BACKGROUND: Current models theorize that affective temperaments underlie the development and expression of mood psychopathology. Recent studies support the construct validity of affective temperaments in clinical and non-clinical samples. However, one concern is that affective temperaments may be describing characteristics that are better captured by models of normal personality. We conducted two studies examining: (a) the association of affective temperaments with domains and facets of normal personality, and (b) whether affective temperaments accounted for variance in mood symptoms and disorders, impairment, and daily-life experiences over-and-above variance accounted for by normal personality. METHODS: Study 1 included 522 young adults who completed the TEMPS-A and the NEO-PI-3. Study 2 included 145 participants who were administered the TEMPS-A, NEO-FFI, interviews assessing psychopathology and impairment, and an assessment of daily life experiences. RESULTS: Study 1 revealed that personality domains and facets accounted for one-third to one-half of the variance in affective temperaments. However, study 2 demonstrated that affective temperaments accounted for unique variance in measures of psychopathology, impairment, and daily-life experiences after partialling variance associated with personality domains. Specifically, cyclothymic/irritable temperament predicted bipolar disorders, impairment, borderline personality traits, urgency, and anger in daily life. Hyperthymic temperament predicted hypomanic episodes, grandiosity, sensation seeking, and increased activity in daily life. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by the fact that only domain, not facet-level, measures of FFM were available in study 2. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the validity of hyperthymic and cyclothymic/irritable temperaments as indicators of clinical psychopathology and indicate that they provide information beyond normal personality.
BACKGROUND: Current models theorize that affective temperaments underlie the development and expression of mood psychopathology. Recent studies support the construct validity of affective temperaments in clinical and non-clinical samples. However, one concern is that affective temperaments may be describing characteristics that are better captured by models of normal personality. We conducted two studies examining: (a) the association of affective temperaments with domains and facets of normal personality, and (b) whether affective temperaments accounted for variance in mood symptoms and disorders, impairment, and daily-life experiences over-and-above variance accounted for by normal personality. METHODS: Study 1 included 522 young adults who completed the TEMPS-A and the NEO-PI-3. Study 2 included 145 participants who were administered the TEMPS-A, NEO-FFI, interviews assessing psychopathology and impairment, and an assessment of daily life experiences. RESULTS: Study 1 revealed that personality domains and facets accounted for one-third to one-half of the variance in affective temperaments. However, study 2 demonstrated that affective temperaments accounted for unique variance in measures of psychopathology, impairment, and daily-life experiences after partialling variance associated with personality domains. Specifically, cyclothymic/irritable temperament predicted bipolar disorders, impairment, borderline personality traits, urgency, and anger in daily life. Hyperthymic temperament predicted hypomanic episodes, grandiosity, sensation seeking, and increased activity in daily life. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by the fact that only domain, not facet-level, measures of FFM were available in study 2. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the validity of hyperthymic and cyclothymic/irritable temperaments as indicators of clinical psychopathology and indicate that they provide information beyond normal personality.
Authors: Joseph F Hayes; David P J Osborn; Glyn Lewis; Christina Dalman; Andreas Lundin Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 21.596