پردازش اطلاعات در مغز در اختلال شخصیتی: I. وابستگی شدت پتانسیل برانگیخته شنوایی

Abstract Patients with personality disorders such as the histrionic type exaggerate their responses when receiving external social or environmental stimuli. We speculated that they might also show an augmenting pattern of the auditory evoked potential N1–P2 component in response to stimuli with increasing levels of intensity, a response pattern that is thought to be inversely correlated with cerebral serotonin (5-HT) activity. To test this hypothesis, we collected auditory evoked potentials in 191 patients with personality disorders (19 patients with the paranoid type, 12 schizoid, 14 schizotypal, 18 antisocial, 15 borderline, 13 histrionic, 17 narcissistic, 25 avoidant, 30 dependent and 28 obsessive-compulsive) and 26 healthy volunteers. Their personality traits were measured using the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire (DAPP-BQ). Compared with healthy subjects and other patient groups, the histrionic group scored higher on the basic traits Affective Instability, Stimulus Seeking, Rejection and Narcissism, and on the higher traits Emotional Dysregulation and Dissocial, than the other groups, and the schizoid group scored lower on most of the DAPP-BQ basic and higher traits. In addition, the histrionic group showed steeper amplitude/stimulus intensity function (ASF) slopes at three midline scalp electrodes than the healthy controls or the other patient groups. The ASF slopes were not correlated with any DAPP-BQ traits in the total sample of 217 subjects. However, the DAPP-BQ basic trait Rejection was positively correlated with the ASF slopes at all three electrode sites in the histrionic group. The increased intensity dependence of the auditory N1–P2 component might indicate that cerebral 5-HT neuronal activity is, on average, weak in the histrionic patients.

. Introduction The classification of personality disorders, e.g., in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM, American Psychiatric Association, 1994), has been challenged by approaches that rely upon a dimensional description of personality traits (Costa and Widiger, 1994 and Cloninger, 2000). The Five-Factor Model of normal personality appears to be systematically related to broadly defined personality disorders rather than to specific diagnostic categories of personality disorder (Coolidge et al., 1994, Clark et al., 1997 and Morey et al., 2002). It also lacks specificity in differentiating personality disorders and Axis I pathology (Butcher and Rouse, 1996, Davis and