TEMPS-I: delineating the most discriminant traits of the cyclothymic, depressive, hyperthymic and irritable temperaments in a nonpatient population
Introduction
The criteria for affective temperaments developed at the University of Tennessee (Akiskal et al., 1977, Akiskal et al., 1979) both in their original form or modified versions, have been widely used to detect the temperamental attributes of clinical (Perugi et al., 1990, Klein, 1990, Koukopulos et al., 1990) and nonclinical populations (Depue et al., 1981, Klein and Miller, 1993). However, no studies have specifically tested the validity of the entire set of the cyclothymic, irritable, depressive and hyperthymic temperaments administered in semi-structured format (Akiskal and Mallya, 1987). The operationalization of these constructs began with our study on cyclothymia, conducted at the University of Tennessee mood clinic (Akiskal et al., 1977). The definitions of the hyperthymic and depressive types (Akiskal et al., 1979) benefited greatly from the perspicacity and astute clinical observations of our late teacher and Memphis colleague Professor Vahé Puzantian, who was well-grounded in the classical German descriptions (Kraepelin, 1921, Schneider, 1958). Thus, the cyclothymic, hyperthymic and depressive types had always been part of the Mood Clinic Data Questionnaire (Akiskal et al., 1978), used in most of the research emanating from that Memphis-based clinic. An irritable type was formally added a decade later (Akiskal and Mallya, 1987).
A brief review of research conducted prior to our Italian collaboration will better set the stage for the analyses to be reported in this paper. In a study on a large sample of college students, Depue et al. (1981)indicated that the most frequent items for cyclothymia —in large part derived from Akiskal et al., 1977, Akiskal et al., 1979— were `lethargy alternating with eutonia', `marked unevenness in quantity and quality of productivity' and `mental confusion alternating with sharpened and creative thinking,' while the least frequent were `alternation between low self-confidence and overconfidence' and `decreased verbal output alternating with talkativeness.' In an affectively ill population, Cassano et al. (1989), using explicitly two of the temperaments operationalized by Akiskal and Mallya (1987), reported that the most frequent traits observed in clinically depressed patients with hyperthymic temperament were `irritable, cheerful, overoptimistic or exuberant, `warm, people-seeking or extroverted' and `overtalkative,' while the least frequent were `overinvolved and meddlesome,' `uninhibited, stimulus-seeking or promiscuous'; the depressive temperament showed a more homogeneous profile and the most frequent traits, again in a clinically depressed population, were `brooding and given to worry,' `conscientious or self-disciplining,' and `quiet, passive or indecisive,' while the least frequent were `preoccupied with inadequacy, failure and negative events to the point of morbid enjoyment of one's failures' and `sceptical, hypercritical or complaining.'
Both of the foregoing studies reported the frequency of single items without permitting an assessment of the weight and predictive value of each item or identification of the most discriminant traits. In fact, the most frequent items analyzed by means of the univariate method do not always prove to be the most discriminant. To our knowledge, only two studies (Klein, 1990, Klein and Miller, 1993) have evaluated the reliability and validity of the depressive temperament construct of Akiskal and Mallya. By using the Akiskal–Mallya depressive personality item set in college student and outpatient groups, these authors demonstrated that the four items most closely related to the overall construct were `gloomy, pessimistic, serious, incapable of fun,' `self-critical, self-reproaching and self-derogatory, `brooding and given to worry' and `preoccupied with negative events, feelings of inadequacy.' On the other hand, the items `quiet, introverted, passive, and nonassertive,' `sceptical, critical of others,' `conscientious, responsible and self-disciplined' had the lowest item-total correlations.
In a previous paper (Placidi et al., 1998), the standardization of the Semi-Structured Affective Temperament Interview — originally developed in the University of Tennessee at Memphis and under current evaluation in Pisa, Paris and San Diego (TEMPS-I) — made it possible to compare the three scales of depressive, hyperthymic and cyclothymic temperaments by showing the dominant temperamental characteristics for each subject. In the present report we carried out a different set of statistical analyses in our sample in order to identify the most discriminant traits of the four affective temperament scales in their University of Tennessee operationalization and, in a more general way, to confirm the validity of these constructs deriving from classic German psychiatry.
