Personality disorders最新文献

The objective of this preregistered study was to gather evidence on training and clinical experiences offered by clinical psychology doctoral programs on the treatment of antagonism-a construct from the personality and psychopathology literature that captures individual differences in aggressiveness, callousness, grandiosity, domineering, and manipulativeness. We surveyed current graduate students (N = 376) in APA-accredited clinical psychology doctoral programs (M_age = 28.4; 83.2% female; 65.2% White) about their experiences in training and treatment of antagonistic patients (ANT-patients) as well as experiences with patients with predominant negative affect (NA; e.g., anxious and depressed). Students reported significantly less training to treat antagonism compared to NA (|ds| = 0.43-2.88), as well as lower rates of direct clinical experience, generally poorer treatment experiences, and stronger countertransference reactions (|ds| = 0.53-1.40). These discrepancies were especially large for adult-focused students compared to child/adolescent-focused students. In fact, adult-focused students reported a mean competency rating of M = 1.71, between the scalar points not competent at all (1) and a little bit competent (2). Overall, these results indicate a lack of training and competence to treat antagonism among current graduate students, especially adult-focused students. We believe the crux of this issue is a field-wide lack of robust empirical work on antagonism treatments (for adults). Moving forward, we implore researchers and funding agencies to help address this substantial gap, which is both an ethical and practical imperative. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

The treatment of populations with antagonistic traits and disorders, particularly psychopathic personalities, poses a significant challenge for mental health practitioners and trainees. This commentary reviews Hyatt, Phillips, et al. (2025), highlighting the critical clinical training gaps related to working with individuals exhibiting externalizing and antagonistic behaviors. Hyatt, Phillips, et al.'s (2025) findings reveal that graduate students receive less training and experience working with these populations compared to clients with internalizing disorders, contributing to lower self-efficacy and greater emotional strain in therapeutic encounters. This commentary discusses the urgent need for enhanced training, including exposure to structured evidence-based interventions for child conduct disorders, such as Parent-Child Interaction Therapy and its adaptation for children with callous-unemotional traits. It also discusses possible reasons for Hyatt, Phillips, et al.'s (2025) findings, including the pervasive underfunding of research on conduct disorders and psychopathy, which contributes to the scarcity of effective treatments. Finally, future training initiatives are considered, including the potential of novel training techniques such as deliberate practice and simulation-based education to improve psychology trainee's clinical competence in working with clients with antagonism. This commentary emphasizes the importance of equipping future clinicians with the skills needed to address the complex needs of these challenging populations to help reduce their societal burden. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

A recent survey of clinical doctoral students found that emerging clinicians feel ill-equipped to treat antagonism-related disorders and that they perceive inferior treatment outcomes (as compared to those with neuroticism-based disorders). That said, the clinician is only one half of the therapeutic relationship-and client qualities, such as motivation, are also important predictors of treatment success. The present article integrates insights from the personality development literature regarding whether nonclinical populations want to change with respect to agreeableness/antagonism, and whether interventions can help them do so. To that end, although people express goals to change all Big Five personality traits, the research literature consistently indicates that these desires are weakest for agreeableness (and openness) as compared to extraversion, conscientiousness, and emotional stability. Moreover, interventions that have successfully increased extraversion, conscientiousness, and emotional stability have struggled to help individuals become more agreeable. These findings are discussed, and future research directions are outlined. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Although clinical psychologists have long speculated that antagonistic individuals may lack insight into their moral deficits, some evidence has shown that more (vs. less) antagonistic people view moral traits as somewhat desirable and rate themselves as lower on moral characteristics (suggestive of some insight). But, we suggest that antagonistic people's struggles with insight can be detected as part of a basic social-cognitive bias that entails believing the self is better-than-average on socially desirable characteristics (i.e., the "better-than-average effect" [BTAE]). Specifically, although antagonistic people may rate themselves lower on moral characteristics than less antagonistic people, they may still believe that their relative standing on moral characteristics compares favorably to others. Participants (N = 515) completed indicators of the Dark Tetrad (D4) constructs (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism) and rated themselves in relation to others on moral and immoral character traits. Overall, participants exhibited very large BTAEs (i.e., rated the self as "better-than-average" on moral character traits); only psychopathy and sadism consistently related negatively to BTAEs, but people with elevations in each D4 construct (or any D4 facet) still exhibited large-to-very-large BTAEs. Such antagonistic participants viewed themselves as possessing substantially greater amounts of moral than immoral character traits but viewed average others as possessing an equal mix of these traits. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Comments on the article by C. S. Hyatt et al. (see record 2025-13493-001), which describes how therapists feel about treating antagonistic patients. The findings clearly reflect all the difficulties one can have with these cases. It is not surprising that many students felt they needed more supervision to address these problems. That might have made a difference. But what is even more necessary is conducting research into which methods work best. If experienced therapists find these cases problematic and may even avoid treating these patients, why should students have an easier time? In summary, teaching students how to deal with their most difficult cases needs to be guided by data. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Antagonism, a personality trait implicated in the development of a range of externalizing disorders, has the potential to significantly impact the course of therapy given its relevance for interpersonal functioning. This commentary describes the process of developing cognitive behavioral modules for personality symptoms, a short-term intervention for borderline personality disorder that directly addresses the personality traits associated with this condition: negative affectivity, disinhibition, and antagonism. Antagonism, as it manifests in the context of borderline personality disorder, is operationalized and putative functional mechanisms associated with its maintenance are suggested. Specific cognitive-behavioral skills are linked to maintaining processes and preliminary evidence of their efficacy for reducing antagonism is presented. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

