Associations between DSM-5 section III personality traits and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) scales in a psychiatric patient sample.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our aim in the current study was to evaluate the convergence between Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5) Section III dimensional personality traits, as operationalized via the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) scale scores in a psychiatric patient sample. We used a sample of 346 (171 men, 175 women) patients who were recruited through a university-affiliated psychiatric facility in Toronto, Canada. We estimated zero-order correlations between the PID-5 and MMPI-2-RF substantive scale scores, as well as a series of exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) analyses to examine how these scales converged in multivariate latent space. Results generally showed empirical convergence between the scales of these two measures that were thematically meaningful and in accordance with conceptual expectations. Correlation analyses showed significant associations between conceptually expected scales, and the highest associations tended to be between scales that were theoretically related. ESEM analyses generated evidence for distinct internalizing, externalizing, and psychoticism factors across all analyses. These findings indicate convergence between these two measures and help further elucidate the associations between dysfunctional personality traits and general psychopathology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".