Are we defining personality or just trying to categorize it?

On social media or in daily conversations, we often hear sentences like “They’re a narcissist”, “My friend might be borderline”. Nowadays, personality disorders mean much more than the technical terms in thick diagnostic books like DSM-5 or ICD-10; they have become a kind of stereotype for all of us. However, in order to understand personality disorders, we must first look at the concept of “personality”. The word personality comes from the Latin persona. A persona referred to the mask worn by actors in ancient theaters, and it represented the character a person portrayed on stage. Over time, the meaning of this word has changed, and today it is used to describe the distinctive features of a person that are seen and recognized by others (Konduz, 2015).

Although people may react similarly in similar situations, everyone’s emotions, thoughts, and behaviors are different from each other. For example, let’s imagine that you and your friends are caught in the rain at the same time. You may enjoy the rain and remember it as a funny memory, while others may feel demoralized. The same event has a completely different meaning for different personality structures. Personality is defined as “an organized set of emotions, thoughts, and behavioral patterns that distinguish a person from others”. Moreover, Burger (2006) explains personality as the consistent behavior patterns that originate from the individual and the internal processes that guide these behaviors.

In other words, personality is a structure that determines who we are, how we think, and how we relate to the world. Each individual’s personality is unique; this diversity makes human relations both rich and complex. However, sometimes this structure can become so rigid, closed to change, or maladaptive that it can harm the person or their environment. This is what we refer to as personality disorders. In this therapy sketch, we explore the concept of personality and personality disorders.

What is personality?

Typically, the word “personality” is used in everyday life with various meanings. In fact, this situation is not very different in psychology and mental health literature. For years, the concept of personality has been studied from different aspects by many theorists from different schools of therapy. Some have emphasized innate tendencies in their studies, while others have emphasized the reflection of life experiences. However, no matter how objective the studies are or how well the data are collected and analyzed, each personality definition and theory reflects the subjective views of the theorist because personal opinions are involved in interpreting the collected data. Reminding that in mind, APA describes personality as “The enduring configuration of characteristics and behavior that comprises an individual’s unique adjustment to life, including major traits, interests, drives, values, self-concept, abilities, and emotional patterns.” This definition can be considered as a common ground between different definitions of personality. So how do these theories differ? Here are a few examples.

Freud was the first to explain personality through his topographic (conscious, preconscious, unconscious) and later structural (id, ego, superego) models. Despite scientific criticism, his work remains one of the most comprehensive attempts to understand human personality (Millon et al., 2004; Magnavita, 2016). He believed that early childhood experiences and unresolved conflicts leave lasting marks on adulthood (Millon & Lerner, 2003).

After Freud, Neo-Freudians such as Adler, Jung, and Horney reimagined his ideas in their own ways. Adler focused on early feelings of inferiority, Jung introduced the collective unconscious and the concept of the “persona,” and Horney emphasized cultural and social influences on personality (Magnavita, 2016; Millon et al., 2004).

Later, behavioral and cognitive theorists turned toward learning and thinking more and argued that who we become depends on how we interpret experiences, respond to rewards and punishments, and relate to others (Bilge, 2014; Burger, 2006). In contrast, humanistic theorists such as Maslow, Rogers, and Fromm offered a more hopeful view and saw personality as an ongoing journey of growth and self-acceptance. They highlighted the importance of unconditional love, inner harmony, and self-realization (Fromm, 1982; Maslow, 1970; Rogers, 2018).

Countless theories explain how personality is structured, how it emerges, and how it is shaped. Each of them is deep enough to be the subject of a therapy sketch or even a book in itself. And you might wonder why there are so many personality definitions and theories. Isn’t one enough? The answer appears to be no, because personality is like a fingerprint. Each of us carries unique, complex, and traces of countless experiences. So no single definition can fully explain the way people think, feel, and relate to the world. Each theory tries to understand this complexity from its own perspective; some focus on internal conflicts, others on learned behaviors, others on the potential for growth, and perhaps this is precisely why understanding personality (even as a concept) is complicated. Then the main question is, if personality is so complex and multidimensional, then how can personality disorders be defined?

What are personality disorders?

From a broad perspective, the concept of personality disorders is really an effort to understand personality and how it can seem dysfunctional within this diversity. While personality theories show us how differently human nature can manifest, personality disorders help us understand what happens when specific patterns become too rigid, extreme, or closed to change.

