Cited page

Citations are available only to our active members. Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

X X

Cited page

Display options
Reset

Eating Disorders and Obesity: A Comprehensive Handbook

By: Christopher G. Fairburn; Kelly D. Brownell | Book details

Contents
Look up
Saved work (0)

matching results for page

Page 204
Why can't I print more than one page at a time?
While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.

36
Personality and Eating Disorders

STEPHEN A. WONDERLICH

Clinicians, theorists, and researchers have a long-standing interest in the relationship between personality and eating disorders. While early clinical descriptions emphasized the predispositional risk of personality traits for eating disorders, more recent conceptualization and research have examined how eating disorders may modify personality traits, whether certain mechanisms increase the risk of both eating disorders and certain personality characteristics, as well as the effect of personality on clinical presentation, course, and treatment of anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. However, this literature continues to be plagued by conceptual and methodological problems, and debates about the nature and measurement of personality.


CONCEPTUAL AND METHODOLOGICAL DEBATE

The categorical approach to understanding personality, represented by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), has come under increasing attack as a model of personality disturbance. The main criticisms include: (1) Most empirical data suggest that personality traits and disorders are continuously distributed as dimensions rather than bimodal categories; (2) cutoff points for “diagnoses” are arbitrary; (3) inadequate agreement between different personality measures (i.e., poor convergent validity); (4) poor discriminant validity between categories, resulting in marked comorbidity; (5) personality disorder categories typically do not show stability over time; and (6) extreme heterogeneity within polythetic diagnostic concepts (e.g., the 93 possible expressions of borderline personality disorder in DSM-III-R).

Although the debate continues, there is an increasing call for different approaches to the conceptualization and measurement of personality and its disorders. The most common recommendation is to move to a dimensional trait perspective. This offers numerous advantages: (1) The dimensional model is more consistent with empirical evidence sug

-204-

Select text to:

Select text to:

  • Highlight
  • Cite a passage
  • Look up a word
Learn more Close
Loading One moment ...
of 632
Highlight
Select color
Change color
Delete highlight
Cite this passage
Cite this highlight
View citation

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?