Millon, 1993 and McAdams, 1992). Because it is difficult to distinguish trait- from state-related characteristics, many measures of disordered personality used in clinical settings also fail to generate reliable results across different studies (Livesley, 2001). Nonetheless, the predictable link between the dimensional models and the DSM diagnoses (Clark et al., 1996, McCrae et al., 2001, Reynolds and Clark, 2001 and Trull et al., 2001) has its biological background (reviewed in Coccaro, 2001). Whether there are other forms of evidence that could serve to strengthen the link, e.g., by neurocognitive responses, is unclear. The sensory cortex responds to peripheral input, and auditory, somatosensory, visual or other stimuli evoke a cortical response that can be quantified by the latency and amplitude of the evoked potential. In cerebral evoked potential studies, the potential amplitude may increase or decrease with stimulus intensity, termed the intensity-dependence phenomenon, or earlier called augmenting/reducing (Buchsbaum and Silverman, 1968). The augmenting-reducing phenomenon was first reported in the visual modality and soon after in the auditory modality in healthy subjects (e.g., Blenner and Yingling, 1993; for review, see Buchsbaum et al., 1975 and Buchsbaum, 1976) and in paranoid schizophrenia and affective disorders (reviewed in Buchsbaum, 1975 and Buchsbaum, 1977). Studies have shown that the intensity dependence is reliable in the auditory evoked N1–P2 amplitude (Hegerl and Juckel, 1993 and Carrillo-de-la-Pena, 2001). As demonstrated recently using brain electrical source analysis, the intensity dependence of the auditory N1–P2 is more pronounced in the superior temporal plane, which is supposed to reflect mainly activity of the primary auditory cortex, rather than the secondary auditory areas in the lateral temporal cortex (Scherg et al., 1989, Scherg and von Cramon, 1990 and Hegerl et al., 1994). It is worthy of note that there might be a positive relationship between the intensity dependence of evoked potentials and the sensation seeking/impulsivity personality trait (Zuckerman et al., 1993) in healthy subjects (reviewed in Carrillo-de-la-Pena, 1992) and in alcohol-dependent patients (Hegerl et al., 1995 and Herrmann et al., 2002), although no correlation was found in another sample of young students (Carrillo-de-la-Pena, 2001) or in migraine sufferers (Wang et al., 1999). On the other hand, the intensity dependence of the evoked potential has also been studied in depression (Paige et al., 1994 and Brocke et al., 