The Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP) is a personality assessment instrument designed for use by expert clinical assessors. Critics have raised questions about its psychometrics, most notably its validity across observers and situations, the impact of its fixed score distribution on research findings, and its test-retest reliability. We review empirical data addressing its validity, emphasizing the multitrait-multimethod approach to evaluating test validity. To evaluate the hypothesis that the fixed, asymmetric score distribution artifactually inflates correlations between SWAP profiles, we conducted Monte Carlo simulations and also presented empirical data from a large patient sample. We observed a mean correlation of zero between simulated SWAP profiles, indicating that the score distribution does not impact the correlation coefficients. Empirical correlations between SWAP profiles of actual patients were small and similar to those obtained using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV) personality disorder scales that had no fixed score distributions, suggesting that the correlations were not a methodological artifact of the SWAP. We report new test-retest reliability data (median coefficient > .85) for the SWAP’s trait and personality disorder dimensions. The SWAP appears to be reliable and valid. The data do not support its primary psychometric critiques.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). The diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., Text Rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
2.
BeckA. T.BrownG.SteerR. A. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory II manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
3.
BlagovP. S.BradleyR.WestenD. (2007). Under the Axis II radar: Clinically relevant personality constellations that escape DSM-IV diagnosis. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 195, 477-483.
BlagovP. S.WestenD. (2008). Questioning the coherence of Histrionic Personality Disorder: Personality subtypes in adults and adolescents. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 169, 785-797.
6.
BlockJ. (1978). The Q-sort method in personality assessment and psychiatric research. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
7.
BlockJ. (2008). The Q-sort in character appraisal: Encoding subjective impressions of persons quantitatively. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
8.
BradleyR.HilsenrothM.GuarnacciaC.WestenD. (2007). Relationship between clinician assessment and self-assessment of personality disorders using the SWAP-200 and PAI. Psychological Assessment, 19, 225-229.
9.
ClarkL. (1992). Resolving taxonomic issues in personality disorders: The value of larger scale analyses of symptom data. Journal of Personality Disorders, 6, 360-376.
10.
CliftonA.TurkheimerE.OltmannsT. F. (2005). Self- and peer perspectives on pathological personality traits and interpersonal problems. Psychological Assessment, 17, 123-131.
11.
CoganR.PorcerelliJ. H. (2011). Test–retest reliability and discriminant validity of the SWAP-200 in a psychoanalytic treatment sample. Psychology & Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8341.2011.02020.x10.1111/j.2044-8341.2011.02020.x
12.
DiLalloJ. J.JonesM.WestenD. (2009). Personality subtypes in disruptive adolescent males. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 197, 15-23.
13.
HareR. D. (2003). The Hare Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (2nd ed.). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
14.
HareR. D.NeumannC. S. (2006). The PCL-R assessment of psychopathy: Development, structural properties, and new directions. In PatrickC. J. (Ed.), Handbook of psychopathy (pp. 58-88). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
15.
HsuL. (1984). MMPI T-scores: Linear versus normalized. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 52, 821-823.
16.
LingiardiV.ShedlerJ.GazilloF. (2006). Assessing personality change in psychotherapy with the SWAP-200: A case study. Journal of Personality Assessment, 86, 23-32.
17.
Marin-AvellanL. (2010). Validation of the SWAP-200 with forensic patients: Do structuring clinical judgements of PD aid violence risk assessments? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University College, London, England.
18.
Marin-AvellanL.McGauleyG.CampbellC.FonagyP. (2005). Using the SWAP-200 in a personality-disordered forensic population: Is it valid, reliable, and useful?Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 15, 28-45.
19.
MoreyL. C. (1991). The Personality Assessment Inventory: Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
20.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
21.
NunnallyJ. C.BernsteinI. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
22.
RussE.BradleyR.ShedlerJ.WestenD. (2008). Refining the construct of narcissistic personality disorder: Diagnostic criteria and subtypes. American Journal of Psychiatry, 165, 1473-1481.
