Psychodynamic Underpinnings of the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorder

There has been much research in recent years on the Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Although this research has by and large validated the model from a psychometric perspective, it has sometimes been criticized by psychodynamically oriented researchers and clinicians for its (lack of) clinical utility and its disregard for the rich history and tradition of psychodynamic thought that formed the foundation for personality disorder research in the first place. These critiques have merit. However, there is much in DSM-5 AMPD that is not only consistent with the broad corpus of the psychodynamic tradition, but which may be useful to consider in psychodynamic research and clinical practice. In this article we review prominent (psychodynamic) critiques of the AMPD, consider the AMPD as a product of (and, thus, its dependency on) psychodynamic thought, and suggest how psychodynamically oriented researchers and clinicians might use the AMPD in their work in service of benefiting both the AMPD and psychodynamic thought more generally.