This is the introduction to a special section of Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment. The special section concerns the treatment of the dimensional trait domain of antagonism. It begins with a target article concerning the lack of adequate training in the treatment of antagonism within clinical psychology training programs, followed by four invited commentaries providing suggestions for possible intervention programs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Antagonism is a personality domain located in most major trait models and is central to multiple personality disorders. This construct has been linked to many societally harmful externalizing behaviors (e.g., criminal conduct). Consequently, accurate assessment of this trait is important in both research and clinical settings. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-3 (MMPI-3) is among the most widely used personality assessment instruments, and both researchers and clinicians using it can benefit from proper assessment of antagonism. Although the Personality Psychopathology Five measures aggressiveness (AGGR), a conceptual cognate to antagonism, its content is restricted. Thus, the current studies aimed to develop and validate a new MMPI-3 Antagonism (ANT) scale using six different samples drawn from university, community, and mental health settings (ns = 289-1,660). Scale development (Study 1) was approached using criterion validity and latent modeling methods with a series of conceptually indicated candidate items. The resulting scale had improved content coverage of antagonism when compared to the AGGR scale. Subsequent validation analyses (Study 2) examined the ANT scale in terms of convergent and incremental validity against antagonism criteria, as well as its discriminant validity against disinhibition criteria. The results largely supported superior construct validity of ANT scale scores over those of AGGR, indicating that the ANT scale has promise as meaningful addition to the MMPI-3 in the assessment of this construct. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Impairments in mentalizing, the capacity to understand the self and others in terms of intentional mental states, are proposed to play an important role in the emergence of borderline personality disorder (BPD) in adolescence. Although mentalizing problems in adults with BPD have been amply demonstrated, research in adolescence lags behind in terms of both the normative development of mentalizing in adolescence and the relation between different dimensions of mentalizing and adolescent BPD. Therefore, the current study investigated developmental trends and sex-related differences related to different mentalizing dimensions and the associations between mentalizing dimensions and BPD features in a large group of adolescents (N = 456, M_age = 15.4 years, range = 12-19) oversampled for risk status for psychopathology. The results demonstrated that age was not associated with increases in the capacity for mentalizing, with one exception: externally based mentalizing improved with age. Girls reported greater difficulties in self-focused, internal, and affective mentalizing, but at the same time also higher levels of other-focused, internal, affective, and cognitive mentalizing than boys. Adolescent BPD features were mainly associated with difficulties in understanding, differentiating, and expressing emotions and elevated sensitivity and concern for the feelings of others. Specifically, problems with self-focused, internally based, affective mentalizing best predicted BPD features both categorically and dimensionally. The implications of these findings for our understanding of the relation between mentalizing and BPD in adolescents will be discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

With joint interpersonal and affective impairments associated with personality disorders, understanding the intersection of these processes in these disorders is a critical emerging trajectory for research. An emerging line of research has been devoted to understanding interpersonal emotion regulation processes in personality disorders. This relatively nascent research area has recently gained traction internationally. This special section summarizes some of the recent innovations in this area of research. These investigations have harnessed a diverse range of methods, including dyadic approaches, intensive longitudinal assessments, and information processing perspectives. Moreover, this section suggests that interpersonal emotion regulation is relevant to personality disorders beyond borderline personality disorder. This summary of innovative approaches is timely and can propel future clinically relevant and impactful research in this area. We provide recommendations for important next steps in this area of research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).