Examining the Relationship Between Psychiatric Traits & Psychological Traits

Are there shared factors underlying psychological and psychiatric personality constructs? For example, is extraversion or openness linked to disorders of personality? This study aimed to look at the relationship between psychiatric traits, psychological traits, and impulsivity as self-reported by 84 nonpsychiatrically ill participants. The Big Five psychological constructs, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, Neuroticism, and Conscientiousness, are each divisible into 2 aspects. How these personality aspects correlate with psychiatric personality disorders viewed as continuously variable traits in a non-clinical sample may foster understanding of the underlying processes involved in personality and in mental illnesses. We found that functional impulsivity was closely related to aspects of psychological personality constructs, whereas dysfunctional impulsivity was closely related to personality disorders. The findings also showed both positive and negative correlations between psychological traits and personality disorders. The relationship between psychological and psychiatric personality constructs has been studied in clinical samples, but less is known about the greater population. Prior research has also linked impulsivity to psychopathology. Investigating these links will allow us to better understand how basic mechanisms underlying personality and impulsivity contribute to mental illness. Examining the Relationship Between Psychiatric Traits & Psychological Traits 3 Introduction A person’s personality shapes not only who they are, but also the actions that they take. For years, research has explored personalities and sought to categorize them, with much success. Many scales, tests and surveys exist and new ones are still being created today. This study aimed to look at the relationship between psychological traits, psychiatric traits and impulsivity on self-reported surveys. The surveys used were the Big Five Aspect Scales (BFAS, DeYoung et al., 2007), the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire 4+ (PDQ4, Hyler et al., 1988) and the Dickman Impulsivity Inventory (DII, Dickman, 1990) (see Appendix A for descriptions of measurements found on all three surveys). Over the past few years the Five-Factor Model of personality, also known as the Big Five, has become widely accepted as a comprehensive model of personality traits. McCrae and Costa (1992) identified five general domains: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness. These broad domains serve as the basis for all of the Big Five personality questionnaires. Within each domain are smaller subscales of traits, known as the dual aspects. The aspects serve as the intermediaries between the domains and the smallest subscale of traits, which are known as the facets (Costa & McCrae, 1995). Each domain has two aspects and several facets. For example, neuroticism is the domain, volatility and withdrawal are the aspects and the facets are anxiety, hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and vulnerability. DeYoung, Peterson & Quilty (2007), used 75 facet scales and through factor analysis were able to produce 2-factor solutions (aspects) for the 15 facets in each domain. “Factor analysis indicated that each Big Five domain is divisible into two correlated aspects, subsuming multiple facets. ” The aspects are: volatility & withdrawal for neuroticism; compassion & politeness for agreeableness; industriousness & orderliness for conscientiousness; enthusiasm & assertiveness for extraversion; and intellect and openness for openness. This correlation allowed for the construction of a 100-item measure of the 10 factors (called the Big Five Aspect Scale, BFAS), which DeYoung et al. (2007) then validated in a second sample. The study demonstrated that aspects represent an intermediate level between the broad domains and the numerous specific facets. The Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire, PDQ4, (Hyler et al., 1988) is a 99-item True/False self-report questionnaire used to screen for the presence of a personality disorder. Item content corresponds directly to the criteria for the Diagnostic Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-IV personality disorders: Paranoid, Schizoid, Schizotypal, Histrionic, Narcissistic, Borderline, Antisocial, Avoidant, Dependent, Obsessive Compulsive, Negativistic, and Depressive. Results from the survey are intended to provide an indication of key features of each personality disorder. Psychiatric constructs, similar to psychological constructs, are considered continuous traits: everybody has more or less tendencies toward them. The PDQ4 is thus a survey instrument that can parallel the self-reported, continuously valued Big Five instruments. Hyler et al. (1992), Fossati et al. (1998), and de Reus et al. (2013) have researched the PDQ4 within clinical populations, but research is less extensive on its usage within