Factorial structure of pathological personality as evaluated by peers

This study explored how individuals apply features of personality disorders (PDs) to peers. Members of groups nominated peers who exhibited symptoms for each of the 10 PDs in the DSM–IV. Data were gathered in 2 samples: 1st-year college students (n 1,440) and Air Force recruits (n 2,075). The peer method reliably identified group members exhibiting specific PD features. Factor analyses identified a clearly interpretable structure relevant to the pathological personality constructs being assessed. The structure replicated well across samples and showed expected relationships to broader models of normal personality. However, cross-method correlations of factor scores were only moderate, suggesting that peer reports are reliably different from self-reports regarding the presence of pathological personality traits. Personality disorders (PDs), defined as persistent, inflexible, maladaptive ways of relating to oneself and one’s environment (American Psychiatric Association, 1994), are generally consid-ered to be one of the most common forms of psychopathology. Of the general adult population, it is estimated that 10%–14 % have PD features present to a sufficient degree to warrant diagnosis (Pilkonis, Blehar, & Prien, 1997; Weissman, 1993; Widiger & Rogers, 1989). People with PDs may be unable to view themselves realistically or be unaware of the effect their behavior has on other people. Indeed, many personality disorder criteria explicitly in-volve distortions of self-perception and an inability to assess realistically one’s effect on others (Westen, 1997; Westen & Shedler, 1999). These facts have clear implications for the usual practice of assessing personality disorders through self-report and have led a number of reviewers to recognize the importance of gathering information from external sources (e.g., Clark, Livesley