APA describes personality disorders as “Any group of disorders involving pervasive patterns of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about the environment and the self that interfere with long-term functioning of the individual and are not limited to isolated episodes.” (APA, The modern definition of personality disorders has been influenced by two main sources: Freud and psychoanalysts’ focus on the inner world, conflicts, and early experiences; and Ribot and Kraepelin’s observation-based, diagnosis and classification-based approach. Kraepelin, in particular, laid the foundation for today’s diagnostic systems by defining distinct personality patterns and their boundaries (Bingöl, 2022).

The current reflection of this approach is the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition). By defining personality disorders with specific criteria, the DSM both enables mental health professionals to speak the same language and helps to understand at what point the personality becomes dysfunctional.

DSM and ICD classifications

DSM-5 and ICD classification are among the leading systems that enable us to understand the causes, effects, and prevalence of mental health diagnoses. ICD-10 provides a framework for planning and implementing health services based on the data provided by this system (Harrison et al., 2021). However, when it comes to personality disorders, the mental health professionals express some shortcomings of these systems. DSM-5 and ICD-10 define personality disorders by dividing them into “categories”.

The DSM-5 defines personality disorders as 10 different types grouped into three main clusters. Cluster A includes paranoid, schizoid, and schizotypal personality disorders. Cluster B includes antisocial, borderline, histrionic, and narcissistic personality disorders. Cluster C includes avoidant, dependent, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorders. Each disorder is described in detail under a separate diagnostic heading and symptoms in the DSM-5. In ICD-10 (1992), personality disorders are included in the code range F60-F69 and are defined as separate categories similar to DSM-5.

In a sense, these systems function with a set of symptom checkboxes. However, research shows that there is great overlap between diagnoses, boundaries are drawn arbitrarily, scientific grounds are limited, and clinical utility is not as strong as we think. This suggests that our older systems, which we have used for decades, might not be functioning properly at all and even lead to stigmatization.

Revisiting Classification Systems

These criticisms, along with the new scientific understanding brought about by digitalization, have made it inevitable to revisit classification systems (Bach and First, 2018). Accordingly, ICD-11, which entered into force in 2022, brought a radical change in the view of personality disorders (WHO, 2024). Personality disorders are now assessed not according to “what type” they are, but according to “how severe” they are. The new system offers a five-point scale:

Personal difficulty (not yet classified as a disorder)
Mild personality disorder
Moderate personality disorder
Severe personality disorder
Personality disorder of unspecified severity (WHO, 2021)

This assessment and classification aim not only to make a diagnosis but also to understand the personality more holistically. Similarly, DSM-5 has brought a new perspective to the classification of personality disorders in recent years. In addition to the classical categorical model, an alternative model that considers personality as a continuum was added. In this model, the focus is on self-functioning, consistency in relationships, and severity of personality traits.

In other words, both ICD-11 and DSM-5 started to see personality as a spectrum instead of fitting into checkboxes. However, misconceptions about personality disorders still persist among the general public.

Common misconceptions about personality disorders

When discussing personality disorders, we may all have specific thoughts in mind. This is quite natural, as we have mentioned, the concept of “personality” itself is a complex and multifaceted area. However, this complexity and the way it is categorized sometimes lead to misconceptions about personality disorders.

“People with personality disorders cannot change.”

This is one of the most common misconceptions. However, research shows that significant improvements in personality disorders are possible with therapy (especially cognitive behavioral therapy, psychodynamic therapy, and transference-focused therapy) (Livesley, 2003). Change may be slow, but it is possible.

“Personality disorder is a personality defect.”

Personality disorders are persistent patterns in the way an individual thinks, feels, and relates that result from a combination of developmental and environmental factors (APA, 2013). In other words, it is not a matter of “being a bad person” but of having internal dynamics that are difficult to adapt to.

“Personality disorders are very rare.”

On the contrary, they are much more common in society than is commonly believed. Research shows that about 10-15% of the general population has a personality disorder (Torgersen, 2012). This suggests that personality disorders may be as common as depression or anxiety.

“People with personality disorders are dangerous or manipulative.”

Media representations reinforce this perception for specific types of personality disorders. However, there is a wide range of personality disorders, and each individual has different levels of functioning (Gunderson & Links, 2014). These individuals often struggle most with their own internal conflicts.

Takeaways:

Personality is a structure that determines who we are, how we think, and how we relate to the world.
Countless theories explain how personality is structured, how it emerges, and how it is shaped.
Each of us carries unique, complex, and traces of countless experiences. So no single definition can fully explain the way people think, feel, and relate to the world.
Personality disorders are any group of disorders involving pervasive patterns of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about the environment and self that interfere with long-term functioning, not limited to isolated episodes.
DSM-5 and ICD-10 classifications are widely used for diagnosing personality disorders, but their effectiveness is criticized due to overlapping diagnoses, arbitrary boundaries, limited scientific basis, and weak clinical utility.
These systems are currently being revisited to improve self-functioning, relationship consistency, and personality trait severity.
The complexity of personality and personality disorders, and the way it is categorized, sometimes lead to misconceptions about personality disorders.