the general population. Some prior work has been done to relate the psychological and psychiatric personality constructs. For example, Miller, Lyman, Widiger & Leukefeld (2001), examined whether the FiveFactor Model could adequately represent psychopathy and found that it in fact could. The study further demonstrated that personality disorders could be understood as extreme variants of common dimensions of personality, which highlights the utility of the Five-Factor Model in creating a descriptive structure of a persons’ personality. Miller, Reynolds, and Pilkonis (2004) demonstrated how Big Five domains map Examining the Relationship Between Psychiatric Traits & Psychological Traits 4 onto personality disorders in two clinical samples. The study linked personality disorders to the Big 5 domains through use of clinical interviews instead of the PDQ4. In 2004, Bollen & Wojciechowski showed that personality traits play a significant role in both subtypes of the eating disorder, Anorexia Nervosa. Findings showed that patients with Anorexia Nervosa, regardless of subtype, are more emotionally unstable and more prone to psychological distress than normal controls. This was demonstrated by the fact that all patients with Anorexia scored significantly lower on Conscientiousness than the control group (Bollen & Wojciechowski, 2004). Additionally, patients scored significantly higher on openness and neuroticism, and lower on the extraversion scale (Bollen & Wojciechowski, 2004). Trull, Widiger, and Burr (2001) studied the relationship between the Five-Factor Model of personality and personality disorder symptomology. They used the Structured Interview for the FiveFactor Model (SIFFM), which is a 120 item semi-structured interview that assesses both adaptive and maladaptive features of the personality traits included in the Big Five. For personality disorder symptomology they used the PDQ-R and found that SIFFM domain and facet scores were significantly related to personality disorder symptomology. Most personality disorders were negatively related to SIFFM Extraversion and Conscientiousness, but they were positively related to Neuroticism (Trull et al., 2001). SIFFM Agreeableness and Openness demonstrated the greatest ability to differentiate between the individual personality disorders. Although a structured interview was used in this study to represent the Five-Factor Model, the research still underlines the utility of the Five-Factor Model in correlating with personality disorders by means of the PDQ-R. Impulsivity is a personality characteristic examined from both psychological and psychiatric perspectives. It is the tendency to deliberate less than most people of equal ability before taking action (Dickman, 1990). Dickman created the Dickman Impulsivity Inventory (DII), which is a 23-question, true or false survey. The three studies he performed provided evidence for two types; functional impulsivity (FI) and dysfunctional impulsivity (DI). In the first study, functional and dysfunctional impulsivity emerged as distinct factors in an analysis of self-report impulsivity items (Dickman, 1990). The second and third studies demonstrated that the two types of impulsivity differ in their relation to personality traits and their cognitive correlates. Dickman (1990) suggested that functional impulsivity is “responsible for the overall relationship between impulsivity and information processing and, at a broader level of analysis, between extraversion and information processing”. Functional impulsivity is the tendency to act with little forethought because of benefits resulting from such an approach to information processing (Dickman, 2000). “Dysfunctional impulsivity appears to represent the tendency to engage in rapid, error-prone information processing because of an inability to use a slower, more methodical approach” (Dickman, 1990). Smillie and Jackson (2006) investigated the relationship between functional and dysfunctional impulsivity and Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory. Using the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised, they found that FI is most strongly related to Extraversion, while DI is most strongly related to psychoticism. Prior research has also shown that impulsivity has links with psychopathology (Gray et al., 1991). The Current Study Looking into the aspects of the Big Five factors of personality, self-reports on the PDQ4 and impulsivity type through the DII will shed light onto the relationship between personality aspects, personality disorders and decision-making. This study serves as the basis for future studies that may Examining the Relationship Between Psychiatric Traits & Psychological Traits 5 look into personality predictors for personality disorders as well as personality predictors for impulsivity type. I hypothesize a connection between personality aspects and self-reports on the PDQ4. I predict that the aspects of Neuroticism (Volatility and Withdrawal) and Conscientiousness (Industriousness an