Structure of Personality Pathology in Normal and Clinical Samples: Spanish Validation of the DAPP-BQ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given that the DSM taxonomy of personality disorders is flawed by severe classificatory problems, the development of alternative classificatory systems, such as the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ), has now become a priority. This study examined the internal consistency, second-order factor structure, and criterion validity of a Spanish translation of the DAPP-BQ in two samples: subjects with personality disorder (n = 155) and subjects from the general population (n = 300). Alpha coefficients ranged satisfactorily from .75 to .93. Four second-order factors of Emotional Dysregulation, Dissocial Behavior, Inhibitedness, and Compulsivity were obtained, which were replicable between samples and identical to those reported in the literature. Finally, disordered subjects scored significantly higher than normal subjects on 17 of the 18 DAPP-BQ traits. Some pending issues in the construction of an alternative taxonomy of personality disorders are discussed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".