The utilization of multimethod assessment approaches can provide comprehensive information regarding daily interpersonal and personality functioning, increasing opportunities to guide treatment planning in a more personalized, evidence-based manner. The routine implementation of multimethod assessment within clinical settings, however, remains rare, and there are few studies that have reviewed the clinical utility of multimethod assessment. Our goal in this study was to analyze multimethod data collected from a single research subject enrolled in residential treatment in order to illustrate the process of integrating data across both single-occasion (e.g., self-report, performance-based, and behavioral tests) and multitimepoint (ecological momentary assessment of interpersonal experiences) dimensions. Results revealed both areas of convergence and divergence across measures, enabling the development of a complex clinical formulation that sharpened diagnostic considerations and contributed valuable insights to treatment planning. Our findings provide support for the value of incorporating multimethod assessment into routine clinical practice.
AckermanS. J.ClemenceA. J.WeatherillR.HilsenrothM. J. (1999). Use of the TAT in the assessment of DSM-IV Cluster B personality disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73(3), 422-448.
2.
AllisonJ.BlattS.ZimetC. N. (1968). The interpretation of psychological tests. New York, NY: Hemisphere.
3.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
4.
BlaisM.HopwoodC. (2017). Model-based approaches for teaching and practicing personality assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 99, 136-145.
5.
CattellR. B. (1943). The description of personality: Basic traits resolved into clusters. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38, 476-506.
6.
ClemenceA. J.LewisK. (2018). Flexibility and rigidity in object relational functioning: Assessing change in suicidal ideation and global psychiatric functioning using the SCORS-G. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100, 135-144.
7.
CoganR.PorcerelliJ. H. (1996). Object relations in abusive partner relationships: An empirical investigation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66, 106-115.
8.
DawoodS.PincusA. L. (2016). Multisurface interpersonal assessment in a cognitive-behavioral therapy context. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 449-460.
ExnerJ. E.Jr. (1993). Wiley series in personality processes: The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Basic foundations (3rd ed.). Oxford, England: John Wiley.
11.
EysenckH. J. (1950). Dimensions of personality. London, England: Routledge.
12.
FinnS. E. (2007). In our clients’ shoes: Theory and techniques of therapeutic assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13.
FonagyP.AllisonE. (2014). The role of mentalizing and epistemic trust in the therapeutic relationship. Psychotherapy, 51(3), 372.
14.
FrithC. D. (2004). Schizophrenia and theory of mind. Psychological Medicine, 34, 385-389.
15.
GriffinJ. D.FletcherP. C. (2017). Predictive processing, source monitoring, and psychosis. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 13, 265-289.
16.
HandlerL.HilsenrothM. J. (Eds.). (1998). Teaching and learning personality assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
HartM.LewineR. R. (2017). Rethinking thought disorder. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 43, 514-522.
18.
HopwoodC. J.AnsellE.PincusA.WrightA.LukowitskyM.RocheM. (2011). The circumplex structure of interpersonal sensitivities. Journal of Personality Assessment, 79, 708-739.
19.
HopwoodC. J.BornsteinR. F. (2014). Multimethod clinical assessment. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
20.
HopwoodC. J.PincusA.DeMoorR.KoonceE. (2008). Psychometric characteristics of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems–Short Circumplex (IP-SC) with college students. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 615-618.
HopwoodC. J.WrightA. G.AnsellE. B.PincusA. L. (2013). The interpersonal core of personality pathology. Journal of Personality Disorders, 27, 270-295.
23.
HuprichS. K. (2011). Contributions from personality- and psychodynamically oriented assessment to the development of the DSM-5 personality disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93, 354-361.
24.
LearyT. (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality: A functional theory and methodology for personality evaluation. New York, NY: Ronald Press.
25.
LewisK.MeehanK.CainN.WongP.ClemenceA. J.StevensJ.TillmanJ. (2016). Impairments in object relations and chronicity of suicidal behavior in individuals with borderline personality disorder. Journal of Personality Disorders, 30, 19-34.
26.
LockeK. D.CraigT. Y.BaikK.GohilK. (2012). Binds and bounds of communion: Effects of interpersonal values on assumed similarity of self and others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 879-897.
