Personality Disorders Comparison and Evaluation

The purpose of this assignment is to enhance your understanding of personality disorders and also to enhance your ability to differentiate between varying personality disorder types. This assignment also serves to familiarize you with use of the DSM.

Part 1

Use the attached document, “Personality Disorders Comparison and Evaluation Table” to compare the three clusters of personality disorders listing at least five to seven criteria in each section. Use the current version of the DSM to assist in the comparison.

Part 2

For this part, write a 750-1,000-word essay explaining the difference between the three clusters:

• Cluster A: Odd or eccentric
• Cluster B: Dramatic, emotional, erratic
• Cluster C: Anxious and fearful
• Next, research and describe the empirically validated treatments for at least three of the personality disorders.
• Choose one empirically validated treatment and explain how you would intervene at an individual level.
• Explain how you would evaluate the effectiveness of your chosen intervention. ***

RUBRIC****

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Insufficient

3. Approaching

4. Acceptable

5. Target

Part 1: Personality Disorders Comparison and Evaluation Table

Comparison table that compares the three clusters of personality disorders, listing at least five to seven criteria in each section.

0 points

Comparison table that compares the three clusters of personality disorders, listing at least five to seven criteria in each section is not included.

12.42 points

Comparison table that compares the three clusters of personality disorders, listing at least five to seven criteria in each section is vague and incomplete.

14.22 points

Comparison table that compares the three clusters of personality disorders, listing at least five to seven criteria in each section is minimal. Lacks some pertinent information.

16.02 points

Comparison table that compares the three clusters of personality disorders, listing at least five to seven criteria in each section is adequately accurate.

18 points

Comparison table that compares the three clusters of personality disorders, listing at least five to seven criteria in each section is comprehensive and expertly accurate.

Part 2: Essay

Explanation of the difference between the three clusters.

0 points

Explanation of the difference between the three clusters is not included.

6.21 points

Explanation of the difference between the three clusters is vague and incomplete.

7.11 points

Explanation of the difference between the three clusters is minimal. Lacks some pertinent information.

8.01 points

Explanation of the difference between the three clusters is adequately accurate.

9 points

Explanation of the difference between the three clusters is comprehensive and expertly accurate.

Empirically Validated Treatments

Description of the empirically validated treatments for at least three of the personality disorders, using research.

0 points

Description of the empirically validated treatments for at least three of the personality disorders, using research is not included.

9.32 points

Description of the empirically validated treatments for at least three of the personality disorders, using research is vague and incomplete.

10.67 points

Description of the empirically validated treatments for at least three of the personality disorders, using research is minimal. Lacks some pertinent information.

12.02 points

Description of the empirically validated treatments for at least three of the personality disorders, using research is adequately detailed and accurate.

13.5 points

Description of the empirically validated treatments for at least three of the personality disorders, using research is comprehensively detailed and expertly accurate.

Empirically Validated Treatment

Empirically validated treatment and explanation about how intervene would be at an individual level.

0 points

Empirically validated treatment and explanation about how intervene would be at an individual level is not included.

9.32 points

Empirically validated treatment and explanation about how intervene would be at an individual level is vague and incomplete.

10.67 points

Empirically validated treatment and explanation about how intervene would be at an individual level is minimal. Lacks some pertinent information.

12.02 points

Empirically validated treatment and explanation about how intervene would be at an individual level is adequately accurate.

13.5 points

Empirically validated treatment and explanation about how intervene would be at an individual level is comprehensive and expertly accurate.

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Explanation about how effectiveness of the chosen intervention would be evaluated.

0 points

Explanation about how effectiveness of the chosen intervention would be evaluated is not included.

6.21 points

Explanation about how effectiveness of the chosen intervention would be evaluated is vague and incomplete.

7.11 points

Explanation about how effectiveness of the chosen intervention would be evaluated is minimal. Lacks some pertinent information.

8.01 points

Explanation about how effectiveness of the chosen intervention would be evaluated is adequately accurate.

9 points

Explanation about how effectiveness of the chosen intervention would be evaluated is comprehensive and expertly accurate.

Thesis, Position, or Purpose

Communicates reason for writing and demonstrates awareness of audience.

0 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is not discernible. No awareness of the appropriate audience is evident.

4.35 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is discernable in most aspects but is occasionally weak or unclear. There is limited awareness of the appropriate audience.

4.98 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is adequately developed. An awareness of the appropriate audience is demonstrated.

5.61 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is clearly communicated throughout and clearly directed to a specific audience.

6.3 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is persuasively developed throughout and skillfully directed to a specific audience.

Development, Structure, and Conclusion

Advances position or purpose throughout writing; conclusion aligns to and evolves from development.

0 points

No advancement of the thesis, position, or purpose is evident. Connections between paragraphs are missing or inappropriate. No conclusion is offered.

4.97 points

Limited advancement of thesis, position, or purpose is discernable. There are inconsistencies in organization or the relationship of ideas. Conclusion is simplistic and not fully aligned to the development of the purpose.

5.69 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is advanced in most aspects. Ideas clearly build on each other. Conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

6.41 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is logically advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A clear and plausible conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

7.2 points

The thesis, position, or purpose is coherently and cohesively advanced throughout. The progression of ideas is coherent and unified. A convincing and unambiguous conclusion aligns to the development of the purpose.

Evidence

Selects and integrates evidence to support and advance position/purpose; considers other perspectives.

0 points

Evidence to support the thesis, position, or purpose is absent. The writing relies entirely on the perspective of the writer.

3.1 points

Evidence is used but is insufficient or of limited relevance. Simplistic explanation or integration of other perspectives is present.

3.56 points

Relevant evidence that includes other perspectives is used.

4.01 points

Specific and appropriate evidence is included. Other perspectives are integrated.

4.5 points

Comprehensive and compelling evidence is included. Multiple other perspectives are integrated effectively.

Mechanics of Writing

Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use, sentence structure, etc.

0 points

Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning. Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found throughout.

3.1 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present. Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are recurrent.

3.56 points

Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.

4.01 points

Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and sentence structure are used.

4.5 points

No mechanical errors are present. Skilled control of language choice and sentence structure are used throughout.

Format/Documentation

Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.

0 points

Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is provided.

3.1 points

Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing. Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.

3.56 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there are some obvious errors.

4.01 points

Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor errors.

4.5 points

No errors in formatting or documentation are present. Selectivity in the use of direct quotations and synthesis of sources is demonstrated.