Abstract
The principal aim of this paper is to investigate whether it is possible to create a personality taxonomy of clinical relevance out of Eysenck’s original PEN model by repairing the various shortcomings that can be noted in Eysenck’s personality theory, particularly in relation to P or Psychoticism. Addressing three approaches that have been followed to answer the question ‘which personality factors are basic?’, arguments are listed to show that particularly the theory-informed approach, originally defended by Eysenck, may lead to scientific progress. However, also noting the many deficiencies in the nomological network surrounding P, the peculiar situation arises that we adhere to Eysenck’s theory-informed methodology, but criticize his theory. These arguments and criticisms led to the replacement of P by three orthogonal and theory-based factors, Insensitivity (S), Orderliness (G), and Absorption (A), that together with the dimensions E or Extraversion and N or Neuroticism, that were retained from Eysenck’s PEN model, appear to give a comprehensive account of the main vulnerability factors in schizophrenia and affective disorders, as well as in other psychopathological conditions.
Publisher
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health,Epidemiology
Reference120 articles.
1. Gunderson JG, Triebwasser J, Phillips KA, Sullivan CN. Personality and vulnerability to affective disorders In: Cloninger CR, Ed. Personality and psychopathology. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Press 1999; pp. 3-32.
2. Kraepelin E. Psychiatrie: Ein Lehrbuch für Studierende und Ärzte In: Leipzig: Barth 1913.
3. Sullivan HS. The theory of anxiety and the nature of psychotherapy Psychiatry 1949; 12 : 3-12.
4. Maher BA, Maher WB. Personality and psychopathology: A historical perspective J Abnorm Psychol 1994; 103 : 72-.
5. Eysenck HJ. Dimensions of personality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul 1947.
Cited by
31 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献