Talk:Schizoid personality disorder

Redirect
For some reason, someone made this page redirect to Archive 1 of this talk page. I'm going to assume good faith in that whoever did it was just trying to archive the page and not be disruptive, but next time please look over WP:ARCHIVE before attempting to archive a talk page again. Thank you. -- Rue Ryuzaki  jam 18:58, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Etiology
The real causes of SPD are largely unkown and speculative. It is realy necessary to have an empty section named "Etiology (causes)"?--194.65.151.101 (talk) 13:23, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It most certainly is. If you have a citation covering your statement "The real causes of SPD are largely unkown and speculative" then put that in. I may be able to dig up some material myself. Even speculative reasons may be worth mentioning as long as that is made clear--Penbat (talk) 13:29, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Kindliness, honesty--a bit unclear
From the present version of the article" "3.pliability, kindliness, honesty, indifference, silence, and cold emotional attitudes" I think it is wonderful if people who have this disorder are notably kind and honest. But the way it is written and lack of followup in article makes it unlikely or at best unclear that this is what is meant. Probably the passage was to say that kindness and honesty, or lack thereof, are among the traits psychiatrists try to measure in schizoid patients.-Richard L. Peterson69.181.160.248 (talk) 14:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


 * No, it is exactly like it is in the text, at least acording to "Disorders of the self..." (pg. 5)--194.65.151.101 (talk) 16:41, 14 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The original: Physique and Character, pg 151--95.93.120.216 (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Very unclear!
The mindset described by the article is a typical mindset of an independent middleclass intellectual/technichan/worker/civil servant/church functionary, who cares more about independent judging of the work's/firm's/state's progress than about nourishing his/her family, whom he considers to be cared of. It is the people who are capable of doing such things like setting up a software firm or writing in-depth philosophical treatises on the state of society, and who are able to think. So if this kind of grown-up mindset "isn't supported" anymore, the whole society will slide into a more childish and brutal mindset. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.190.149.23 (talk) 18:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree. And not only that BUT this article relies very much on a freudian understanding of schizoid personality which I think is biased. There are other writing on schizoid personality that could be referenced.

Freudian psychology shouldn't be the only thing cited here. Verges on pseudoscience.

Spylass (talk) 18:51, 2 March 2016 (UTC)Spylass

The slave/ master dynamic
What isnt mentioned on the wiki page is the type of schizoid that is drawn to exploitative relationships, that is, into the 'slave-master relationship' as described by Klein in 'Disorders of the self..'. This is a largely unrecognised side to this disorder, and includes some who are sociable and kindly, but who have been affected, probably in their formative years by exploitative, and/ or dishonest relationships in their family, or abandonment, (and this includes many who have had a narcissistic parent). A key issue to be made clear is the intrapsychic structure of the split between self in exile and slave/ master relationship, that is to say, there is a dynamic polarisation. The intrusiveness and appropriation in the relationship experiences, and the other half of the polarity, being the self in exile. I'd like to try to edit the wiki page, but feel unsure about the best way to go about this. If anyone can help I'd be grateful. I believe these aspects are very important, I have experience of lives lost due to ingnorance of this disorder, failure to diagnose and treat. From River,  my email:  rivr.x@tiscali.co.uk 7 Feb. .2010  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.96.47 (talk) 22:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Just put this thread under a proper? heading, hopefully that makes it more easily editable. I just discovered this article, then this 'teaser' in the discussion here, and have to say I'm very curious about how the concept applies in this context as opposed to attachment disorders (are those considered symptoms [i]of[/i] SPD if enough cues are hit to declare a diagnosis of SPD?) or "healthy" kink/sexuality.  Personally, I recognize myself falling into that pattern negatively "in real life", especially after a reduction in personal/financial autonomy and moving back and forth between narcissistic parents(!) - yet also being attracted to the idea in sexual contexts, hopefully with people who can muster a 'normal' non-exploitative aspect outside the fantasy/roleplay.  The 'expert' perspective would be a good data point and perhaps useful to fully defining what falls under this label as opposed to any other. 64.252.197.142 (talk) 13:02, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Just speculation?
How much of this is speculation and how much has been verified by scientific analysis? We all know the Freudians write/wrote volumes of speculation, is this just the same? I'd like to see a Criticism section. 92.28.252.46 (talk) 14:24, 13 June 2010 (UTC)


 * What do you say by "criticism"? I think that is a fact that are people with this symptoms (me, for example); by "criticism" you mean the opinion that this is simply a variant of personality and not a disease? But the whole concept of "personality disorder" is, basically, an extreme variant of a personality type.


