definition of personality disorder, representing a new conceptualization
that shapes how the DSM distinguishes personality pathology from other undesirable or negative personality features. The change
is needed due to serious deficiencies in the current DSM-IV approach. Specifically, personality disorder is to be conceptualized
as impairment in both self organization and interpersonal relating, caused by pathological (extreme) personality traits. This
represents progress in that marked impairment in self organization and interpersonal relating are plausibly characteristic
of personality disorder. However, the required level of impairment remains too low, and the kinds of impairment are not restricted
to those which indicate disorder versus culturally undesirable features. Moreover, extreme traits are neither necessary nor
sufficient for personality disorder because personality represents not the sum of traits but the holistic organization of
traits and other meanings. The DSM-5’s diagnostic focus on traits thus potentially opens the way to massive false positive
diagnoses. An earlier proposal to reframe personality disorders using global similarity matching of the patient’s condition
to prototypical descriptions of specific personality disorders is argued to also lead toward less valid diagnoses.
that shapes how the DSM distinguishes personality pathology from other undesirable or negative personality features. The change
is needed due to serious deficiencies in the current DSM-IV approach. Specifically, personality disorder is to be conceptualized
as impairment in both self organization and interpersonal relating, caused by pathological (extreme) personality traits. This
represents progress in that marked impairment in self organization and interpersonal relating are plausibly characteristic
of personality disorder. However, the required level of impairment remains too low, and the kinds of impairment are not restricted
to those which indicate disorder versus culturally undesirable features. Moreover, extreme traits are neither necessary nor
sufficient for personality disorder because personality represents not the sum of traits but the holistic organization of
traits and other meanings. The DSM-5’s diagnostic focus on traits thus potentially opens the way to massive false positive
diagnoses. An earlier proposal to reframe personality disorders using global similarity matching of the patient’s condition
to prototypical descriptions of specific personality disorders is argued to also lead toward less valid diagnoses.
- Content Type Journal Article
- Category Original Paper
- Pages 1-16
- DOI 10.1007/s10615-012-0402-5
- Authors
- Jerome C. Wakefield, Silver School of Social Work and Department of Psychiatry, New York University (NYU), 1 Washington Square N., New York, NY 10003, USA
- Journal Clinical Social Work Journal
- Online ISSN 1573-3343
- Print ISSN 0091-1674