Date of Award


Publication Type

Master Thesis

Degree Name




First Advisor

Hibbard, S.


Psychology, Personality.



Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.


A number of studies have explored in recent years the extent to which a dimensional view of Personality Disorders might be conceptualized in terms of the Five-Factor Model of Personality (FFM; Costa & McCrae, 1985; Goldberg, 1990). Moreover, other studies have suggested that interpersonal problems (Freedman et al., 1951), attachment style (Bowlby, 1977) and other personality constructs such as sociotropy vs. autonomy (Blatt, 1991; Beck, 1983) might also play a strong role in defining Personality Disorders. We have not, however, seen any studies to date that attempt to bring these two lines of thought together. In particular, no studies have attempted to explore the extent to which the interpersonal problems, attachment style, sociotropy vs. autonomy and the five personality dimensions together contribute to explaining Personality Disorders. The present study examines the FFM as a predictor of Personality Disorders while comparing it to other personality theories. Two measures of each personality theory were included in the study and the dependent variables were five components derived through a Principal Components Analysis of the two Personality Disorder measures (PDQ-4; Hyler et al., 1988; MCMI-III; Millon, 1994). Participants were 288 undergraduate students (49 males, 239 females) from a medium sized Canadian university who volunteered for partial course credit. The questionnaires were all administered via the Internet on a secure website. As predicted, the other personality measures captured significant variance above and beyond the FFM. Both measures of sociotropy vs. autonomy and of attachment theory accounted for significant amounts of unique variance for each of the five Personality Disorder components. The results and discussion centre on the description of the findings and a comparison and interpretation of the role each measure played in the explaining the common variance within and between the Personality Disorder measures.Dept. of Psychology. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2002 .C38. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 41-04, page: 1213. Adviser: Stephen Hibbard. Thesis (M.A.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2002.