Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Implications of DSM-5 Personality Traits for Forensic Psychology

  • Published:
Psychological Injury and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the major innovations in the DSM-5 involves the introduction of evidence-based, dimensional approaches to diagnostic assessment. One way in which dimensions are being incorporated into the DSM-5 is in the form of a trait system that offers an alternative strategy for the diagnosis of personality disorders. The traits that comprise this system rest on the foundation of decades of quantitative research in personality and clinical psychology. Although they are conceptualized in the DSM-5 as primarily relevant to the diagnosis of personality disorder, emerging evidence suggests that these traits offer an evidence-based framework for organizing psychopathology more generally. For instance, trait approaches provide promising solutions to widely cited problems in clinical and forensic assessment such as diagnostic co-occurrence, heterogeneity, and arbitrary cut-offs. In this paper, rather than focusing specifically on the diagnosis of personality disorder, we review the rapidly emerging literature on the DSM-5 traits with special attention to their application beyond personality disorder diagnosis and their use and implications for forensic psychology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We use the term “neo-Kraepelinian medical model” to specifically reference the underlying assumptions of the DSM-III and DSM-IV, which have been carried over for the most part into DSM-5. It is important to note that this perspective is inconsistent with the views of both Kraepelin and the assumptions of construct validity and diagnosis in other branches of medicine in important ways. Kraepelin, who was a student of Wundt among others, was likely less rigid about issues related to syndromal diagnosis than the neo-Kraepelinians who framed the architecture of the DSM-III and DSM-IV (Blashfield, 1984). And many branches of medicine approach pathology in terms of a review of systems model that bears striking resemblance to the structural framework identified in quantitative psychology (e.g., Harkness, Reynolds & Lilienfeld, 2013).

  2. Note that the PID-5, which is the best validated measure of these traits, including brief, informant, and adolescent versions, is freely available online at the DSM-5 website (http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm/dsm5/online-assessment-measures). Although our focus in this paper is on the DSM-5 Section III traits as instantiated in the PID-5 family of instruments, we also note that other trait inventories are useful for conceptualizing psychopathology in general and that emerging evidence indicates that other inventories are capable of recapturing aspects of the DSM-5 trait model in particular.

  3. While this analysis refers specifically to US law, similar factors are typically considered when the trial judge is making a determination about evidence admissibility in other jurisdictions heavily influenced by anglo-saxon law (e.g., Canada).

References

  • Achenbach, T. M. (1966). The classification of children's psychiatric symptoms: A factor-analytic study. Psychological Monographs, 80,(615)

  • Andersen, H. C. (1837/2005). The Emporer’s new clothes. Retrieved from http://www.online-literature.com/hans_christian_andersen/967/

  • Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Wygant, D. B., & Edens, J. F. (2013). Examining the Necessity for and Utility of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory—Revised (PPI-R) Validity Scales. Law and Human Behavior.

  • Ardoff, B. R., Denney, R. L., & Houston, C. M. (2007). Base rates of negative response bias and malingered neurocognitive dysfunction among criminal defendants referred for neuropsychological evaluation. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 21, 899–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., deVries, R. E., Hendricks, J., & Born, M. P. (2012). The maladaptive personality traits of the personality inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in relation to the HEXACO personality factors and schizotypy/dissociation. Journal of Personality Disorders, 26, 641–659.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bagby, R. M., Sellbom, M., Ayearst, L. E., Chmielewski, M. S., Anderson, J. L., & Quilty, L. C. (2013). Exploring the hierarchical structure of the MMPI-2-RF personality psychopathology five in psychiatric patient and university student samples. Journal of Personality Assessment.

  • Berghuis, H., Kamphuis, J. H., & Verheul, R. (2012). Core features of personality disorder: differentiating general personality dysfunctioning from personality traits. Journal of Personality Disorders, 26, 704–716.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, D. P., Iscan, C., & Maser, J. (2007). Opinions of personality disorder experts regarding the DSM-IV personality disorders classification system. Journal of Personality Disorders, 21, 536–551.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blashfield, R. K. (1984). The classification of psychopathology: Neo-Kraepelinian and quantitative approaches. New York: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. A., Campbell, L. A., Lehman, C. L., & Grisham, J. (2001). Current and lifetime comorbidity of DSM-IV anxiety and mood disorders in a large clinical sample. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 110, 585–599.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burchett, D. L., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2010). The impact of overreporting on MMPI-2-RF substantive scale score validity. Assessment, 17, 497–516.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, D. J., Mitchie, C., & Hart, S. D. (2006). Facets of clinical psychopathy: Toward a clearer measurement. In C. Patrick (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 91–106). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993). 405 U.S. 597.

