目的：将来自西方的四种人格障碍检测工具IPDE、SCID-Ⅱ、SCID-ⅡPQ和PDI-Ⅳ中文版本（简称IPDE、 SCID-Ⅱ、SCID-ⅡPQ和PDI-Ⅳ）在中国文化背景下进行检测和信度比较研究。方法：以上述四个人格障碍检测工具分别检测153名被试（缓解期重型精神病患者42名，病情稳定的神经症患者41名，人格障碍者29名，正常对照被试41名）并对其信度进行了系统检验和比较。结果：信度检验显示，强迫型、回避型（IPDE中为焦虑/回避型）、依赖型、表演型、边缘型（IPDE中为情绪不稳定型）、反社会型（IPDE中为社交紊乱型）、分裂样型和偏执型等8个人格障碍分量表的重测信度、评定者信度、分半信度和同质性信度较好；在四个人格障碍检测工具中，IPDE的信度较其它人格障碍工具更好。结论：强迫型、回避型（IPDE中为焦虑/回避型）、依赖型、表演型、边缘型（IPDE中为情绪不稳定型）、反社会型（IPDE中为社交紊乱型）、分裂样型和偏执型等8个人格障碍型别具有较好的稳定性、客观性、内部同源性。IPDE有较为完善的信度。%Objective: To compare and study the reliability of the four instruments for assessment of personality disorders in Chinese subjects. Method: 42 patients with psychosis in remission, 41 patients with neurosis in stable state, 29 subjects with personality disorder and 41 normal control were evaluated using the four instruments: IPDE (International Personality Disorder Examination), SCID-II (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R Personality Disorder), SCID-II PQ (SCID-II Patient Questionnaire), PDI-IV (Personality Disorder Interview for DSM-IV). Their reliabilities in Chinese subjects were tested. Result: It was found that obsessive-compulsive, avoidant (IPDE: anxious/avoidant), deppendent, histrionic, borderline (IPDE: emotionally unstable), antisocial (IPDE: dissocial), schizoid, paranoid personality disorders had better test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, split-half reliability, inter-item consistency. IPDE had better reliability. Conclusion: Obsessive-compulsive, avoidant (IPDE: anxious/avoidant), dependent, histrionic, borderline (IPDE: emotionally unstable), antisocial (IPDE: dissocial), schizoid, paranoid personality disorders had better stability, consistency and inner homogeneity. IPDE may be taken as principal reference information for our newly developed instruments for assessment of personality disorder for CCMD-2-R.
展开▼
