CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 689Personality Disorders and PsychopathologyPersonality Traits and PsychologyMental Health Research Topics

Using the five-factor model to represent the DSM-IV personality disorders: An expert consensus approach.

Lynam, Donald R., Widiger, Thomas A.·2001·Journal of Abnormal Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0021-843x.110.3.401
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study sought to extend previous work on the five-factor dimensional model (FFM) of personality disorder (PD) by developing more comprehensive FFM descriptions of prototypic cases. Specifically, the authors asked experts in each of the 10 DSM-IV PDs to rate the prototypic case by using all 30 facets of the FFM. Aggregating across raters of the given disorder generated a prototype for each disorder. In general, there was good agreement among experts and with previous theoretical and empirical FFM translations of DSM diagnostic criteria. Furthermore, the ability of the FFM explanation to reproduce the high comorbidity rates among PDs was demonstrated. The authors concluded that, with the possible exception of schizotypal PD, the DSM PDs can be understood from the dimensional perspective of the FFM. Future directions for research, including the use of the present prototypes to "diagnose" personality disorder, are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0021-843x.110.3.401

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Lay raters' consensual profile of narcissistic individuals strongly matched academician (r = 0.92) and clinician (r = 0.95) profiles of prototypical NPD.

    “Despite the purposeful lack of explicit operationalization of narcissism provided to these lay raters, the consensual profile of narcissistic individuals strongly matched the academician, i.e., r = 0.92 (Lynam & Widiger 2001), and clinician profiles, i.e., r = 0.95 (Samuel & Widiger 2004), of the prototypical NPD profile.”

    From Controversies in Narcissism (2017) · cites this paper as Lynam & Widiger 2001

  • Expert ratings by researchers and clinicians and meta-analytic reviews identify entitlement, manipulativeness, and callousness as key traits associated with narcissism and NPD.

    “expert ratings by researchers and clinicians (Brown et al. 2009, Lynam & Widiger 2001, Samuel & Widiger 2004, Samuel et al. 2012, Thomas et al. 2012) and meta-analytic reviews (e.g., O'Boyle et al. 2015, Samuel & Widiger 2008a) identify these as key traits associated with narcissism and NPD.”

    From Controversies in Narcissism (2017) · cites this paper as Lynam & Widiger 2001

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lynam, D. R., & Widiger, T. A.
Affiliations
University of Kentucky (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Abnormal Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2001-08
Volume
110
Issue
3
Pages
401-412
ISSN
  • 0021-843X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1846
DOI
10.1037/0021-843x.110.3.401
OpenAlex
W2132494154
Cited by
688
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 51
FWCI
15.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Abnormal Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH 60104, R01MH060104)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
Big Five personality traits, personality disorders, DSM-IV personality disorders, personality disorder comorbidity, schizotypal personality disorder, dimensional personality assessment, personality disorder diagnosis
MeSH terms
Adult, Consensus Statements as Topic, Consensus Development Conferences as Topic, Diagnosis, Differential, Expert Testimony, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Personality Disorders, Psychiatry, Psychology, Psychopathology, Surveys and Questionnaires, Observer Variation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review