Personality: Description, Classification and Evaluation

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 2, 154 - 177, 01.06.2012

İbrahim Taymur Mehmet Hakan Türkçapar

https://doi.org/10.5455/cap.20120410

Öz

Many descriptions and classifications of personality have been made to understand and acknowledge human being through out the history. During the developmental process of psychiatry, almost every school defined and assessed personality regarding to their own perspective. As DSM (Diagnostical and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) and ICD (International Classification of Diseases) being available to common usage, scientists conducted studies to set a common terminology for personality. Categorical and dimensional approaches are the most fundamentally different assessment strategies in the research and clinical aspects about personality. While categorical approach views the personality as dichotomies which consists of different groups, dimensional approach aims to describe the personality on the basis of dimensions, thus suggests that the personality is a structure formed by definite dimensions. Several advantages and disadvantages can be noticed when descriptions of personality and tools for the evaluation of personality are reviewed. When the section making suggestions about personality disorder in DSM-5 is evaluated, it is seen that it aims to restructure the personality disorder diagnostic group according to new findings and critiques. In this article, the description of personality throughout the history, dimensional, categorical and cognitive approaches to personality, the features of the tools that are used to assess and measure the personality are reviewed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Personality, description, classification, evaluation

Kişilik: Tanımı, Sınıflaması ve Değerlendirmesi

Öz

Geçmişten bu yana insanları anlamak ve tanımak adına kişilikle ilgili birçok tanım ve sınıflandırma yapılmıştır. Psikiyatrinin gelişim sürecindeki her kuram kişiliği kendi açısından tanımlamış ve değerlendirmiştir. Uluslararası sınıflama sistemleri, DSM ve ICD ile birlikte araştırmacılar daha yaygın ve ortak bir dil kullanımına yönelik çalışmalar içerine girmişlerdir. Kişiliğe yönelik çalışmalarda ve klinik uygulamada kategorik ve boyutsal yaklaşımlar en temel farklı yaklaşım biçimleridir. Kategorik yaklaşım kişiliğe birbirinden farklı sınıflardan oluşan dikotomilerle yaklaşırken, boyutsal yaklaşım kişiliğin belli boyutlardan oluşan bir yapı olduğunu öne sürerek bu boyutlar temelinde kişiliği anlama ve tanımlamayı amaçlamıştır. Kişiliğe ilişkin bu güne kadar oluşturulmuş tanımlar ve geliştirilmiş araçlar değerlendirildiğinde hepsinin bir takım avantaj ve dezavantajlara sahip oldukları görülmektedir. DSM-5 tanı sınıflamasının kişilik bozukluğuna ilişkin öneriler içeren bölümü incelendiğinde kişilik bozuklukları tanı grubunun yeni bulgular ve eleştiriler doğrultusunda yeniden yapılandırılmasının amaçlandığı görülmektedir. Bu yazıda kişiliğin tarihsel süreçteki tanımı, kişiliğe boyutsal, kategorik ve bilişsel yaklaşımlar, kişiliğin ölçüm ve değerlendirmesinde kullanılan araçların özellikleri gözden geçirilmeye çalışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kişilik, tanımı, sınıflama, değerlendirme