References:

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.
American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Personality disorder. In APA Dictionary of Psychology. https://dictionary.apa.org/personality-disorder
Bach, B., & First, M. B. (2018). Application of the ICD-11 classification of personality disorders. BMC Psychiatry, 18(351), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1908-3
Bilge, F. (2014). Kişilik kuramları. Pegem Akademi.
Burger, J. M. (2006). Personality (7th ed.). Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Fromm, E. (1982). The anatomy of human destructiveness. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gunderson, J. G., & Links, P. S. (2014). Borderline personality disorder: A clinical guide (2nd ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.
Harrison, J., Britt, H., Miller, G., & Henderson, J. (2021). The role of the ICD classification system in global health data. World Health Organization Bulletin, 99(4), 250–258.
Albay A, Atak H. Personality Disorders: A Theoretical and Psychometric Assessment. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar – Current Approaches in Psychiatry. June 2025;17(2):358-381. doi:10.18863/pgy.1502717
Konduz, A. (2015). Kişilik psikolojisine giriş. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
Livesley, W. J. (2003). Practical management of personality disorder. Guilford Press.
Magnavita, J. J. (2016). Personality disorders: Toward the DSM-V. Elsevier Academic Press.
Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). Harper & Row.
Bingöl, S. (2024). Mediating role of defense mechanisms and dimensions of the interpersonal relationship in the relationship between selfobject needs and personality disorders. Journal of Clinical Psychology (Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi), 8(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.57127/kpd.26024438.1274647
Millon, T., Lerner, M. J., & Weiner, I. B. (2003). Handbook of psychology: Personality and social psychology. Wiley.
Millon, T., Grossman, S., Meagher, S., Millon, C., & Everly, G. S. (2004). Personality disorders in modern life (2nd ed.). Wiley.
Rogers, C. R. (2018). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Sezer Katar, K., Gökçen Gündoğmuş, A., & Örsel, S. (2022). Kişilik İnançları ve DSM-5’e Göre Boyutsal Kişilik Özellikleri Arasındaki İlişkinin Araştırılması [Investigation of the relationship between personality beliefs and dimensional personality traits according to DSM-5]. Journal of Cognitive Behavioral Psychotherapy and Research, 11(2), 136–146.

Torgersen, S. (2012). Epidemiology. In T. A. Widiger (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of personality disorders (pp. 186–198). Oxford University Press.
WHO. (2021). International Classification of Diseases for Mortality and Morbidity Statistics (11th Revision). World Health Organization. https://icd.who.int
WHO. (2024). ICD-11: Personality disorders and related traits. World Health Organization.

Book Now! Find a Specialist!

At Roamers Therapy, our psychotherapists are here to support you through anxiety, depression, trauma and relationship issues, race-ethnicity issues, LGBTQIA+ issues, ADHD, Autism, or any challenges you encounter. Our psychotherapists are trained in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, Psychodynamic Therapy, Acceptance, and Commitment Therapy, Person-Centered Therapy, and Gottman Therapy.

Whether you’re seeking guidance on a specific issue or need help navigating difficult emotions, we’re ready to assist you every step of the way.

Contact us today to learn more about our services and schedule a session with our mental health professionals to begin your healing journey. To get started with therapy, visit our booking page.

First, decide if you’ll be paying out-of-pocket or using insurance. If you’re a self-pay client, you can book directly through the “Book Now” page or fill out the “Self-Pay/Out-of-network Inquiry Form.” If you’re using insurance, fill out the “Insurance Verification Form” to receive details about your costs and availability. Please let us know your preferred therapist. If your preferred therapist isn’t available, you can join the waitlist by emailing us. Once your appointment is confirmed, you’ll receive intake documents to complete before your first session.

This page is also part of the Roamers Therapy Glossary; a collection of mental-health related definitions that are written by our therapists.

While our offices are currently located at the South Loop neighborhood of Downtown Chicago, Illinois, we also welcome and serve clients for online therapy from anywhere in Illinois and Washington, D.C. Clients from the Chicagoland area may choose in-office or online therapy and usually commute from surrounding areas such as River North, West Loop, Gold Coast, Old Town, Lincoln Park, Lake View, Rogers Park, Logan Square, Pilsen, Bridgeport, Little Village, Bronzeville, South Shore, Hyde Park, Back of the Yards, Wicker Park, Bucktown and many more. You can visit our contact page to access detailed information on our office location.