2000) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (Carrillo-de-la-Pena et al., 2000). Since layer IV of the temporal cortex receives most of the specific thalamic sensory input (Winer, 1984 and Zilles, 1990) and is rich in modulatory serotonin (5-HT) neurons (McCormick, 1992), it has been hypothesized that the intensity dependence of the auditory evoked N1–P2 component is inversely related to cortical 5-HT neuronal activity (Hegerl and Juckel, 1993). Many neurotransmitters, including 5-HT, have been linked to personality disorders (reviewed in Depue and Lenzenweger, 2001), and we speculate that certain personality traits may be correlated with the intensity dependence of the auditory N1–P2 components. For instance, patients with histrionic and borderline personality disorders tend to be sensation seekers. In particular, patients with histrionic personality are highly expressive, dramatic, attention seeking, overly gregarious, seductive and manipulative (Widiger and Sankis, 2000 and Cale and Lilienfeld, 2002). Therefore, we hypothesize that (1) the intensity dependence of the auditory N1–P2 component might be more pronounced in patients with histrionic and borderline personality disorders and (2) the intensity dependence might be correlated with Stimulus Seeking (similar to “sensation seeking”) as described in the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology-Basic Questionnaire (Livesley and Jackson, in press).

3. Results Each subject completed the DAPP-BQ and underwent the auditory evoked potential study. They showed clear N1 and P2 components in different intensities at each electrode site. The N1 latency was around 100 ms, and P2 around 180 ms. Fig. 1 illustrates the grand mean of the responses in the healthy subjects and in the histrionic personality disorder group. Superimposed grand averages of the auditory evoked potentials (negative upward) ... Fig. 1. Superimposed grand averages of the auditory evoked potentials (negative upward) recorded in the healthy control subjects (dotted lines) and of the histrionic personality disorder sufferers (solid lines). Four lines from top to bottom in each panel represent responses recorded at intensities of 70, 80, 90 and 100 dB. Figure options Latencies of N1 (F[10, 206] = 0.4, P = 0.94) and P2 components (F = 0.5, P = 0.89) did not differ significantly between groups of subjects at any stimulation intensity or electrode site ( Table 2). The N1–P2 amplitudes (F = 1.7, P = 0.07) did not differ significantly between groups of subjects at any stimulation intensity or electrode site ( Table 3). When the ASF slopes in different groups were examined, MANOVA detected significant group (F[10, 206] = 2.0, P < 0.04) and electrode site effects (F[2, 412] = 8.9, P < 0.001). The group-by-electrode site interaction, however, was not significant (F[20, 412] = 1.3, P = 0.21). In particular, the mean ASF slopes were steeper in patients with histrionic personality disorder than in the other groups (post hoc Duncan's test, all P < 0.05) except the patients with narcissistic (P = 0.06) or avoidant (P = 0.08) personality disorder. Table 2. Latencies (mean ± S.D.) of auditory evoked N1 and P2 in the healthy subjects and patients with personality disorders Subjects Intensity (dB SPL) C3 (ms) Cz (ms) C4 (ms) N1 P2 N1 P2 N1 P2 Healthy 70 105.2 ± 7.3 186.2 ± 25.3 105.3 ± 8.8 184.3 ± 24.4 105.3 ± 8.5 183.1 ± 24.0 80 99.5 ± 6.5 181.1 ± 24.9 98.8 ± 7.1 181.6 ± 22.5 100.9 ± 8.2 181.6 ± 23.0 90 99.7 ± 6.3 181.1 ± 23.9 99.5 ± 6.5 178.7 ± 26.2 101.1 ± 7.6 180.7 ± 23.3 100 101.4 ± 6.9 182.3 ± 24.5 102.4 ± 7.7 179.5 ± 24.9 103.2 ± 6.1 179.5 ± 24.4 Paranoid 70 104.3 ± 11.9 179.7 ± 25.7 105.4 ± 14.0 177.5 ± 15.6 108.3 ± 12.1 183.1 ± 24.0 80 100.5 ± 11.3 173.3 ± 13.6 101.4 ± 7.4 178.9 ± 18.2 101.6 ± 9.8 181.6 ± 23.0 90 102.6 ± 9.7 174.7 ± 19.6 100.4 ± 7.6 169.8 ± 14.2 98.7 ± 8.4 180.7 ± 23.3 100 101.3 ± 10.5 176.9 ± 10.6 100.7 ± 7.8 173.9 ± 10.1 100.7 ± 8.7 174.4 ± 12.5 Schizoid 70 101.9 ± 12.7 184.3 ± 18.1 108.1 ± 9.8 184.6 ± 12.8 103.9 ± 9.2 187.0 ± 14.9 80 101.9 ± 10.3 182.8 ± 17.3 103.1 ± 10.2 180.1 ± 14.1 101.8 ± 10.3 183.5 ± 19.3 90 99.5 ± 8.7 182.7 ± 24.3 98.4 ± 8.9 171.3 ± 10.1 98.0 ± 8.9 177.1 ± 14.2 100 102.6 ± 8.1 179.0 ± 26.2 101.3 ± 6.8 177.2 ± 24.3 102.5 ± 6.8 173.2 ± 18.3 Schizotypal 70 106.4 ± 9.0 185.7 ± 14.6 105.3 ± 7.8 183.3 ± 17.9 104.6 ± 11.0 188.5 ± 19.2 80 99.5 ± 9.0 171.2 ± 13.0 100.1 ± 9.5 169.5 ± 17.0 101.7 ± 11.0 177.0 ± 16.4 90 99.6 ± 8.9 175.3 ± 14.3 100.9 ± 10.0 173.4 ± 15.4 100.4 ± 9.5 180.4 ± 20.3 100 99.1 ± 8.2 172.1 ± 13.9 97.9 ± 9.2 167.4 ± 11.9 97.4 ± 10.0 167.7 ± 13.4 Antisocial 70 104.2 ± 11.6 193.9 ± 26.4 104.6 ± 12.5 185.0 ± 27.8 105.1 ± 13.2 186.3 ± 27.0 80 100.9 ± 9.5 180.4 ± 24.8 102.0 ± 10.8 182.2 ± 22.9 102.9 ± 9.3 180.4 ± 21.1 90 106.6 ± 16.8 185.6 ± 15.1 102.9 ± 12.0 182.0 ± 15.5 106.2 ± 13.7 187.1 ± 18.7 100 98.5 ± 8.0 179.2 ± 17.4 100.1 ± 7.9 174.4 ± 17.6 101.4 ± 8.9 177.1 ± 19.3 Borderline 70 103.1 ± 9.0 191.8 ± 18.4 105.5 ± 10.1 191.1 ± 23.6 103.5 ± 9.8 190.7 ± 23.4 80 101.6 ± 9.1 186.5 ± 17.9 101.1 ± 7.6 181.1 ± 17.6 104.6 ± 8.1 180.6 ± 16.5 90 99.5 ± 8.3 179.3 ± 17.6 99.3 ± 5.8 177.1 ± 20.3 99.1 ± 7.4 174.9 ± 15.8 100 103.7 ± 7.9 186.8 ± 30.5 101.2 ± 5.8 176.9 ± 16.9 102.1 ± 7.2 178.6 ± 26.0 Histrionic 70 106.2 ± 15.5 178.9 ± 17.0 105.1 ± 12.4 177.7 ± 15.4 104.0 ± 9.6 181.6 ± 23.0 80 105.1 ± 8.4 180.9 ± 14.9 102.4 ± 9.6 176.8 ± 15.8 103.1 ± 9.5 178.2 ± 14.6 90 102.7 ± 6.0 177.1 ± 21.8 103.5 ± 5.6 175.6 ± 19.9 103.8 ± 6.1 180.7 ± 20.1 100 102.5 ± 7.3 180.4 ± 22.6 101.4 ± 6.8 182.8 ± 21.9 103.3 ± 8.1 180.9 ± 21.6 Narcissistic 70 107.9 ± 11.1 186.3 ± 22.0 105.9 ± 10.4 190.7 ± 27.9 103.1 ± 10.4 185.7 ± 20.3 80 101.5 ± 8.5 185.4 ± 23.9 100.8 ± 11.8 173.4 ± 20.0 102.2 ± 10.2 176.4 ± 20.6 90 99.3 ± 4.9 183.9 ± 22.7 99.1 ± 4.9 183.9 ± 27.4 105.3 ± 21.2 187.5 ± 26.4 100 99.1 ± 6.4 181.6 ± 20.7 98.3 ± 8.1 180.3 ± 19.9 99.3 ± 9.4 180.8 ± 21.3 Avoidant 70 111.2 ± 16.9 188.5 ± 26.6 110.6 ± 17.2 187.7 ± 24.4 110.9 ± 18.3 185.0 ± 21.4 80 104.1 ± 9.8 183.5 ± 19.7 104.4 ± 13.3 185.8 ± 20.9 103.6 ± 9.0 180.6 ± 21.0 90 101.0 ± 9.0 179.8 ± 17.2 99.2 ± 7.6 179.4 ± 19.2 99.5 ± 7.7 178.8 ± 18.3 100 100.2 ± 8.5 172.1 ± 18.7 99.2 ± 9.4 173.8 ± 17.6 97.5 ± 11.3 176.3 ± 14.6 Dependent 70 105.7 ± 9.1 185.1 ± 20.4 105.0 ± 8.2 181.5 ± 20.3 104.6 ± 7.6 183.0 ± 15.6 80 103.7 ± 10.7 181.7 ± 17.9 104.9 ± 10.7 183.1 ± 20.2 104.9 ± 10.0 183.2 ± 16.4 90 102.3 ± 8.3 178.9 ± 18.6 101.8 ± 7.2 173.9 ± 19.8 101.1 ± 8.3 174.8 ± 18.1 100 101.9 ± 8.5 177.1 ± 16.8 101.8 ± 10.0 172.6 ± 19.0 101.5 ± 10.0 175.2 ± 20.9 Compulsive 70 102.6 ± 9.1 183.2 ± 16.3 106.1 ± 10.6 179.6 ± 15.7 105.0 ± 10.4 180.7 ± 19.8 80 100.4 ± 10.0 180.6 ± 20.6 99.6 ± 8.5 175.7 ± 23.8 101.9 ± 14.0 179.8 ± 24.9 90 98.3 ± 10.0 176.3 ± 19.4 99.4 ± 10.3 175.4 ± 18.4 100.3 ± 9.8 175.8 ± 18.9 100 97.7 ± 6.7 181.1 ± 24.4 97.4 ± 8.6 178.6 ± 21.1 99.4 ± 9.1 176.2 ± 19.9 Table options Table 3. Amplitudes (mean ± S.D.) of auditory evoked N1–P2 and the respective ASF slopes (mean ± S.D.) in healthy subjects and patients with personality disorders Subjects Intensity (dB SPL) N1–P2 (μV) Slope (μv/10 dB) C3 Cz C4 C3 Cz C4 Healthy 70 7.0 ± 2.5 7.1 ± 2.6 6.2 ± 2.6 0.3 ± 0.6b 0.4 ± 0.7b 0.4 ± 0.7b 80 7.9 ± 2.3 8.3 ± 2.2 7.3 ± 2.2 90 7.6 ± 2.4 8.0 ± 2.5 7.4 ± 2.5 100 8.3 ± 2.1 8.7 ± 2.2 7.6 ± 2.2 Paranoid 70 5.6 ± 2.3 6.2 ± 2.2 5.5 ± 2.0 0.4 ± 1.0b 0.5 ± 1.0b 0.4 ± 0.9b 80 5.8 ± 1.7 7.0 ± 1.7 6.1 ± 2.2 90 6.3 ± 2.2 7.4 ± 2.6 6.4 ± 2.2 100 6.7 ± 2.4 7.6 ± 2.5 6.7 ± 2.0 Schizoid 70 5.5 ± 1.7 6.2 ± 1.7 5.7 ± 1.6 0.2 ± 0.5b 0.3 ± 0.6b −0.1 ± 0.5b 80 6.3 ± 1.5 6.6 ± 1.6 6.2 ± 1.9 90 6.5 ± 2.7 6.9 ± 2.2 6.2 ± 1.9 100 6.0 ± 1.9 6.9 ± 2.4 5.7 ± 1.9 Schizotypal 70 7.5 ± 2.6 8.1 ± 3.5 7.1 ± 2.7 0.1 ± 0.7b 0.2 ± 0.6b 0.1 ± 0.7b 80 6.7 ± 1.9 7.7 ± 2.6 6.8 ± 2.3 90 6.7 ± 2.4 7.4 ± 2.8 6.7 ± 2.2 100 7.8 ± 3.2 8.8 ± 3.1 7.6 ± 2.7 Antisocial 70 5.2 ± 2.2 6.2 ± 2.5 5.2 ± 1.6 0.4 ± 0.7b 0.4 ± 0.9b 0.5 ± 0.8b 80 5.5 ± 2.6 6.1 ± 2.7 4.8 ± 2.5 90 5.9 ± 2.5 6.2 ± 2.4 5.2 ± 2.1 100 6.3 ± 2.7 7.5 ± 3.1 6.4 ± 2.8 Borderline 70 7.2 ± 2.2 7.9 ± 2.3 7.2 ± 2.1 0.3 ± 0.7b 0.3 ± 1.0b 0.2 ± 0.8b 80 7.1 ± 2.0 8.2 ± 1.9 7.3 ± 2.0 90 7.0 ± 1.2 8.4 ± 1.9 7.3 ± 1.8 100 8.4 ± 2.5 8.7 ± 3.0 8.1 ± 2.8 Histrionic 70 5.9 ± 2.6 6.7 ± 3.1 6.1 ± 2.7 1.1 ± 1.0a 1.2 ± 1.2a 1.0 ± 0.9a 80 6.6 ± 2.5 7.1 ± 2.8 6.5 ± 2.7 90 8.6 ± 4.7 9.6 ± 5.0 8.8 ± 4.5 100 9.0 ± 4.0 10.0 ± 4.7 8.8 ± 4.0 Narcissistic 70 6.1 ± 2.3 6.6 ± 2.2 6.2 ± 2.3 0.6 ± 0.8 0.8 ± 0.8 0.5 ± 0.6 80 7.0 ± 2.1 7.4 ± 2.4 6.3 ± 2.5 90 7.2 ± 2.7 8.3 ± 3.1 7.3 ± 2.9 100 8.1 ± 1.8 8.8 ± 2.0 7.5 ± 1.7 Avoidant 70 5.9 ± 2.7 6.0 ± 2.9 5.4 ± 2.7 0.6 ± 1.0 0.8 ± 1.1 0.7 ± 0.9 80 6.7 ± 3.0 7.0 ± 3.2 6.0 ± 3.0 90 7.1 ± 2.1 7.6 ± 2.2 6.7 ± 2.3 100 7.8 ± 3.4 8.4 ± 3.5 7.2 ± 3.1 Dependent 70 5.9 ± 2.2 6.4 ± 2.1 5.5 ± 2.3 0.3 ± 0.7b 0.3 ± 0.7b 0.2 ± 0.7b 80 6.4 ± 2.3 6.3 ± 2.1 5.6 ± 1.8 90 6.1 ± 2.3 6.7 ± 2.3 5.5 ± 1.7 100 7.2 ± 3.2 7.6 ± 3.1 6.3 ± 2.7 Compulsive 70 6.3 ± 2.9 6.4 ± 3.1 6.2 ± 3.1 0.5 ± 0.8b 0.7 ± 1.1b 0.3 ± 0.7b 80 7.3 ± 3.2 7.5 ± 3.3 6.8 ± 3.2 90 7.3 ± 2.6 7.9 ± 3.1 6.9 ± 2.7 100 7.8 ± 3.1 8.5 ± 3.4 7.0 ± 2.9 a P < 0.05 vs. the controls. b P < 0.05 vs. the historic group. Table options MANOVA also revealed significant effects of group (main effect: F[10, 206] = 23.7, P < 0.001) and DAPP-BQ basic trait (F[17, 3502] = 190.3, P < 0.001), as well as a significant group by trait interaction (F[170, 3502] = 73.3, P < 0.001). For the higher traits, MANOVA in addition confirmed a significant main effect of group (F[10, 206] = 23.7, P < 0.001), a higher trait effect (F[3,618] = 5877.8, P < 0.001), and a group by trait interaction (F[30, 618] = 21.8, P < 0.001). One-way ANOVA detected significant differences of 18 DAPP-BQ basic traits (main effects, F[10, 206] = 3.1–20.6; P's < 0.01–0.001) and four higher traits (main effects, F[10, 206] = 4.6–24.3; all P values < 0.001) among groups. For instance, the post hoc Duncan's test detected that the schizoid group scored significantly lower on most of these basic and higher traits than the other groups. The histrionic personality disorder group had higher scores on the basic traits Stimulus Seeking, Rejection, Affective Instability and Narcissism in general, and higher scores on the latter two traits than the borderline group. Moreover, the histrionic group had higher scores on the higher traits Emotional Dysregulation