使用多信息者数据评估人格特征的重叠和内化精神病理学:同一枚硬币的两面?

IF 3.1 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Journal of psychopathology and clinical science Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-03 DOI:10.1037/abn0000967
Helo Liis Soodla, Kelli Lehto, Kadri Kõiv, Uku Vainik, Kirsti Akkermann, René Mõttus
{"title":"使用多信息者数据评估人格特征的重叠和内化精神病理学:同一枚硬币的两面?","authors":"Helo Liis Soodla, Kelli Lehto, Kadri Kõiv, Uku Vainik, Kirsti Akkermann, René Mõttus","doi":"10.1037/abn0000967","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Personality and psychopathology share a hierarchical dimensional structure, developmental trajectories and correlations with varied outcomes. However, quantifying the extent and details of their direct empirical overlap has been hindered by overreliance on self-reports and broad construct domains. Using multimethod data, we estimated the Big Five personality domains' and nuances' (items') \"true\" correlations (rtrue) with, and true predictive accuracy (rtruePRED) for, various psychopathology state domains, free of single-method and occasion-specific biases, random error, and direct content overlap. Our sample included Estonian Biobank participants (<i>N</i> = 16,226) who completed psychopathology and comprehensive personality questionnaires, and whose personality traits were also rated by close informants. Personality nuances out-predicted the Big Five domains for psychopathology, with items' <i>r</i><sub>truePRED</sub> = .31 … .58 for specific psychopathology domains of distress, fear, inattention, hyperactivity, insomnia, and fatigue, and <i>r</i><sub>truePRED</sub> = .52 for the general p factor. Individual items had various meaningful rtrues with the psychopathology domains. Among the Big Five, neuroticism was the strongest correlate of distress (<i>r</i><sub>true</sub> = .29) and fear (<i>r</i><sub>true</sub> = .13), while inattention was most correlated with conscientiousness (<i>r</i><sub>true</sub> = -.56), hyperactivity with extraversion (rtrue = .25), fatigue with openness (r<sub>true</sub> = .12), and insomnia with conscientiousness (<i>r</i><sub>true</sub> = .12). Associations based on self-reports alone were weaker. We argue for multirater and finer grained assessments of both personality and psychopathology to fully reveal the extent and details of their overlap. This association is likely stronger than typical self-report data suggest, yet psychopathology is not empirically redundant with personality traits. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":73914,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","volume":" ","pages":"400-413"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the overlap of personality traits and internalizing psychopathology using multi-informant data: Two sides of the same coin?\",\"authors\":\"Helo Liis Soodla, Kelli Lehto, Kadri Kõiv, Uku Vainik, Kirsti Akkermann, René Mõttus\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/abn0000967\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Personality and psychopathology share a hierarchical dimensional structure, developmental trajectories and correlations with varied outcomes. However, quantifying the extent and details of their direct empirical overlap has been hindered by overreliance on self-reports and broad construct domains. Using multimethod data, we estimated the Big Five personality domains' and nuances' (items') \\\"true\\\" correlations (rtrue) with, and true predictive accuracy (rtruePRED) for, various psychopathology state domains, free of single-method and occasion-specific biases, random error, and direct content overlap. Our sample included Estonian Biobank participants (<i>N</i> = 16,226) who completed psychopathology and comprehensive personality questionnaires, and whose personality traits were also rated by close informants. Personality nuances out-predicted the Big Five domains for psychopathology, with items' <i>r</i><sub>truePRED</sub> = .31 … .58 for specific psychopathology domains of distress, fear, inattention, hyperactivity, insomnia, and fatigue, and <i>r</i><sub>truePRED</sub> = .52 for the general p factor. Individual items had various meaningful rtrues with the psychopathology domains. Among the Big Five, neuroticism was the strongest correlate of distress (<i>r</i><sub>true</sub> = .29) and fear (<i>r</i><sub>true</sub> = .13), while inattention was most correlated with conscientiousness (<i>r</i><sub>true</sub> = -.56), hyperactivity with extraversion (rtrue = .25), fatigue with openness (r<sub>true</sub> = .12), and insomnia with conscientiousness (<i>r</i><sub>true</sub> = .12). Associations based on self-reports alone were weaker. We argue for multirater and finer grained assessments of both personality and psychopathology to fully reveal the extent and details of their overlap. This association is likely stronger than typical self-report data suggest, yet psychopathology is not empirically redundant with personality traits. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"400-413\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000967\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000967","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人格和精神病理学共享一个层次的维度结构、发展轨迹和与不同结果的相关性。然而,量化其直接经验重叠的程度和细节受到过度依赖自我报告和广泛构建域的阻碍。使用多种方法的数据,我们估计了五大人格领域和细微差别(项目)。各种精神病理状态域的“真实”相关性(rtrue)和真实预测准确性(rtruePRED),不存在单一方法和特定场合的偏差、随机误差和直接内容重叠。我们的样本包括爱沙尼亚生物银行的参与者(N = 16,226),他们完成了精神病理学和综合人格问卷,其人格特征也由亲密的线人评定。人格的细微差别预测了五大精神病理学领域,项目的truepred = 0.31 ... .58特定精神病理学领域的痛苦,恐惧,注意力不集中,多动,失眠和疲劳,和truepred = 0.52一般p因素。个别项目在精神病理领域具有不同的意义真理。在五大人格特质中,神经质与焦虑(rtrue = 0.29)和恐惧(rtrue = 0.13)的相关性最强,而注意力不集中与责任心(rtrue = - 0.56)、多动与外向(rtrue = 0.25)、疲劳与开放(rtrue = 0.12)、失眠与责任心(rtrue = 0.12)的相关性最强。仅基于自我报告的关联较弱。我们主张对人格和精神病理学进行多重和更精细的评估,以充分揭示它们重叠的程度和细节。这种关联可能比典型的自我报告数据所显示的更强,然而精神病理学与人格特征并不是经验上多余的。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing the overlap of personality traits and internalizing psychopathology using multi-informant data: Two sides of the same coin?

Personality and psychopathology share a hierarchical dimensional structure, developmental trajectories and correlations with varied outcomes. However, quantifying the extent and details of their direct empirical overlap has been hindered by overreliance on self-reports and broad construct domains. Using multimethod data, we estimated the Big Five personality domains' and nuances' (items') "true" correlations (rtrue) with, and true predictive accuracy (rtruePRED) for, various psychopathology state domains, free of single-method and occasion-specific biases, random error, and direct content overlap. Our sample included Estonian Biobank participants (N = 16,226) who completed psychopathology and comprehensive personality questionnaires, and whose personality traits were also rated by close informants. Personality nuances out-predicted the Big Five domains for psychopathology, with items' rtruePRED = .31 … .58 for specific psychopathology domains of distress, fear, inattention, hyperactivity, insomnia, and fatigue, and rtruePRED = .52 for the general p factor. Individual items had various meaningful rtrues with the psychopathology domains. Among the Big Five, neuroticism was the strongest correlate of distress (rtrue = .29) and fear (rtrue = .13), while inattention was most correlated with conscientiousness (rtrue = -.56), hyperactivity with extraversion (rtrue = .25), fatigue with openness (rtrue = .12), and insomnia with conscientiousness (rtrue = .12). Associations based on self-reports alone were weaker. We argue for multirater and finer grained assessments of both personality and psychopathology to fully reveal the extent and details of their overlap. This association is likely stronger than typical self-report data suggest, yet psychopathology is not empirically redundant with personality traits. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信