Section snippets
Subjects
The characteristics of the subjects and the instruments used in this study have been reported in detail in a previous paper (Placidi et al., 1998). The randomized student sample consisted of 1010 subjects (n=518 males, n=492 females; mean age of 18±3 years, and range of 14 to 26). The randomized sample was drawn from a student population attending five schools (n=704) providing secondary education with three different orientations (technical, professional and humanities), and taking various
Results
Table 2 shows the data resulting from the confirmatory factor analysis of the item scores of TEMPS-I. The hypothesized factorial structure in four dimensions has been confirmed; the cyclothymic factor appears to explain the highest proportion of variance, followed in decreasing order by the irritable, depressive and hyperthymic factors. It is particularly noteworthy that depressive factor correlates negatively with items belonging to the hyperthymic construct (HYP-1 and HYP-2): in other words,
Discussion
The data emerging from the multivariate analysis of TEMPS-I administered to 1010 young subjects further confirm the internal validity of this construct. In fact, confirmatory factor analysis with varimax rotation provides four factors, thereby ruling out other dimensions in the temperament affective scales. Moreover, all but two traits (DEP-3 `sceptical, hypercritical or complaining' and IRR-3 `tendency to brood' included, respectively, in the depressive and irritable scales) show a good
Conclusions
Multivariate analysis makes it possible to confirm the construct validity of the Akiskal and Mallya Semi-Structured Interview for the Affective Temperaments. Four temperaments emerge, of which the irritable is the least well defined. Of the irritable temperament, we recommend retaining only items IRR-2, IRR-3, IRR-5 and IRR-8 for further systematic study. Of the depressive, DEP-3 could be provisionally deleted. Of the cyclothymic, we recommend dropping CYC-6 and CYC-10. The hyperthymic scale
References (33)
- et al.
Cyclothymic temperamental disorders
Psychiatr. Clin. North Am.
(1979) Subaffective disorders: dysthymic, cyclothymic, and bipolar II disorders in the `borderline' realm
Psychiatr. Clin. North Am.
(1981)- et al.
Proposed subtypes of bipolar II and related disorders
J. Affect Disord
(1992) - et al.
The Semi-structured Affective Temperament Interview: I. Reliability and Psychometric Properties in 1010 14–26 Year Students
J. Affect. Disord.
(1998) - et al.
Familial and developmental factors in characteriological depression
J. Affect. Disord.
(1981) - et al.
Evaluating the diagnostic specifity of the Munich personality test dimension in major depression
J. Affect. Disord.
(1997) - et al.
Personality traits of Japanese patients in remission from an episode of primary unipolar depression
J. Affect. Disord.
(1997) - et al.
Cyclothymic disorder: Validating criteria for inclusion in the bipolar affective group
Am. J. Psychiatry
(1977) - et al.
The nosological status of neurotic depression: A prospective three-to-four-year examination in light of the primary-secondary and unipolar-bipolar dichotomies
Arch. Gen. Psychiatry
(1978) Dysthymic disorder: Psychopathology of proposed chronic depressive subtypes
Am. J. Psychiatry
(1983)
Criteria for the `soft' bipolar spectrum: Treatment implications
Psychopharmacol. Bull.
Delineating irritable-choleric and hyperthymic temperaments as variants of cyclothymia
J. Person. Disord.
Toward a temperament-based approach to depression: Implications for neurobiologic research
Adv. Biochem. Psychopharmacol.
Psychopathology, temperament, and past course in primary major depression, 2: toward a redefinition of bipolarity with a new semi-structured Interview for depression
Psychopathology
A behavioral paradigm for identifying persons at risk for bipolar depressive disorders: A conceptual framework and five validation studies
J. Abnorm. Psychol.
Development and validation of a scale for hypomanic persona
J. Abnorm. Psychol.
Cited by (0)
- 1
University of Tennessee, Memphis (deceased).