바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

ISSN : 1229-0653

Article Contents

Next
e-Submission

Vol.30 No.3
Citation Share

Reliability and Validity ofthe Korean version Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5)

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2016, v.30 no.3, pp.1-24
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2016.30.3.001


& (2016). Reliability and Validity ofthe Korean version Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 30(3), 1-24, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2016.30.3.001
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

This research tested the reliability and validity of The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) - which is based on ‘Pathological personality traits’, the core criterion of DSM-5 Section Ⅲ personality disorder - after translating it into Korean language. The test comprises of 5 domains - negative affect, attachment, antagonism, disinhibition, psychoticism - and each domain comprises of 25 detailed facets, and there are total 220 questions (219 in the Korean version).To 607 adults over the age of 18, along with the Korean version of PID-5, the Korean Personality Disorders Test and PSY-5 were conducted. Descriptive statistic analysis, reliability analysis, exploratory factor analysis, correlation analysis were conducted with collected data. As the result of analyses, first, the Korean PID-5 showed appropriate levels of internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Secondly, reviewing the factor structure, the facets of negative affect domains, attachment domains and psychoticism domains were identical to the factor structure of the original. However, the facets of antagonism domains and disinhibition domains were difference to the factor structure of the original. Thirdly, the Korean version’s PID-5 facet showed positive correlation to each personality disorder’s core personality traits. Fourth, the Korean version’s PID-5 facet showed relatively positive correlation with the PSY-5’s related scales. The results above show that, although there are partial differences to the results of preceding overseas research, the PID-5 is measuring the important characteristics of various personality disorders in this country relatively well, and shows the possibility of becoming a tool for evaluating DSM-5 Section Ⅲ personality disorders.

keywords
성격장애, DSM-5 Section Ⅲ, DSM-5 성격검사, PID-5, Personality disorder, DSM-5 Section Ⅲ, Personality Disorder for DSM-5, PID-5

Reference

1.

김덕준 (2009). SPSS를 활용한 결측치 처리 방안 비교 분석. 한국비교정부학보, 13(1), 177-196.

2.

민경환 (1996). 성격심리학에서의 비교문화 연구. 한국심리학회 창립 50주년 동계연구세미나. 79-103.

3.

서재삼, 황순택 (2006). 한국형 성격장애 진단검사의 개발과 타당화. 한국심리학회지: 임상, 25(1), 273-288.

4.

양익홍, 이흥표, 최명구 (1997). 분열형 성격 대학생의 MMPI 반응특성. 한국교육심리학회, 11(3), 123-145.

5.

오현숙, Goth, K., & 민병배 (2008). 한국사회와 교육적 성취: 문화적 배경과 국가간 비교: 독일과 한국 청소년의 기질 및 성격 특성의 차이. 한국심리학회지: 사회문제, 14(1), 391- 407.

6.

최은경, 하지현 (2013). DSM-5 인격장애에 정신분석적 개념의 진입 시도. 한국정신분석학회, 24, 102-110.

7.

황순택, 조혜선, 박미정, 이주영 (2015). 성격장애와 기질 및 성격특질 간의 관계. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 29(2), 1-13.

8.

American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th edition). Washington. DC.

9.

American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th edition). Washington. DC.

10.

Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Bagby, R. M., Quilty, L. C., Veltri, C. O., Markon, K. E., & Krueger, R. F. (2013). On the convergence between PSY-5 domains and PID-5 domains and facets implications for assessment of DSM-5 personality traits. Assessment, 20, 286-294.

11.

Anderson, J., Snider, S., Sellbom, M., Krueger, R., & Hopwood, C. (2014). A comparison of the DSM-5 Section Ⅱ and Section Ⅲ personality disorder structures. Psychiatry research, 216(3), 363-372.

12.

Arnau, R. C., Handel, R. W., & Archer, R. P. (2005). Principal components analyses of the MMPI-2 PSY-5 scales identification of facet subscales. Assessment, 12(2), 186-198.

13.

Bagby, R. M., Ryder, A. G., Ben-Dat, D., Bacchiochi, J., & Parker, J. D. (2002). Validation of the dimensional factor structure of the Personality Psychopathology Five in clinical and nonclinical samples. Journal of personality disorders, 16(4), 304-316.

14.

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(5), 536-551.

15.

Biederman, J. (2004). Impact of comorbidity in adults with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 65(3), 3-7.

16.

Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), 245-276.

17.

Fossati, A., Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Borroni, S., & Maffei, C. (2013). Reliability and Validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) Predicting DSM-Ⅳ Personality Disorders and Psychopathy in Community-Dwelling Italian Adults. Assessment, 20(6), 689-708.

18.

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.

19.

Hopwood, C. J., Thomas, K. M., Markon, K. E., Wright, A. G., & Krueger, R. F. (2012). DSM-5 personality traits and DSM-Ⅳ personality disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121(2), 424.

20.

Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179-185.

21.

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, 1879-1980.

22.

Krueger, R. F., & Markon, K. E. (2014). The role of the DSM-5 personality trait model in moving toward a quantitative and empirically based approach to classifying personality and psychopathology. Annual review of clinical psychology, 10, 477-501.

23.

Kupfer, D. J., First, M. B., & Regier, D. A. (Eds.) (2002). A research agenda for DSM-V. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

24.

Sellbom, M., Anderson, J, L., & Bagby, R. M. (2013). Assessing DSM-5 Section Ⅲ Personality Traits and Disorders With the MMPI-RF. Assessment, 20(6), 709-722.

25.

Skodol, A. E., Bender, D. S., Morey, L. C., Clark, L. A., Oldham, J. M., Alarcon, R. D., ..., & Siever, L. J. (2011). Personality disorder types proposed for DSM-5. Journal of Personality Disorders, 25(2), 136-169.

26.

Spencer, T., Biederman, J., & Wilens, T. (1999). Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and comorbidity. Pediatric Clinics of North America, 46(5), 915-927.

27.

Verheul, R., & Widiger, T. A. (2004). A meta-analysis of the prevalence and usage of the personality disorder not otherwise specified (PDNOS) diagnosis. Journal of Personality Disorders, 18(4), 309-319.

28.

Wender, P. H. (1995). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults. New York Oxford: Oxford University Press.

29.

Widiger, T. A. (2005). Five factor model of personality disorder: Integrating science and practice, Journal of Research In Personality, 39, 67-83.

30.

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

31.

Widiger, T. A., & Trull, T. J. (2007). Plate tectonics in the classification of personality disorder: shifting to a dimensional model. American Psychologist, 62(2), 71-83.

32.

Zuckerman, M., Bone, R. N., Neary, R., Mangelsdorff, D., & Brustman, B. (1972). What is the sensation seeker? Personality trait and experience correlates of the Sensation-Seeking Scales. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 39(2), 308.

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy