Personality dysfunction is an excellent marker of general psychopathology, particularly internalizing symptoms but less so for externalizing: A commentary on Martin, Kuer, & Sellbom
Abstract
Martin and colleagues examined the separability of personality dysfunction (PF) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) using clinician ratings and self-reports in a sample of 289 adults receiving community-based mental health treatment. Using both confirmatory factor and bifactor analyses, the authors found that a general factor splitting across both BPD and PF best accounted for their variance. The authors concluded that PF and BPD “represent the same underlying construct,” with only modest unique variance left in BPD thought to be artifacts of its conceptualization in the DSM. In this commentary, we argue two basic points. First, there is simultaneously ample evidence that PF is an excellent marker of psychopathology writ large and comparatively little evidence that it will successfully delineate personality disorders from other forms of psychopathology, as has been suggested. Second, there is growing evidence that PF is a better marker of internalizing than externalizing forms of psychopathology. Without modification to the conceptualization and assessment of PF, we believe that current (and forthcoming) diagnostic models of personality disorder unduly focus on internalizing, distress-based presentations, which potentially exclude more purely externalizing forms such as (grandiose) narcissism and antisocial/psychopathic personality pathology.
Related
- Children's Cognitive Abilities Moderate Parent/Teacher Agreement on Internalizing and Externalizing Psychopathology.
- Hypoxia-associated Birth Complications and Offspring Childhood Internalizing, Externalizing, and Adolescent Depression Symptoms
- An Elaborated Model of Youth Externalizing Psychopathology
- Parenting profiles and dimensions in relation to children’s internalizing and externalizing behaviors in the ECHO program
- Association of early life adversity with internalizing and externalizing behavior across 3 low- and middle-income countries
BibTeX
@misc{miller2026personality,
title = {{Personality dysfunction is an excellent marker of general psychopathology, particularly internalizing symptoms but less so for externalizing: A commentary on Martin, Kuer, & Sellbom}},
author = {Josh Miller and Nathaniel L. Phillips and Ashmita Ghosh and Leigha Rose and Donald Lynam},
howpublished = {PsyArXiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.31234/osf.io/heqz9_v2},
url = {https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/heqz9_v2/},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Personality dysfunction is an excellent marker of general psychopathology, particularly internalizing symptoms but less so for externalizing: A commentary on Martin, Kuer, & Sellbom
AU - Josh Miller
AU - Nathaniel L. Phillips
AU - Ashmita Ghosh
AU - Leigha Rose
AU - Donald Lynam
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/17
PB - PsyArXiv
DO - 10.31234/osf.io/heqz9_v2
UR - https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/heqz9_v2/
AB - Martin and colleagues examined the separability of personality dysfunction (PF) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) using clinician ratings and self-reports in a sample of 289 adults receiving community-based mental health treatment. Using both confirmatory factor and bifactor analyses, the authors found that a general factor splitting across both BPD and PF best accounted for their variance. The authors concluded that PF and BPD “represent the same underlying construct,” with only modest unique variance left in BPD thought to be artifacts of its conceptualization in the DSM. In this commentary, we argue two basic points. First, there is simultaneously ample evidence that PF is an excellent marker of psychopathology writ large and comparatively little evidence that it will successfully delineate personality disorders from other forms of psychopathology, as has been suggested. Second, there is growing evidence that PF is a better marker of internalizing than externalizing forms of psychopathology. Without modification to the conceptualization and assessment of PF, we believe that current (and forthcoming) diagnostic models of personality disorder unduly focus on internalizing, distress-based presentations, which potentially exclude more purely externalizing forms such as (grandiose) narcissism and antisocial/psychopathic personality pathology.
ER -