The alternative model of personality disorders or early maladaptive schemas? Usefulness for understanding borderline features in a non-clinical adult sample

Abstract

Introduction and objective: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) alternative model of personality disorders (AMPD) is currently under empirical verification for its usefulness and diagnostic accuracy. At the same time, numerous studies based on Young’s concept of maladaptive schemas are underway. The aim of the research was to compare the possibilities of explaining the severity of borderline features using both models. Materials and methods: The results obtained from 565 healthy adults, with women accounting for slightly more than 52%, aged 18–81 years (M = 37 years) were analysed. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis II Personality Disorders – Personality Questionnaire (items for borderline personality disorder) (SCID-II, BPD part), Young Schema Questionnaire – Short Form (YSQ-S3) and Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5), Brief Form were used. Results: Regression analysis demonstrated that schemas account for about 39%, and personality traits for 53% of borderline trait variability, and their combined use increases this percentage to 55%. Structural modelling, in turn, indicated that only three schema domains are relevant for explaining borderline traits, but only indirectly. The direct effect schemas have on the personality dimensions from the AMPD model (only Impaired Autonomy has a significant direct effect on borderline). Contrary to the assumptions of the AMPD model, Negative Affectivity holds the slightest importance for the severity of borderline, while the greatest effect strength characterises Psychoticism. Conclusions: The dimensions of an alternative personality model have a direct relationship with BPD traits. The schemas explain personality traits (AMPD) but not the severity of the disorder itself.