Kaynakça

• Linda V. Berens. Sixteen Personality Types: Descriptions for Self-Discovery. Telos Publications, California, 1999.
• Ewen RB. An Introduction to Theories of Personality, 7th ed. East Sussex, UK, Psychology Press, 2009.
• American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, Fourth ed. Washington DC, American Psychiatric Association,1994.
• Thomas JC, Segal DL. Comprehensive Handbook of Personality and Psychopathology. New Jersey, Wiley, 2006.
• Farmer A, McGuffin P, Williams J. Measuring Psychopathology. New York, Oxford University Press, 2002.
• Loranger AW, Janca A, Sartorius N. Assessment and Diagnosis of Personality Disorders. New York, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
• Hill D. Psychopathic personality. Postgrad Med J 1954; 30:399-403.
• Simanowitz V, Pearce P. Personality Development. Berkshire, UK, Open University Press, 2003.
• Leary T. Interpersonal Diagnosis of Personality: A Functional Theory and Methodology for Personality Evaluation. New York, Ronald Press, 1957.
• Costa PT, McCrae RR. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five–Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional Manual. Odessa, Psychological Assessment Resources, 1992.
• John OP, Caspi A, Robbins RW, Moffitt TE, Stouthaner-Loeber M. The “little five”: exploring the normological network of the five-factor model of personality in adolescent boys. Child Dev 1994; 65:160-178.
• Ashton MC, Lee KA. Theoretical basis for the major dimensions of personality. Eur J Pers 2001;15:327-353.
• Zuckerman M, Kuhlman DM, Camac C. What lies beyond E and N? Factor analyses of scales believed to measure basic dimensions of personality. J Pers Soc Psychol
• Digman JM. Higher-order factors of the Big Five. J Pers Soc Psychol 1997; 73:1246- 1256.
• Markon KE, Krueger RF, Watson D. Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality: an integrative hierarchical approach. J Pers Soc Psychol 2005; 88:139-157.
• Costa PT, McCrae RR. Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. J Pers Assess 1995; 64:21-50.
• Igarashi H, Kikuchi H, Kano R, Mitoma H, Shono M, Hasui C et al. The Inventory of Personality Organisation: its psychometric properties among student and clinical populations in Japan. Ann Gen Psychiatry 2009; 8:9.
• American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed. American Psychiatric Association, Washington DC, 1980.
• Gunderson JG, Links PS, Reich JH. Competing models of personality disorders. J Pers Disord 1991; 5:60-68.
• Kernberg OF. Severe Personality Disorders: Psychotherapeutic Strategies. New Haven, CT, Yale University Press, 1984.
• Kernberg OF, Clarkin JF. The Inventory of Personality Organization. White Plains, NY, Hospital-Cornell Med. Cent, 1995.
• Trull TJ, Durrett CA. Categorical and dimensional models of personality disorder. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2005; 1:355-380.
• Shedler J. Westen D. Dimensions of personality pathology: an alternative to the Five- Factor Model. Am J Psychiatry 2004; 161:1743-1754.
• Riso LP, Klein DN, Anderson RL, Ouimette PC, Lizardi H. Concordance between patients and informants on the personality disorder examination. Am J Psychiatry 1994; 151:568-573.
• Beck AT, Freeman A, Davis DD. Cognitive Therapy of Personality Disorders, 2nd ed. New York, Guilford Press, 2004.
• Young J. Cognitive Therapy for Personality Disorders: A Schema-Focused Approach. Sarasota, Professional Resource Press, 1990.
• Westen D, Shedler J, Bradley R. A prototype approach to personality disorder diagnosis. Am J Psychiatry 2006; 163:846-856.
• Zimmerman M, Pfohl B, Coryell W. Diagnosing personality disorder in depressed patients: a comprasion of patient and informant interviews. Arch Gen Psychiatry
• Savaşır I. Minnesota Çok Yönlü Kişilik Envanteri El Kitabı. Ankara, Sevinç Matbaa- sı, 1981.
• Erol N. Ülkemizdeki psikiyatrik hastalarda MMPI’ın geçerlik çalışması. Psikoloji Dergisi 1982; 14:15-23.
• Graham JR, Ben-Porath YS, Tellegen A, Dahlstrom WG, Butcher JN, Kaemmer B. MMPI-2 (Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory): Manual for Administration, Scoring and Interpretation. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 2001.
• Somwaru DP, Porath YS. Development and reliability of MMPI-2 based personality disorder scales. 30th Annual Workshop and Symposium on Recent Developments in Use of the MMPI-2 and MMPI-A, March 1995, St. Petersburg Beach, Florida.
• First MB, GibbonM, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW, Benjamin LS. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSMIV Axis II Personality Disorders (SCID-II). Washington DC , American Psychiatric Press, 1997.