23.
ShedlerJ.BlockJ. (1990). Adolescent drug use and psychological health: A longitudinal inquiry. American Psychologist, 45(5), 612-630
24.
ShedlerJ.WestenD. (1998). Refining the measurement of Axis II: A Q-sort procedure for assessing personality pathology. Assessment, 5, 335-355.
25.
ShedlerJ.WestenD. (2004a). Refining personality disorder diagnoses: Integrating science and practice. American Journal of Psychiatry, 161, 1350-1365.
26.
ShedlerJ.WestenD. (2004b). Dimensions of personality pathology: An alternative to the Five Factor Model. American Journal of Psychiatry, 161, 1743-1754.
27.
ShedlerJ.WestenD. (2007). The Shedler–Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP): Making personality diagnosis clinically meaningful. Journal of Personality Assessment, 89, 41-55.
28.
SmithS. W.HilsenrothM. J.BornsteinR. F. (2009). Convergent validity of the SWAP-200 dependency scales. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 197, 613-618.
29.
SpitzerR. L.FirstM. B.ShedlerJ.WestenD.SkodolA. E. (2008). Clinical utility of 5 dimensional systems for personality diagnosis: A “consumer preference” study. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 196, 356-374.
30.
WestenD. (1997). Divergences between clinical and research methods for assessing personality disorders: Implications for research and the evolution of Axis II. American Journal of Psychiatry, 154, 895-903.
31.
WestenD.DutraL.ShedlerJ. (2005). Assessing adolescent personality pathology: Quantifying clinical judgment. British Journal of Psychiatry, 186, 227-238.
32.
WestenD.MuderrisogluS. (2003). Assessing personality disorders using a systematic clinical interview: Evaluation of an alternative to structured interviews. Journal of Personality Disorders, 17, 351-369.
33.
WestenD.MuderrisogluS. (2006). Clinical assessment of pathological personality traits. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 1285-1287.
34.
WestenD.ShedlerJ. (1999a). Revising and assessing Axis II, Part 1: Developing a clinically and empirically valid assessment method. American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 258-272.
35.
WestenD.ShedlerJ. (1999b). Revising and assessing Axis II, Part 2: Toward an empirically based and clinically useful classification of personality disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 273-285.
36.
WestenD.ShedlerJ. (2007). Personality diagnosis with the Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP): Integrating clinical and statistical measurement and prediction. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116, 810-822.
37.
WestenD.ShedlerJ.BradleyR. (2006). A prototype approach to personality disorder diagnosis. American Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 846-856.
38.
WestenD.ShedlerJ.BradleyB.DeFifeJ.A. (2012). An empirically derived taxonomy for personality diagnosis: Bridging science and practice in conceptualizing personality. American Journal of Psychiatry, 169, 273-284.
39.
WestenD.WallerN.ShedlerJ.BlagovP. (2012). Dimensions of personality and personality pathology: Factor structure of the Shedler–Westen Assessment Procedure–II (SWAP-II). Journal of Personality Disorders, 169, 273-284.
40.
WestenD.WeinbergerJ. (2004). When clinical description becomes statistical prediction. American Psychologist, 59, 595-613.
41.
WidigerT. A. (2002). Personality disorders. In AntonyM. M.BarlowD. H. (Eds.), Handbook of assessment and treatment planning for psychological disorders (pp. 453-480). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
42.
WidigerT.SamuelD. B. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of personality disorders. Psychological Assessment, 17, 278-287.
43.
WoodJ. M.GarbH. N.NezworskiM. T.KorenD. (2007). The Shedler–Westen Assessment Procedure-200 as a basis for modifying DSM personality disorder categories. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116, 823-836.
44.
ZittelC.WestenD. (2005). Borderline personality disorder as seen in clinical practice: Implications for DSM-V. American Journal of Psychiatry, 162, 867-875.