  • De Clercq, B., De Fruyt, F., De Bolle, M., Van Hiel, A., Markon, K. E., & Krueger, R. F. (2013). The hierarchical structure and construct validity of the PID5 trait measure in adolescence. Journal of Personality.

  • De Fruyt, F., De Clercq, B., De Bolle, M., Wille, B., Markon, K. E., & Krueger, R. F. (2013). General and maladaptive traits in a five-factor framework for DSM-5 in a university student sample. Assessment, 20, 295–307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeYoung, C. G., Grazioplene, R. G., & Peterson, J. B. (2012). From madness to genius: the openness/intellect trait domain as a paradoxical simplex. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, K. S., Hart, S. D., Webster, C. D., & Belfrage, H. (2013). HCR-20 version 3: assessing risk for violence. Vancouver, BC: Simon Fraser University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, K. S., & Skeem, J. L. (2005). Violence risk assessment: getting specific about being dynamic. Psychology, Public Policy, and the Law, 11, 347–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feighner, J. P., Robins, E., Guze, S. B., Woodruff, R. A., Winokur, G., & Munoz, R. (1972). Diagnostic criteria for use in psychiatric research. Archives of General Psychiatry, 26, 57–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Few, L. R., Miller, J. D., Rothbaum, A., Meller, S., Maples, J., Terry, D. P., … MacKillop, J. (2013). Examination of the proposed DSM-5 dimensional diagnostic system for personality disorders in an outpatient clinical sample. Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

  • First, M. B., & Westen, D. (2007). Classification for clinical practice: how to make ICD and DSM better able to serve clinicians. International Review of Psychiatry, 19, 473–481.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frye v. United States ((D.C. Cir. 1923).). 293 F. 1013.

  • Gore, W. L., & Widiger, T. A. (2013). The DSM-5 dimensional trait model and five-factor models of general personality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 816–821.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R. D. (1996). Psychopathy: a construct whose time has come. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 25–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2008). Psychopathy as a clinical and empirical construct. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 217–246.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hare, R. D., & Neumann, C. S. (2010). The role of antisociality in the psychopathy construct: comment on Skeem and Cooke (2010). Psychological Assessment, 22, 446–454.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harkness, A. R., & McNulty, J. L. (1994). The Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5): Issues 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: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harkness, A. R., Reynolds, S. M., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2013). A review of systems approach for psychology and psychiatry: Adaptive systems, the Personality Psychopathology Five, and DSM-5. Journal of Personality Assessment.

  • Haslam, N., Holland, E., & Kuppens, P. (2012). Categories versus dimensions in personality and psychopathology: a quantitative review of taxometric research. Psychological Medicine, 42, 903–920.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, B. M., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Krueger, R. F., & Newman, J. P. (2004). Identifying psychopathy subtypes on the basis of personality structure. Psychological Assessment, 16, 276–288.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood, C. J. (2011). Personality traits in the DSM-5. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93, 398–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood, C. J., Malone, J. C., Ansell, E. B., Sanislow, C. A., Grilo, C. M., McGlashan, T. H., … Morey, L. C. (2011). Personality assessment in DSM-V: Empirical support for rating severity, style, and traits. Journal of Personality Disorders, 25, 305–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood, C. J., Schade, N., Krueger, R. F., Wright, A. G. C., & Markon, K. E. (2013a). Connecting DSM-5 personality traits and pathological beliefs: Toward a unifying model. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 35, 162–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood, C. J., Thomas, K. M., Markon, K. E., Wright, A. G. C., & Krueger, R. F. (2012). DSM-5 personality traits and DSM-IV personality disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121, 424–432.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood, C. J., Wright, A. G. C., Ansell, E. B., & Pincus, A. L. (2013b). The interpersonal core of personality pathology. Journal of Personality Disorders, 27, 270–295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood, C. J., Wright, A. G., Krueger, R. F., Shade, N., Markon, K. E., & Morey, L. C. (2013c). DSM-5 pathological personality traits and the personality assessment inventory. Assessment, 20, 269–285.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kotov, R., Gamez, W., Schmidt, F., & Watson, D. (2010). Linking “big” personality traits to anxiety, depressive, and substance use disorders: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 768–821.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, R. F. (1999). The structure of common mental disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 921–926.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, R. F. (2013). Personality disorders: the vanguard of the post DSM-5 era. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment.

  • Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson, D., & Skodol, A. E. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5. Psychological Medicine, 42, 1879–1890.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, R. F., Eaton, N. R., Clark, L. A., Watson, D., Markon, K. E., Derringer, J., … Livesley, W. J. (2011). Deriving an empirical structure of personality pathology for DSM-5. Journal of Personality Disorders, 25, 170–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, R. F. & Markon, K. E. (2013). The role of the DSM-5 personality trait model in moving toward a quantitative and empirically-based approach to classifying personality disorder. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology.

  • Leary, T. F. (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld, S. O. (1994). Conceptual problems in the assessment of psychopathy. Clinical Psychology Review, 14, 17–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld, S. O., Patrick, C. J., Benning, S. D., Berg, J., Sellbom, M., & Edens, J. F. (2012). The role of fearless dominance in psychopathy: confusions, controversies, and clarifications. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3, 327–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livesley, W. J., & Jackson, D. N. (2009). Manual for the dimensional assessment of personality pathology-basic questionnaire. Port Huron: Sigma Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635–694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markon, K. E., Krueger, R. F., & Watson, D. (2005). Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality: an integrative hierarchical approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 139–157.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Markon, K. E., Quilty, L. C., Bagby, R. M., & Krueger, R. F. (2013). The development and psychometric properties of an informant-report form of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Assessment, 20(3), 370–383.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, A. W., & Krueger, R. F. (2013). Mapping the country within: a special section on reconceptualizing the classification of mental disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 891–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, R. E., Mitchell, M., Kim, B. H., & Hough, L. (2010). Evidence for response bias as a source of error variance in applied assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 450–470.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Melton, G., Petrila, J., Poythress, N., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological evaluations for the courts: a handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. D., Gentile, B., Wilson, L., & Campbell, W. K. (2013). Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism and the DSM-5 pathological personality trait model. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95, 284–290.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2012). An examination of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory’s nomological network: a meta-analytic review. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 3, 305–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monahan, J. (2006). A jurisprudence of risk assessment: forecasting harm among prisoners, predators, and patients. Virginia Law Review, 92, 391–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morey, L. C., Krueger, R. F., & Skodol, A. E. (2013). The hierarchical structure of clinician ratings of proposed DSM-5 pathological personality traits. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 836–841.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morey, L. C., & Ochoa, E. S. (1989). An investigation of adherence to diagnostic criteria: clinical diagnosis of the DSM-III personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 3, 180–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morey, L. C., & Skodol, A. E. (2013). Convergence between DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 diagnostic models for personality disorder: evaluation of strategies for establishing diagnostic thresholds. J ournal of Psychiatric Practice, 19, 179–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, B. P. (2005). Graphical analyses of personality disorders in five-factor model space. European Journal of Personality, 19, 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poythress, N. G., & Hall, J. R. (2011). Psychopathy and impulsivity reconsidered. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16, 120–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quilty, L. C., Ayearst, L., Chmielewski, M., Pollock, B. G., & Bagby, R. M. (2013). The psychometric properties of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 in an APA DSM-5 field trial sample. Assessment, 20, 362–369.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Samuel, D. B. (2011). Assessing personality in the DSM-5: the utility of bipolar constructs. Journal Personality Assessment, 93, 390–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuel, D. B., Hopwood, C. J., Krueger, R. F., Thomas, K. M., & Ruggero, C. J. (2013). Comparing methods for scoring personality disorder types using maladaptive traits in DSM-5. Assessment, 20, 353–361.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Samuel, D. B., & Widiger, T. A. (2008). A meta-analytic review of the relationships between the five-factor model and DSM-IV-TR personality disorders: a facet level analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 1326–1342.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanislow, C. A., Pine, D. S., Quinn, K. J., Kozak, M. J., Garvey, M. A., Henssen, R. K., … Cuthbert, B. N. (2010). Developing constructs for psychopathology research: Research domain criteria. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 119, 631–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellbom, M., Anderson, J. L., & Bagby, R. M. (2013). Assessing DSM-5 Section III Personality Traits and Disorders with the MMPI-2-RF. Assessment.