• Costa PT, Terracciano A, McCrae RR. Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: robust and surprising findings. J Pers Soc Psychol 2001; 81:322-331.
• Roepke S, McAdams LA, Lindamer LA, Patterson TL, Jeste DV. Personality profiles among normal aged individuals as measured by the NEO-PI-R. Aging Ment Health 2001; 5:159-164.
• Shipley BA, Weiss A, Der G, Taylor MD, Deary IJ. Neuroticism, extraversion and mortality in the UK Health and Lifestyle Survey: a 21-year prospective cohort study. Psychosom Med 2007; 69:923-931.
• Jonassaint CR, Boyle SH, Williams RB, Mark DB, Siegler IC, Barefoot JC. Facets of openness predict mortality in patients with cardiac disease. Psychosom Med 2007; 69:319-322.
• Cloninger CR, Przybeck TR, Svrakic DM. The Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire: U.S. normative data. Psychol Rep 1991; 69:1047-1057.
• Cloninger CR. The Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI): A Guide to its Development and Use. Washington University, St Louis, Center for Psychobiology of Personality, 1994.
• Cloninger CR. A practical way to diagnose personality disorder: a proposal. J Pers Disord 2000; 14:99-108.
• Güleç MY. Psikosomatik hastalıklarda mizaç ve karakter. Psikiyatride Güncel Yakla- şımlar 2009; 1:201-214.
• Shedler J, Westen D. Refining personality disorder diagnosis: integrating science and practice. Am J Psychiatry 2004; 161:1350-1365.
• Skodol AE, Bender DS. The future of personality disorders in DSM-V? Am J Psychiatry 2009; 166:388-391.
• Westen D, Shedler J. A prototype matching approach to diagnosing personality disorders: toward DSM-V. J Pers Disord 2000; 14:109-126.
• Westen D, Shedler J. Revising and assessing axis II, Part I: developing a clinically and empirically valid assessment method. Am J Psychiatry 1999; 156:258-272.
• Kernberg OF. A psychoanalytic classification of character pathology. J Am Psychoanal Assoc 1970; 18:800-822.
• Lenzenweger MF, Clarkin JF, Kernberg OF, Foelsch PA. The Inventory of Personality Organization: psychometric properties, factor composition, and criterion relations with affect aggressive yscontrol, psychosis proneness, and self domains in a nonclinical sample. Psychol Assess 2001; 13:577-591.
• Clark LA. Manual for the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 1993.
• Samuel DB, Simms LJ, Clark LA, Livesley WJ, Widiger TA. An item response theory integration of normal and abnormal personality scales. Personal Disord 2010; 1:5-21.
• Livesley WJ, Jackson DN. Manual for the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology - Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ). Post Huron, Sigma Press, 2002.
• De Beurs E, Rinne T, Van Kampen D, Verheul R, Andrea H. Reliability and validity of the Dutch Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Short Form (DAPP- SF), a shortened version of the DAPP-Basic Questionnaire. J Pers Disord 2009; 23:308-326.
• Pukrop R, Steinbring I, Gentil I, Schulte C, Larstone R, Livesley JW. Clinical validity of the "Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP)" for psychiatric patients with and without a personality disorder diagnosis. J Pers Disord 2009; 23:572-586.
• Tromp NB, Koot HM. Dimensions of personality pathology in adolescents: psychometric properties of the DAPP-BQ-A. J Pers Disord 2008; 22:623-638.
• Pfohl B, Coryell W, Zimmerman M, Stangl D. DSM-III personality disorders: diagnostic overlap and internal consistency of individual DSM-III criteria. Compr Psychiatry 1986; 27:21-34.
• Stangl D, Pfohl B, Zimmerman M, Bowers W, Corenthal C. A structured interview for the DSM-III personality disorders. A preliminary report. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1985; 42:591-596.
• Tyrer P, Alexander J. Classification of personality disorder. Br J Psychiatry 1979; 135:163-167.
• Tyrer P, Alexander MS, Cicchetti D, Cohen MS, Remington M. Reliability of a schedule for rating personality disorders. Br J Psychiatry 1979; 135:168-174.
• Van Horn E, Manley C, Leddy D, Cicchetti D, Tyrer P. Problems in developing an instrument for the rapid assessment of personality status. Eur Psychiatry 2000; 15(Suppl 1):29-33.
• Mann AH, Jenkins R, Cutting JC, Cowen PJ. The development and use of a standardized assessment of abnormal personality. Psychol Med 1981; 11:839-847.
• Pilgrim JA, Mellers JD, Boothby HA, Mann AH. Inter-rater and temporal reliability of the Standardized Assessment of Personality and the influence of informant characteristics. Psychol Med 1993; 23:779-786.
• Millon T, Millon C, Davis RD. MCMI-III Manual, 2nd ed. Minneapolis, National Computer Systems, 1997.
• Millon T, Davis RD. The MCMI-III: present and future directions. J Pers Assess 1997; 68:69-85.
• Hyler SE, Skodol AE, Oldham JM, Kellman HD, Doidge N. Validity of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-Revised: a replication in an outpatient sample. Compr Psychiatry 1992; 33:73-77.
• Uehara T, Sakado K, Sato T. Test-retest reliability of the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire: Revised. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 1997; 51:369-372.
• Hill J, Fudge H, Harrington R, Pickles A, Rutter M. The Adult Personality Functioning Assessment (APFA): factors influencing agreement between subject and informant. Psychol Med 1995; 25:263-275.
• Hill J, Harrington R, Fudge H, Rutter M, Pickles A. Adult personality functioning assessment (APFA): An investigator-based standardised interview. Br J Psychiatry 1989; 155:24-35.
• Loranger A, Janca A, Sartorius N. Assessment and Diagnosis of Personality Disorders: The ICD-10 International Personality Disorders Examination (IPDE). Cambrdige, UK, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
• Loranger A, Sartorious N, Andreoli A. The International Personality Disorders Examination: The WHO/ADAMHA international pilot study of personality disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1994; 51:215-224.
• Langbehn DR, Pfohl BM, Reynolds S, Clark LA, Battaglia M, Bellodi L et al. The Iowa Personality Disorder Screen: development and preliminary validation of a brief screening interview. J Pers Disord 1999; 13:75-89.
• Thomas C, Turkheimer E, Oltmanns TF. Factorial structure of personality as evaluated by peers. J Abnorm Psychol 2003; 112:81-91.
• Okada M, Oltmanns TF. Comparison of three self-report measures of personality pathology. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 2009; 31: 358-367.
• Eysenck HJ, Eysenck SB. Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (adult and junior). London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1975.
• Francis LJ, Brown LB, Philipchalk R. The development of an abbreviated form of the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQR-A): its use among students in England, Canada, the USA and Australia. Pers Individ Dif 1992;13:443-449.
• Karanci AN, Dirik G, Yorulmaz O. [Reliability and validity studies of Turkish translation of Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised-Abbreviated]. Turk Psiki- yatri Derg 2007; 18:254-261.
• McCrae RR, Terracciano A, Personality Profiles of Cultures Project. Universal features of personality traits from the observer’s perspective: Data from 50 cultures. J Pers Soc Psychol 2005; 88:547-561.
• Türkçapar MH, Örsel S, Uğurlu M, Sargın E, Turhan M, Akkoyunlu S et al. Kişilik inanç ölçeği Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Klinik Psikiyatri Dergisi 2007;10:177-191.
• Butler AC, Beck AT, Cohen LH. The Personality Belief Questionnaire-Short Form: development and preliminary findings. Cogn Ther Res 2007; 31:357-370.
• Güleç H. Psikiyatride psikometri: temel kavramlar. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar
• Höflich A, Rasting M, Mach J, Pless S, Danckworth S, Reimer C et al. A German version of the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP-200) for the dimensional assessment of personality disorders. Psychosoc Med 2007; 22:4.
• Shedler J, Westen D. Refining the measurement of Axis II: A Q-sort procedure for assessing personality pathology. Assessment 1998; 5:335-355.
• Marinangeli MG, Butti G, Scinto A, Di Cicco L, Petruzzi C,Daneluzzo E et al. Patterns of comorbidity among DSM-III-R personality disorders. Psychopathology
• Watson DC, Sinha BK. Comorbidity of DSM-IV personality disorders in a nonclinical sample. J Clin Psychol 1998; 54:773-780.
• Widiger TA, Simonsen E, Krueger R, Livesley WJ, Verheul R. Personality disorder research agenda for the DSM-V. J Pers Disord 2005; 19:315-338.
• Widiger TA, Simonsen K. Alternative dimensional models of personality disorder: finding a common ground. J Pers Disord 2005; 19:110-130.
• Oldham JM, Skodol AE. Charting the future of Axis II. J Pers Disord 2000; 14:17- 29.
• Widiger TA. The DSM-III-R categorical personality disorder diagnoses: a critique and an alternative. Psychol Inq 1993; 4:75-90.
• İbrahim Taymur, Uzm.Dr., S.B. Dışkapı Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Ankara; M. Hakan Türkçapar,
• Doç.Dr., S.B. Dışkapı Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Ankara