The Maladaptive Personality Traits of the Personality Inventory for<i>DSM-5</i>(PID-5) in Relation to the HEXACO Personality Factors and Schizotypy/Dissociation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), a new measure of maladaptive personality traits, has recently been developed by the DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Workgroup. The PID-5 variables were examined within the seven-factor space defined by the six HEXACO factors and the Schizotypy/Dissociation factor (Ashton & Lee, 2012) using participant samples from Canada (N = 378) and the Netherlands (N = 476). Extension analyses showed that several PID-5 facet-level scales represented each of the Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, Extraversion, Conscientiousness, and Schizotypy/Dissociation factors. In contrast, only one PID-5 scale loaded strongly on HEXACO Agreeableness, and no PID-5 scales loaded strongly on Openness to Experience. In addition, a joint factor analysis involving the PID-5 variables and facets of the Five-Factor Model was conducted in the Canadian sample and recovered a set of seven factors corresponding rather closely to the HEXACO factors plus Schizotypy/Dissociation. The authors discuss implications for the assessment and structure of normal and abnormal personality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".