  • Sharma, L., Markon, K. E., & Clark, L. A. (2013). Toward a theory of distinct types of “impulsive” behaviors: A meta-analysis of self-report and behavioral measures. Psychological Bulletin.

  • Simms, L. J., Yufik, T., & Gros, D. F. (2010). Incremental validity of positive and negative valence in predicting personality disorder. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 1, 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skeem, J. L., & Cooke, D. J. (2010). Is criminal behavior a central component of psychopathy? Conceptual directions for resolving the debate. Psychological Assessment, 22, 433–445.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Strickland, C. M., Drislane, L. E., Lucy, M., Krueger, R. F., & Patrick, C. J. (2013). Characterizing psychopathy using DSM-5 personality traits. Assessment, 20, 327–338.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tellegen, A. (1985). Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety, with an emphasis on self-report. In A. H. Tuma & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Anxiety and the anxiety disorders. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. M., Yalch, M. M., Krueger, R. F., Wright, A. G. C., Markon, K. E., & Hopwood, C. J. (2013). The convergent structure of DSM-5 personality trait facets and five-factor model trait domains. Assessment, 20, 308–311.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tackett, J. L. (2006). Evaluating models of the personality-psychopathology relationship in children and adolescents. Clinical Psychology Review, 26, 584–599.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Broeck, J., Bastiaansen, L., Rossi, G., Dierckx, E., DeClercq, B., & Hofmans, J. (2013). Hierarchical structure of maladaptive personality traits in older adults: joint factor analysis of the PID-5 and the DAPP-BQ. Journal of Personality Disorders.

  • Watson, D., Stasik, S. M., Ro, E., & Clark, L. A. (2013). Integrating normal and pathological personality relating the DSM-5 trait-dimensional model to general traits of personality. Assessment, 20, 312–326.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Widiger, T. A., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2013). Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widiger, T. A., & Simonsen, E. (2005). Alternative dimensional models of personality disorder: finding a common ground. Journal of Personality Disorders, 19, 110–130.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Widiger, T. A., & Trull, T. J. (2007). Plate tectonics in the classification of personality disorder: shifting to a dimensional model. American Psychologist, 62, 71–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A. G. C., Krueger, R. F., Hobbs, M. J., Markon, K. E., Eaton, N. R., & Slade, T. (2013a). The structure of psychopathology: toward an expanded quantitative empirical model. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 281–294.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A. G. C., Pincus, A. L., Hopwood, C. J., Thomas, K. M., Markon, K. E., & Krueger, R. F. (2012a). An interpersonal analysis of pathological personality traits in DSM-5. Assessment, 19, 263–275.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A. G. C., Pincus, A. L., Thomas, K. M., Hopwood, C. J., Markon, K. E., & Krueger, R. F. (2013b). Conceptions of narcissism and the DSM-5 pathological personality traits. Assessment, 20, 339–352.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A. G. C. & Simms, L. J. (2013). On the structure of personality disorder traits: Conjoint analyses of the CAT-PD, PID-5, and NEO-PI-3 trait models. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment.

  • Wright, A. G. C., Thomas, K. M., Hopwood, C. J., Markon, K. E., Pincus, A. L., & Krueger, R. F. (2012b). The hierarchical structure of DSM-5 pathological personality traits. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121, 951–957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Robert F. Krueger, Kristian E. Markon, and Aidan G.C. Wright for their specific comments on this paper and ongoing discussion of issues described therein.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA

    Christopher J. Hopwood

  2. The Australian National University, Acton, Australia

    Martin Sellbom

Authors
  1. Christopher J. Hopwood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Sellbom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher J. Hopwood.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hopwood, C.J., Sellbom, M. Implications of DSM-5 Personality Traits for Forensic Psychology. Psychol. Inj. and Law 6, 314–323 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-013-9176-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-013-9176-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation