Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul 14;17(7):e0266201.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266201. eCollection 2022.

Reliability and validity of the Hungarian version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5)

Zita S Nagy  1 , Ella Salgó  2 , Bettina Bajzát  2 , Bálint Hajduska-Dér  2 , Zsolt Szabolcs Unoka  2
Affiliations

Reliability and validity of the Hungarian version of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5)

Zita S Nagy et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Objectives and methods: In order to assess the internal consistency, fit indexes, test-retest reliability, and validity of the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) and its associations with age, gender, and education, 471 non-clinical (69,6% female; mean age: 37,63) and 314 clinical participants (69,7% female, mean age: 37,41) were administered the Hungarian translation of the PID-5, as well as the SCL-90-R and the SCID-II Personality Questionnaire.

Results: We found that; (a) temporal consistency of the Hungarian PID-5 was confirmed by one-month test-retest reliability analysis, (b) validity of the PID-5 instrument is acceptable in the clinical and the non-clinical sample as well, based on significant correlations with SCID-II and SCL-90-R, (c) PID-5 facets' and domains' associations with gender, age, and level of education are in accordance with previous findings.

Conclusion: These findings support that the Hungarian PID-5 is a reliable and valid instrument for both clinical and non-clinical populations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

    1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington, DC; 2013.
    1. Krueger RF, Derringer J, Markon KE, Watson D, Skodol AE. Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5. Psychol Med. 2012. Sep;42(9):1879–90. doi: 10.1017/S0033291711002674 Epub 2011 Dec 8. Erratum in: Psychol Med. 2012 Sep;42(9):1891. ; PMCID: PMC3413381. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Al-Dajani N, Gralnick TM, Bagby RM. A Psychometric Review of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5): Current Status and Future Directions. J Pers Assess. 2016;98(1):62–81. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2015.1107572 Epub 2015 Nov 30. Erratum in: J Pers Assess. 2018 Jul-Aug;100(4):448. . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Samuel DB, Carroll KM, Rounsaville BJ, Ball SA. Personality disorders as maladaptive, extreme variants of normal personality: borderline personality disorder and neuroticism in a substance using sample. J Pers Disord. 2013. Oct;27(5):625–35. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2013.27.5.625 ; PMCID: PMC4125199. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 1951. 16, 297–334.

Publication types