and Dissocial than did the healthy control group ( Table 4). Table 4. Scores (mean ± S.D.) of the disordered personality basic and higher (in italics) traits in the healthy subjects and patients with personality disorders Healthy Paranoid Schizoid Schizotypal Antisocial Borderline Histrionic Narcissistic Avoidant Dependent Compulsive Submissiveness 42.3 ± 8.1 51.3 ± 10.0 and 36.1 ± 9.0b 61.4 ± 12.0, and 47.8 ± 9.8c 51.5 ± 15.1 and 50.1 ± 10.1c 40.4 ± 12.2b 54.4 ± 12.1 and 48.9 ± 13.4c 39.2 ± 8.6b Cognitive Distortion 38.8 ± 9.7 54.0 ± 7.6 and 34.0 ± 9.7b 66.0 ± 10.0, and 55.1 ± 9.2 and 52.8 ± 10.3 and 54.9 ± 9.0 and 44.3 ± 6.3 and 53.2 ± 12.1 and 49.1 ± 10.9 and 45.3 ± 8.5 and Identity Problems 42.0 ± 10.7 55.7 ± 7.5 and 36.1 ± 9.8b 66.1 ± 5.9, and 52.6 ± 12.6 and 51.3 ± 13.4 and 50.1 ± 11.7c 42.7 ± 12.8 58.0 ± 13.0 and 51.6 ± 10.8 and 42.6 ± 11.6 Affective Instability 47.8 ± 8.5 56.4 ± 9.6, and 35.5 ± 8.5 and 72.4 ± 5.6 and 59.5 ± 11.0, and 63.2 ± 10.1, and 70.1 ± 6.1 and 53.5 ± 10.6 and 54.4 ± 13.9 and 57.2 ± 10.7, and 50.7 ± 11.1 and Stimulus Seeking 44.2 ± 6.7 43.7 ± 8.1 and 33.9 ± 5.9 and 56.1 ± 10.8, and 56.1 ± 9.3 and 54.9 ± 8.4 and 59.2 ± 6.8 and 47.6 ± 7.4 and 41.2 ± 10.4 and 42.0 ± 9.8 and 39.1 ± 8.5b Compulsivity 57.0 ± 7.2 58.7 ± 12.7c 45.5 ± 8.1 and 61.1 ± 13.1c 53.2 ± 11.2c 56.8 ± 12.5c 57.8 ± 11.0c 59.9 ± 10.5c 51.8 ± 12.2 58.8 ± 8.8c 71.0 ± 3.8, and Restricted Expression 46.0 ± 8.6 53.2 ± 9.8, and 43.3 ± 7.6 50.2 ± 9.0c 47.3 ± 7.8 47.4 ± 8.5 44.1 ± 8.8 46.3 ± 9.2 59.0 ± 8.1, and 47.4 ± 10.8 51.5 ± 7.5 and Callousness 35.4 ± 7.5 41.9 ± 9.0c 31.9 ± 11.4b 48.3 ± 8.1 and 49.8 ± 6.7 and 46.1 ± 14.6 and 46.4 ± 12.4 and 42.6 ± 10.0 and 36.9 ± 10.0b 35.9 ± 9.3b 30.2 ± 6.7b Oppositionality 45.0 ± 7.2 54.3 ± 10.8 and 39.0 ± 10.1b 66.4 ± 7.4, and 55.4 ± 10.3 and 53.3 ± 8.5 and 58.2 ± 9.6 and 46.8 ± 8.7b 56.2 ± 10.0 and 50.8 ± 10.3 and 41.9 ± 9.5b Intimacy Problems 37.4 ± 6.5 40.5 ± 7.6c 43.1 ± 8.5 42.1 ± 8.3 41.3 ± 11.1 42.2 ± 13.5 37.6 ± 9.2c 35.3 ± 8.0c 43.0 ± 9.6c 33.5 ± 6.8 39.0 ± 6.8c Rejection 47.0 ± 6.8 49.8 ± 11.1 and 37.8 ± 6.7 and 54.2 ± 11.2c 56.7 ± 10.8 and 52.6 ± 14.6c 58.5 ± 10.0 and 53.9 ± 9.9c 39.4 ± 8.9 and 47.5 ± 11.5 and 47.4 ± 9.8 and Anxiousness 48.1 ± 9.8 62.1 ± 8.2 and 33.3 ± 8.7 and 73.4 ± 3.5, and 54.9 ± 11.5 and 56.5 ± 13.1 and 63.1 ± 9.0 and 54.2 ± 10.8 and 62.7 ± 9.4 and 59.5 ± 11.9 and 51.1 ± 8.8 and Conduct Problems 27.6 ± 7.4 33.2 ± 7.1c 26.6 ± 7.1b 38.8 ± 10.8 and 51.4 ± 6.3, and 41.1 ± 13.4 and 35.9 ± 11.7 and 30.3 ± 8.4 29.3 ± 8.0b 29.1 ± 8.8b 27.0 ± 8.6b Social Avoidance 43.3 ± 11.2 56.8 ± 8.4 and 35.3 ± 8.5 and 66.8 ± 7.9, and 53.9 ± 11.6 and 56.1 ± 10.1 and 51.7 ± 13.0 and 47.5 ± 13.4c 67.4 ± 7.4, and 52.5 ± 11.3 and 47.0 ± 9.3c Narcissism 47.7 ± 7.4 52.8 ± 8.3 and 36.8 ± 8.2 and 66.3 ± 8.1 and 57.7 ± 10.8, and 54.6 ± 5.2 and 69.8 ± 5.5 and 65.8 ± 8.6 and 51.9 ± 14.0 and 55.2 ± 9.7, and 49.0 ± 9.2 and Insecure Attachment 45.8 ± 10.8 56.2 ± 8.8 and 35.0 ± 8.5 and 67.4 ± 11.9 and 55.5 ± 11.6, and 59.9 ± 11.0 and 63.0 ± 8.7 and 51.9 ± 10.5 and 48.6 ± 13.3 and 70.9 ± 4.1, and 49.2 ± 9.4 and Suspiciousness 29.3 ± 5.2 52.6 ± 6.4, and 25.0 ± 8.1b 55.1 ± 6.4, and 46.1 ± 9.2 and 39.1 ± 13.3 and 41.5 ± 9.1 and 35.2 ± 9.5 and 37.7 ± 10.2 and 35.3 ± 8.7 and 31.3 ± 7.2b Self-harm 18.3 ± 6.9 30.5 ± 9.3 and 17.2 ± 7.3b 41.1 ± 11.7, and 32.6 ± 10.0 and 37.7 ± 14.5 and 31.9 ± 14.9 and 18.8 ± 6.8b 29.0 ± 14.1 and 26.9 ± 11.7 and 19.1 ± 8.9b Emotional dysregualtion 400.7 ± 61.1 530.0 ± 47.5 and 326.4 ± 71.4 and 635.9 ± 36.7, and 513.3 ± 70.8 and 521.4 ± 78.6 and 534.7 ± 65.6 and 435.5 ± 67.3 and 521.6 ± 83.1 and 502.6 ± 75.9 and 417.6 ± 64.4 and Dissocial 202.0 ± 23.4 221.3 ± 30.7 and 167 ± 29.5 and 263.7 ± 24.2 and 271.7 ± 29.8 and 249.4 ± 42.7 and 269.8 ± 31.5 and 240.4 ± 33.2, and 198.7 ± 40.1 and 209.7 ± 35.4 and 192.6 ± 31.7 and Inhibition 83.5 ± 12.5 93.7 ± 15.9b 86.5 ± 11.8 92.3 ± 13.5 88.7 ± 14.8 89.6 ± 21.0 81.7 ± 15.1 81.6 ± 13.5 102.0 ± 13.7, and 80.8 ± 14.2 90.5 ± 11.6 Compulsivity 57.0 ± 7.2 58.7 ± 12.7c 45.5 ± 8.1 and 61.1 ± 13.1c 53.2 ± 11.2c 56.8 ± 12.5c 57.8 ± 11.0c 59.9 ± 10.5c 51.8 ± 12.2 58.8 ± 8.8c 71.0 ± 3.8, and The detail analyses are not presented here for brevity but available from the corresponding author by request. a P < 0.05 vs. the controls. b P < 0.05 vs. the historic group. c P < 0.05 vs. the schizoid group. Table options When all subjects were considered as a group, age was positively correlated with the DAPP-BQ basic trait Compulsivity (r = 0.20, n = 217, P < 0.01); educational level was negatively correlated with Cognitive Distortion (r = − 0.21, P < 0.01), Intimacy Problems (r = − 0.29, P < 0.001), Insecure Attachment (r = − 0.24, P < 0.001), or Self-harm (r = − 0.27, P < 0.001). N1 and P2 latencies and N1–P2 amplitudes were not correlated with DAPP-BQ basic or higher traits. The mean ASF slope was also not correlated with any DAPP-BQ trait. When only patients with histrionic personality disorder were considered, the mean ASF slopes at C3, Cz and C4 were positively correlated with the DAPP-BQ basic trait Rejection (r = 0.58, n = 13, all P < 0.05), while these correlations were not found in the other groups.