27.
MatsumotoD.EkmanP. (1988). Japanese and Caucasian Facial Expressions of Emotion (JACFEE). San Francisco, CA: Intercultural and Emotion Research Laboratory, Department of Psychology, San Francisco State University.
28.
MayerJ. D. (1998). A systems framework for the field personality. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 118-144.
29.
MayerJ. D. (2005). A tale of two visions: Can a new view of personality help integrate psychology?American Psychologist, 60, 294-307.
MeyerG. J.ErdbergP.ShafferT. W. (2007). Toward international normative reference data for the Comprehensive System. Journal of Personality Assessment, 89(S1), S201-S216.
32.
MinorK. S.DavisB. J.MarggrafM. P.LutherL.RobbinsM. L. (2018). Words matter: Implementing the electronically activated recorder in schizotypy. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 9, 133-143.
33.
MischelW.ShodaY. (1995). A cognitive–affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246-268.
34.
MoskowitzD. S. (2009). Coming full circle: Conceptualizing the study of interpersonal behavior. Canadian Psychology, 50, 33-41.
35.
MurrayH. (Ed.). (1943). Thematic Apperception Test manual. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
36.
PetersE. J.HilsenrothM. J.Eudell-SimmonsE. M.BlagysM. D.HandlerL. (2006). Reliability and validity of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale in clinical use. Psychotherapy Research, 16, 617-626.
37.
PincusA.SadlerP.WoodyE.RocheM.ThomasK.WrightA. G. (2014). Multimethod assessment of interpersonal dynamics. In HopwoodC. J.BornsteinR. F. (Eds.), Multimethod clinical assessment (pp. 51-91). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
38.
PreißlerS.DziobekI.RitterK.HeekerenH. R.RoepkeS. (2010). Social cognition in borderline personality disorder: Evidence for disturbed recognition of the emotions, thoughts, and intentions of others. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 4, 182. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2010.00182
39.
RamN.ConroyD. E.PincusA. L.LorekA.RebarA.RocheM. J.. . . GerstorfD. (2014). Examining the interplay of processes across multiple time-scales: Illustration with the Intraindividual Study of Affect, Health, and Interpersonal Behavior (iSAHIB). Research in Human Development, 11, 142-160.
40.
RocheM. J.PincusA. L.RebarA. L.ConroyD. E.RamN. (2014). Enriching psychological assessment using a person-specific analysis of interpersonal processes in daily life. Assessment, 21, 515-528.
SteinM.Slavin-MulfordJ. (2017). The Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Rating Method (SCORS-G): A comprehensive guide for clinicians and researchers. New York, NY: Routledge.
44.
SteinM. B.Slavin-MulfordJ.SinclairS. J.ChungW. J.RocheM.DencklaC.BlaisM. A. (2018). Extending the use of the SCORS–G composite ratings in assessing level of personality organization. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100, 166-175.
45.
SteinmetzJ.SezerO.SedikidesC. (2017). Impression mismanagement: People as inept self-presenters. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 11(6), e12321.
46.
TottenhamN.TanakaJ. W.LeonA. C.McCarryT.NurseM.HareT. A.NelsonC. (2009). The NimStim set of facial expressions: Judgments from untrained research participants. Psychiatry Research, 168, 242-249.
47.
TrobstK. K.WigginsJ. S. (2003). Constructive alternativism in personality assessment: Madeline G. from multiple perspectives. In WigginsJ. (Eds.), Paradigms of personality assessment (pp. 296-324). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
48.
WeinerI. B. (2003). Principles of Rorschach interpretation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
49.
WhippleR.FowlerJ. C. (2011). Affect, relationship schemas, and social cognition: Self-injuring borderline personality disorder inpatients. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 28, 183-195.
50.
WigginsJ. S. (2003). Paradigms of personality assessment. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
51.
WrightA. G. C.ZimmermanJ. (2019). Applied ambulatory assessment: Integrating idiographic and nomothetic principles of measurement. Psychological Assessment, 31, 1467. doi:10.31234/osf.io/6qc5x
