From the earliest attempts by psychiatrists to diagnose longstanding deficits in adaptive functioning known as personality
disorders, to the most recent revision of the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual (DSM) in 2013, there remains confusion and
controversy. How many of these disorders are there, how distinct are
they from one another, do they show stability over time, and-
importantly- can people who have them be cured? Some of the personality
disorders seem to provide sources of endless fascination to
professionals and laypersons alike, such as narcissistic, antisocial, and borderline
personality disorders. Each of these terms has become part of popular
parlance, even as their exact meanings become blurred and potentially
distorted with each passing year.

This diagnostically complicated situation is not aided by the fact
that psychiatrists and psychologists are at odds over whether there are,
in fact, distinct personality disorders or whether they rest on one or
more continuums or dimensions. The old “Axis II” of the previous DSM put
the disorders onto a separate plane from other psychological conditions
that, in contrast, were regarded as true “diseases” that could be
“cured.” Axis II, by contrast, was a part of the fabric of the
individual’s psyche that could not be excised.
In a new version of an old approach to personality disorders as
reflecting “styles” rather than stable disorders, University of
Minnesota psychologist Sylvia Wilson and colleagues (2017) took the
perspective of interpersonal theory to examine the interpersonal styles
associated with each personality disorder.
As they note, “Interpersonal style is defined by one’s characteristic
approach to interpersonal situations and relationships” (p. 679). It
includes the attitudes you have toward relationships, your goals
in your relationships, how you interpret what happens in your
relationships, the way you behave, and the way you interpret the
behaviors of others. This all-inclusive concept, furthermore, determines
the quality of essentially all of your relationships, from those
closest to you to the ones you interact with on a more formal basis.
The extensive results provide profiles
useful not only classification, but also for understanding
how people within each of the disorders approaches their relationships.
For people in relationships with such individuals, it’s a framework
that could help you understand them in more depth.
With this in mind, let’s examine the main interpersonal traits for each disorder:
Paranoid: Vindictive and cold stand out as the two
predominant themes. To a lesser extent, people with this personality
disorder are also intrusive.
Schizoid:
Coldness with a combination of social avoidance form the main traits
for this personality disorder’s profile. It’s unlikely that schizoid
individuals, according to the findings, will try to exploit you.
Schizotypal:
Individuals with this personality disorder score high on all 3 of the
above traits—namely, vindictive, cold, and avoidant. This profile fits
with the disorder’s main criterion of odd, eccentric, and socially
awkward behavior.
Antisocial: The extreme of the psychopathic
personality, people with this disorder scored high on the traits of
domineering, vindictive, and intrusive, with slightly high scores on
coldness.
Borderline: A broad set of interpersonal traits appeared in the studies of people with borderline personality disorder,
but the highest scores were on vindictive and intrusive. You might
experience this sense when with someone who has this disorder,
particularly when you feel that your boundaries are being violated and
you’re being held accountable to an extreme degree for your behaviors
and possible shortcomings.
Histrionic: This personality disorder is rarely
diagnosed, and was almost eliminated in the new DSM. However, the
interpersonal trait profile showed distinctly high scores on domineering
and, particularly, intrusiveness. These individuals are unlikely, in
contrast, to be cold and socially avoidant.
Narcissistic: Remarkably similar to antisocial in
the interpersonal style model, individuals with this personality
disorder were also high in domineering, vindictive, cold, and intrusive
interpersonal style traits. These qualities are ones that you’ll almost
invariably encounter when dealing with people who fit this diagnostic
category.
Avoidant: As you might expect, people high in avoidant personality disorder
are most likely to be high on coldness and social avoidance, but low on
domineering and intrusiveness. As the avoidant personality disorder is
so aptly described in terms of interpersonal relationships, it makes
sense that the profile as revealed in research fits this pattern.
Dependent: The dependent personality disorder
showed a pattern of scores marked by the highest scores on
intrusiveness and lowest, as you might expect, on domineering.
Individuals with this disorder, who have an excessive need to be taken
care of, readily submit to others. Their second highest score was on
vindictiveness but they were also high on exploitativeness.
Obsessive-compulsive: There were no stand-out,
distinguishing, features of this personality disorder in the overall
analysis which yielded a relatively flat profile across the 8 traits.
This finding suggests that perhaps this personality disorder doesn’t
involve as much interpersonal dysfunction as has been thought although
individuals who fit the criteria of excessive perfectionism,
inflexibility, and restricted expression of emotions may have trouble
at work or in relationships. They may also, however, achieve higher
status and wealth, as other research has indicated. There’s a trade-off
then, when an individual has such an extreme work ethic that he or she
may pay less attention to relationships.
In summarizing the findings, the authors concluded that, without
question, the “personality disorders are associated with dysfunctional
interpersonal styles” and “core disturbances in self” (p. 720). From a
diagnostic point of view, the authors also believe that the idea of
discarding the personality disorder categories and replacing them with a
rating system also receives support from their findings. All but
obsessive-compulsive personality disorder appeared to have impaired
interpersonal relationships and, that in some of the analyses were
particularly strong for family and less so for romantic domains.
There is still much to be learned about personality disorders, as the
authors note. However, these findings suggest that cutting to the core
of relationship difficulties and disturbances in sense of self provides
the best way of understanding people who seem to fit the personality
disorder definition. You don’t need to become a diagnostician to be
able to use these findings in your daily life. Looking at people who may
be narcissistic or
psychopathic in terms of their interpersonal style rather than discrete
categories provides perhaps a more realistic, if not sympathetic, way
of relating to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment