Vol. 24 No. 2 (2021)

Group and Personal Projections of a Strong and Weak Personality Traits, Well–Being, Need of Approval and False Impression – Retest Procedures

Published 05/03/2022


  • adjustment,
  • maladjustment,
  • personality traits,
  • social desirability,
  • flourishing,
  • thriving,
  • biases
  • ...More

How to Cite

FERDINANDOV, K. (2022). Group and Personal Projections of a Strong and Weak Personality Traits, Well–Being, Need of Approval and False Impression – Retest Procedures. Psychological Research (in the Balkans), 24(2). Retrieved from https://journalofpsychology.org/index.php/1/article/view/29


The current article presents the results of the re–test procedure applied to Personality Inven tory for DSM–5 Brief Form (PID–5–BF, Krueger et al., 2013) with two random samples. The first sample consists undergraduate students of the Sofia High School of Mathematics at 10 to 18 years old, while the second sample is consisted of Bulgarian citizens aged at 9 to 59 years old. The aim of the study is to reconfirm the accuracy, bandwidth and sensitivity of the inventory after wording adjustments of three state ments that have been made to. Some of the already published key correlates of PID–5–BF indicators were attested. The self–assessment measures demonstrates high levels of consistency, and the latent structure of the indicators is almost completely confirmed by the data obtained in the exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. New findings are also contribute to the nomological network extension process and the breadth and fidelity of measurements are confirmed. During the analysis was found that some of the ex pected adjustment and dysfunctional traits are moderately to strongly interrelated. A useful profiling model of two participants’ cases considering the psychological counseling of level of behavioral and emotional disfunctions experienced during the period of second and third Sars-Cov-2 spreading.


  1. Бардов, И. (2014). Номотетичен и идиогра­фичен подход в психологическото познание на личността: един възможен модел за ин­теграция. Сборник научни доклади на VII национален конгрес по психология, София, 30.10 – 02.11, 2014, с. 184 – 195. [Bardov, I. (2014). Nomotetichen i idiografichen podhod v psihologicheskoto poznanie na lichnostta: edin vazmozhen model za integratsia. Sbornik nauchni dokladi na VII natsionalen kongres po psihologia, Sofia, 30 Oktomvri – 02 Noemvri, p. 184 – 195. (In Bulgarian).]
  2. Dilova, M., Koralov, M. & Papazova, E. (2017). Bulgarian standardization of Morris Rosenberg’s self–esteem scale. Psychological Thought, 10, 1, 124 – 137. (in Bulgarian). [Ди­ лова, М., Папазова, Е., Коларов, М. (2017). Българска стандартизация на скалата за себеоценка на Морис Розенберг. Psychological Thought, 10, 1, 124 – 137.]
  3. Koleva, S. & Kalchev, K. (2019). Personality Inventory For Dsm–5: Brief Form (PID–5–ВF). Factor Structure, Reliability, And Validity In Bulgarian Adolescent Sample. Annual of So­ fia University “St. Kliment Ohridski” Faculty of Philosophy, Psychology, Volume 109, 115
  4. – 152, (in Bulgarian). [Колева, С., Калчев, П. (2019). Личностен въпросник за DSM–5: кратка форма (PID–5–ВF). факторна струк­тура, надеждност и валидност в българска юношеска извадка. Годишник на Софийския Университет „Св. Климент Охридски“, Философски Факултет, Психология, Том 109, 115 – 152.]
  5. Ferdinandov, K. (2020). Experimental Mod­ el оf Simple Emotions аnd Complex Feel­ings, Balgarsko spisanie po psihologia, 1–4, 32–61, ISSN 0861 – 7813, (in Bulgarian). [Фердинандов, K. (2020). Експериментален модел за прости емоции и сложни чувства. Българско списание по психология, брой 1 – 4, 32 – 61.]
  6. Ferdinandov, K. (2018). Vavilonska kula v choveshkoto sartse. Sporni vaprosi i proti­vorechia v psihologiyata na emotsiite. Vir­tualna konferentsia po psihologia „Novi idei i dobri praktiki v psihologiyata kato nauka i profesia, 2018 – 2019” (In Bulgarian) [Ферди­ нандов, K. (2019). Вавилонска кула в човеш­кото сърце. Спорни въпроси и противоречия в психологията на емоциите. Виртуална конференция по психология „Нови идеи и добри практики в психологията като наука и професия, 2018 – 2019”.], ISBN: 978-619-90786-1-7.
  7. Alexander, I. (1988). Personality, Psychologi­cal assessment, and Psybiography. Joumal of Personality, 56, 265 – 294
  8. Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M. & Salekin, R. T. (2016). Utility of the Personality Inventory for DSM–5–Brief Form (PID–5–BF) in the Measurement of Maladaptive Personality and Psypa­ thology. Assessment, 25, 5, 596 – 607.
  9. Barchi-Ferreira, A. M., Loureiro, S. R., Tor- res, A. R., da, S. T. D. A., Moreno, A. L., De-Sousa, D. A., Chagas, M. H. N., ... Osório, F.
  10. L. (2019). Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5): cross–cultural adaptation and content validity in the Brazilian context. Trends in Psy­ chiatry and Psytherapy, 41, 3, 297 – 300.
  11. Becker, P. (1999). Beyond the Big Five. Per­sonality and Individual Differences, 26, 511 – 530.
  12. Bobbio, A. & Manganelli, A. M. (2011). Mea­suring social desirability responding. A short version of Paulhus‘ BIDR 6. Tpm – Testing, Psymetrics, Methodology in Applied Psychol­ ogy, 18, 2, 117 – 135.
  13. Carroll, J. B. (2002). The Five–Factor person­ality model: How complete and satisfactory is it? In H. Braun, D. N. Jackson, & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in Psychological and educational measurement, 97 – 126. Mah­wah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  14. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum As­ sociates.
  15. Combaluzier, S., Gouvernet, B., Menant, F. & Rezrazi, A. (2018). Validation d’une version française de la forme brève de l’inventaire des troubles de la personnalité pour le DSM–5 (PID– 5 BF) de Krueger. L‘encephale, 44, 1, 9 – 13.
  16. Cronbach, L., Meehl, P. (1955). Construct va­ lidity in Psychological tests. Psychological Bul­ letin. 52 (4): 281 – 302.
  17. De Caluwé, E., Decuyper, M. & De Clercq, B. (2013). The child behavior checklist dys­regulation profile predicts adolescent DSM–5 pathological personality traits 4 years later. Eu­ ropean Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 22, 7, 401 – 411.
  18. De Clercq, B., De Fruyt, F., De Bolle, M., Van Hiel, A., Markon, K. E., Krueger, R. F. (2014). The Hierarchical Structure and Construct Validity of the PID–5 Trait Measure in Adolescence: DSM–5 Trait Structure in Adolescents. Journal of Personality, 82, 2, 158 – 169.
  19. De Fruyt, F., De Clercq, B., De Bolle, M., Wille, B., Markon, K. E. & Krueger, R. F. (2013). General and maladaptive traits in a five– factor framework for DSM–5 in a university stu­dent sample. Assessment, 20, 295 – 307.
  20. DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher–order factors of the Big Five in a multiinformant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1138 – 1151.
  21. Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D.W., Oishi, S. & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well–being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicator Research, 97, 143 – 156.
  22. Digman, J. (1997). Higher order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psy­ chology, 73, 1246 – 1256.
  23. Fossati, A., Somma, A., Borroni, S., Markon, K. E. & Krueger, R. F. (2017). The personal­ity inventory for DSM–5 brief form: Evidence for reliability and construct validity in a sample of community dwelling Italian adolescents. As­sessment, 24, 615 – 631.
  24. Gomez, R., Watson, S. & Stavropoulos, V. (2020). Personality inventory for DSM–5, Brief Form: Factor structure, reliability, and coefficient of congruence. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 11, 1, 69 – 77.
  25. Góngora, V. C. & Castro, S. A. (2017). Patho­logical Personality Traits (DSM–5), Risk Fac­tors, and Mental Health. Sage Open, 7, 3.
  26. Hart, C. Ritchie, T., Hepper, E. Gebauer, J. (2015). The Balanced Inventory of Desir­able Responding Short Form (BIDR–16). Sage Open, 5, 4.
  27. Kerber, A., Knaevelsrud, C., Schultze, M., Muller, S., Ruhling, R. M., Zimmermann, J., Wright, A. G. C., Spitzer, C., Krueger., R. F., Knaevelsrud, C., Zimmermann, J. (2020). Development of a Short and ICD–11 Compat­ible Measure for DSM–5 Maladaptive Personal­ity Traits Using Ant Colony Optimization Algo­rithms. Assessment.
  28. Kotov, R., Krueger, R. F. & Watson, D. (2018). A paradigm shift in psychiatric classification: the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psypathology (HiTOP). World Psychiatry, 17, 1, 24 – 25.
  29. Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson, D. & Skodol, A. E. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM–5. Psychological Medicine, 42, 9, 1879 – 90.
  30. Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson D., Skodol, A. E. (2013). The Person­ality Inventory for DSM–5 Brief Form (PID–5– BF). American Psychiatric Association.
  31. Krueger, R. F. & Markon, K. E. (2014). The role of the DSM–5 personality trait model in moving toward a quantitative and empirically based approach to classifying personality and Psypathology. Annual Review of Clinical Psy­ chology, 10, 477 – 501.
  32. Lugo, V., de, O. S. E. S., Hessel, C. R., Mon- teiro, R. T., Pasche, N. L., Pavan, G., Motta, L. S., ... Spanemberg, L. (2019). Evaluation of DSM–5 and ICD–11 personality traits using the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5) in a Brazilian sample of psychiatric inpatients. Personality and Mental Health, 13, 1, 24 – 39.
  33. Markon, K. E., Quilty, L. C., Bagby, R. M. & Krueger, R. F. (2013). The Development and Psymetric Properties of an Informant–Report Form of the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5). Assessment, 20, 3, 370 – 383.
  34. McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. (2021). Under­ standing persons: From Stern‘s personalistics to Five–Factor Theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 169.
  35. Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two–component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Per­sonality and Social Psychology, 46, 598 – 609.
  36. Pires, R., Ferreira, A. S., Guedes, D., Gon- calves, B., Henriques-Calado, J., Pires, R., Goncalves, B., Pires, R. (2018). A Study of the Psymetric qualities of the Portuguese version of the personality inventory for dsm–5 (pid–5): Full version, reduced form and brief form. Revista Iberoamericana De Diagnostico Y Evalu­ acion Psicologica, 2, 47, 197 – 212.
  37. Porcerelli, J. H., Hopwood, C. J. & Jones, J.
  38. R. (2019). Convergent and Discriminant Valid­ ity of Personality Inventory for DSM–5 –BF in a Primary Care Sample. Journal of Personality Disorders, 33, 6, 846 – 856.
  39. Romero, E. & Alonso, C. (2019). Maladapta­ tive personality traits in adolescence: Behav­ ioural, emotional and motivational correlates of the PID–5–BF scales. Psicothema, 31, 3, 263 – 270.
  40. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adoles­cent self–image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Uni­ versity Press.
  41. Somma, A., Fossati, A., Terrinoni, A., Wil- liams, R., Ardizzone, I., Fantini, F., ... Ferrara, M. (2016). Reliability and clinical useful­ness of the personality inventory for DSM–5 in clinically referred adolescents: A preliminary report in a sample of Italian inpatients. Compre­hensive Psychiatry, 70, 141 – 151.
  42. Soto, C. J. & John, O. P. (2016). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI–2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psy­ chology, 113, 1, 117 – 143.
  43. Soto, C. J., John, O. P. (2017). Short and extra– short forms of the Big Five Inventory–2: The BFI–2–S and BFI–2–XS. Journal of Research in Personality, 68, 69 – 81.
  44. Steel, P., Schmidt, J. & Shultz, J. (2008). Re­fining the relationship between personality and subjective well–being. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 138 – 161.
  45. Su, R., Tay, L., Diener, E. (2014). The Devel­opment and Validation of the Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving (CIT) and the Brief In­ ventory of Thriving (BIT). Applied Psychology Health and Well Being, 6, 3, 251 – 279.
  46. Taylor, S. E., Lerner, J. S., Sherman, D. K., Sage, R. M. & McDowell, N. K. (2003). Por­trait of the self–enhancer: Well adjusted and well liked or maladjusted and friendless?. Jour­ nal of Personality & Social Psychology, 84, 1, 165 – 176.
  47. Watson, D., Stasik, S. M., Ro, E. & Clark, L.
  48. A. (2013). Integrating Normal and Pathologi­cal Personality: Relating the DSM–5 Trait–Di­ mensional Model to General Traits of Personality. Assessment, 20, 3, 312 – 326.
  49. Widiger, T. A. & Costa, P. T. (2012). Integrat­ing Normal and Abnormal Personality Structure: The Five–Factor Model: Integrating Normal and Abnormal Personality Structure. Journal of Per­sonality, 80, 6, 1471 – 1506.
  50. Zatti, C., Oliveira, S. E. S., Guimarães, L. S. P., Calegaro, V. C., Benetti, S. P. C., Serralta, F. B. & Freitas, L. H. M. (2020). Translation and cultural adaptation of the DSM–5 Personal­ity Inventory – Brief Form (PID–5–BF). Trends in Psychiatry and Psytherapy, 42, 4, 291– 301.