Comparing DSM-5-hybrid, SWAP, and PDM prototype models of personality disorders: Convergent and divergent findings
Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment
Although dimensional models of personality disorders are of great interest, there exist three methods by which personality disorders may be diagnosed for their fit to a predetermined prototype. In this study, we evaluate a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), hybrid model prototype match (modified from the original prototype DSM-5 proposal; Skodol, Bender, Morey, et al., 2011; Skodol, Bender, Oldham, et al., 2011), the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure-2 (Shedler, 2015), and the Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual prototype match (PDM Task Force, 2006). Three hundred twenty-nine clinical psychology graduate students and interns rated patients they currently were treating with each of the aforementioned diagnostic models, as well as completing a checklist of their DSM-IV personality disorder symptoms. Matching a prototype was defined as being a very good match (exemplifying the disorder, a prototypical case) or a good match (has the diagnosis, disorder applies). Frequencies of the prototype assignments are reported. For the SWAP-2 and PDM, depressive and borderline personality disorders were most frequently assigned, whereas avoidant and borderline personality disorder were the most assigned prototypes for the DSM-5 hybrid categories. However, the degree of convergence across methods on similar diagnostic constructs was low. Implications of these findings for personality disorder diagnosis are discussed.
Link to Published Version
Huprich, S. K., Jowers, C., & Nelson, S. (2019). Comparing DSM–5-Hybrid, SWAP, and PDM prototype models of personality disorders: Convergent and divergent findings. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 10(4), 376–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000340