We examined the associations between personality pathology and daily situational experiences. College student participants (N = 180) were assessed on pathological personality traits along with six assessments of everyday situation experiences. Independent raters judged situation descriptions provided by the participants to estimate the normative and consensually shared aspect of situations. Participants’ subjective situational construals were obtained by partialing the consensual aspect out of their in situ situation ratings. Substantive and meaningful relations between personality pathology and situations were found, and they were predominantly underpinned by subjective construal of situational characteristics. By using comprehensive taxonomies of personality pathology and situations, we advanced current understanding on the day-to-day situational dynamics and experiences of individuals with pathological personality tendencies.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
2.
BlockJ.BlockJ. (1981). Studying situational dimensions: A grand perspective and some limited empiricism. In MagnussonD. (Ed.), Toward a psychology of situations: An interactional perspective (pp. 85–106). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3.
CostaP. T.WidigerT. A. (Eds.). (2002). Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
4.
CregoC.GoreW. L.RojasS. L.WidigerT. A. (2015). The discriminant (and convergent) validity of the personality inventory for DSM-5. Personality Disorders, 6, 321–335. doi:10.1037/per0000118
5.
DeYoungC. G.GraziopleneR. G.PetersonJ. B. (2012). From madness to genius: The Openness/Intellect trait domain as a paradoxical simplex. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 63–78. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2011.12.003
6.
EatonN. R.SouthS. C.KruegerR. F. (2009). The Cognitive–Affective Processing System (CAPS) approach to personality and the concept of personality disorder: Integrating clinical and social-cognitive research. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 208–217. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2009.01.016
7.
FunderD. C. (2016). Taking situations seriously. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 203–208. doi:10.1177/0963721416635552
8.
GeldhofG. J.PreacherK. J.ZyphurM. J. (2014). Reliability estimation in a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis framework. Psychological Methods, 19, 72–91. doi:10.1037/a0032138
9.
GoreW. L.WidigerT. A. (2013). The DSM-5 dimensional trait model and five-factor models of general personality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 816–821. doi:10.1037/a0032822
10.
HuprichS. K.BornsteinR. F.SchmittT. (2011). Self-report methodology is insufficient for improving the assessment and classification of Axis II personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 25, 557–570. doi:10.1521/pedi.2011.25.5.557
11.
HuprichS. K.NelsonS. M. (2015). Advancing the assessment of personality pathology with the cognitive-affective processing system. Journal of Personality Assessment, 97, 467–477. doi:10.1080/00223891.2015.1058806
12.
JonasonP. K.LiN. P.WebsterG. D.SchmittD. P. (2009). The dark triad: Facilitating a short-term mating strategy in men. European Journal of Personality, 23, 5–18. doi:10.1002/per.698
13.
KruegerR. F.DerringerJ.MarkonK. E.WatsonD.SkodolA. E. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory forDSM–5. Psychological Medicine, 42, 1879–1890. doi:10.1017/S0033291711002674
14.
LimD. S. H.GweeA. J.HongR. Y. (2019). Associations between the DSM-5 Section III trait model and impairments in functioning in Singaporean college students. Journal of Personality Disorders, 33, 413–431. doi:0.1521/pedi_2018_32_353
15.
MagnussonD. (1981). Problems in environmental analyses – An introduction. In MagnussonD. (Ed.), Toward a psychology of situations: An interactional perspective (pp. 3–8). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16.
MarkonK. E.QuiltyL. C.BagbyR. M.KruegerR. F. (2013). The development and psychometric properties of an informant-report form of the personality inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5). Assessment, 20, 370–383. doi:10.1177/1073191113486513
17.
MoreyL. C. (2017). Development and initial evaluation of a self-report form of the DSM-5 level of personality functioning scale. Psychological Assessment, 29, 1302–1308. doi:10.1037/pas0000450
18.
MurrayH. A. (1938). Explorations in personality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
19.
ParrigonS.WooS. E.TayL.WangT. (2017). CAPTION-ing the situation: A lexically-derived taxonomy of psychological situation characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 642–681. doi:10.1037/pspp0000111
20.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S.CheongA. S.FaiY. F.CongdonR. T.du ToitM. (2011). HLM 7: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
21.
RauthmannJ. F.Gallardo-PujolD.GuillaumeE. M.ToddE.NaveC. S.ShermanR. A.. . . FunderD. C. (2014). The Situational Eight DIAMONDS: A taxonomy of major dimensions of situation characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 677–718. doi:10.1037/a0037250
22.
RauthmannJ. F.ShermanR. A. (2018). The description of situations: Towards replicable domains of psychological situation characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114, 482–488. doi:10.1037/pspp0000162
23.
RauthmannJ. F.ShermanR. A.NaveC. S.FunderD. C. (2015). Personality-driven situation experience, contact, and construal: How people’s personality traits predict characteristics of their situations in daily life. Journal of Research in Personality, 55, 98–111. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2015.02.003
24.
ScherbaumC. A.FerreterJ. M. (2009). Estimating statistical power and required sample sizes for organizational research using multilevel modelling. Organizational Research Methods,12, 347–367. doi:10.1177/1094428107308906
25.
ShermanR. A.NaveC. S.FunderD. C. (2013). Situational construal is related to personality and gender. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2012.10.008
26.
ShermanR. A.RauthmannJ. F.BrownN. A.SerfassD. G.JonesA. B. (2015). The independent effects of personality and situations on real-time expression of behavior and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 872–888. doi:10.1037/pspp0000036
SleepC. E.LynamD. R.HyattC. S.MillerJ. D. (2017). Perils of partialing redux: The case of the dark triad. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126, 939–950. doi:10.1037/abn0000278
29.
SnijdersT. A.BoskerR. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Thousand, Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
SteppS. D.PilkonisP. A.YaggiK. E.MorseJ. Q.FeskeU. (2009). Interpersonal and emotional experiences of social interactions in borderline personality disorder. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 197, 484–491. doi:0.1097/NMD.0b013e3181aad2e7
31.
WilsonS.StroudC. B.DurbinC. E. (2017). Interpersonal dysfunction in personality disorders: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 143, 677–734. doi:10.1037/bul0000101
32.
WrightA. G. C.SimmsL. J. (2014). On the structure of personality disorder traits: Conjoint analyses of the CAT-PD, PID-5, and NEO-PI-3 trait models. Personality Disorders, 5, 43–54. doi:10.1037/per0000037
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