 * Or you are talking, not about the concept of SPD itself, but about the psycho-dynamic theories about the causes of SPD?--95.93.14.161 (talk) 17:13, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I mean that there may be no such thing as a "schizoid personality disorder", and that the reasoning given may not be true either. Where are the empirical scientific studies to prove it? 92.15.10.239 (talk) 18:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)


 * This is like saying "may be no such thing as a «color cyan»" - it is a fact that there are some color combinations that match what is called "cyan", and it is also a fact that some people have personality traits that match the definition of "schizoid personality disorder"; there is the question if we should have a particular label ("schizoid personality disorder") for these people or a particular label ("cyan") for this color combination (instead of considering it as, for example, simply a variant of "blue"), but this is more a question of convention than of "true/false".--95.93.126.227 (talk) 00:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Not quite. A disorder is not a collection of personality traits. Furthermore, it could be that the difficulties of those diagnosed that get a certain diagnosis can be described in different and more accurate ways. Maybe the diagnosis groups together people that only on the surface seem more or less similar, but who differ vastly in their own experiences. Lova Falk   talk  16:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

.....Hi. I have Schizoid Personality Disorder. I've been taking ant-psychotics for the past 2 and 1/2 years due to a speculative family history of schizophrenics (we are of a third-world orient), a father with NPD and the latter, and found out about it all after the drug use. I am almost in my mid-twenties, and my 3rd doctor since this has all began has stated that after being diagnosed with schizophrenia that I really have an "undiagnosed psychosis w/ schizophrenic symptoms due to drug use." I've worked with children w/ autism, PDNOS, Aspergers, majoring in a Neurological field so that if i do have kids with said afflictions, I can be prepared to respond properly. Now I know the difference between schizophrenia and a schizoid personality disorder and can unfortunately say that, yes, it sucks. I feel and go through every single thing that this article describes and since childhood. I know some of it is bit provocative, given the extreme sexual (or lack thereof) interests and mindsets that people like me go through. It's sad because I think that most of the relationships that I have had recently have been those with similar symptoms and experiences. So yes, it exists, and I say this as a living testament, a friend of those similar and contrasted, and as one who his making his livelihood based on preparing for the worst since Ive been given my worst. I guess that's the ridiculous amount of kindness and humility that the article was referring to. Trust me, I've been going through this for so long, that I hate that this isn't out in the open more, but then again, i believe that society has made the Schizoid-types the social outcasts they are today...it's the apathy that makes it look so selfish. We feel like we have no choice, because the external/internal (which is another hard to tell thing) won't let us be satisfied or comfortable. So with the constant tug of war and the multitudes of today's society of polite fictions, the apathetic, social outcast becomes the only saving grace, and the fantasy/womb-like mind becomes something of a nuisance at times, as well as a fortress of solitude. Then, with age, which is what I'm facing, given the powers of what discernment I have left, the solitude of mind will manifest itself in reality, given the extreme realness within the duality of brain and mind. In fact, one can speculate that the external/internal tug-of-war is just a fight between the reality of concept od Duality (Brain/Mind). Ah well...this is just a means for me to express a lot since I've read this, and thankfully, without much emotional attachment. Anywho, it's real, because I and others I know live it. Every. Day. It's funny how it's found to be only 1% of the population.

-LB 76.102.46.29 (talk) 09:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I got the diagnosis Asperger's Syndrome at the age of eleven or twelve. This diagnosis works better with how modern cognitive science says that the human mind works. Experts in this field says that certain behaviours are simply not a choice. In other words, if someone do certain things it is because he or she can't choose to not do so. It is also worth noting that many symptoms of Asperger's Syndrome could mistakenly be described as the listed symptoms of Schizoid personality disorder if the person is not asked about his or her own thoughts and emotions. I strongly suspect that the people formulating the diagnostic criteria for Schizoid personality disorder did not realise they have to ask their patients about such things. Not asking the person in question is a very common source of misunderstandings about the causes of someone's behaviour.


 * 2011-01-06 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.


 * Lena, first, in talk pages we NEVER, NEVER delete or replace older messages (like you did to the text written by LB) - well, I deleted your text (to recover LB's text), but made a copy of your text and past it again


 * Second, you say that "Experts in this field says that certain behaviours are simply not a choice". And...? I think that is irrelevant to the discussion: people with Schizoid PD don't "choose" to be schizoids (and nobody is saying that they choose). Yes, in some sense, schizoids "choose" to be alone - but they don't "choose" the preference for being alone (an analogy with homossexuals - in some sense, an homossexual "choose" to be with a person of the same sex, but he/she did not "choose" to be attracted to people of the same sex)


 * "I strongly suspect that the people formulating the diagnostic criteria for Schizoid personality disorder did not realise they have to ask their patients about such things. Not asking the person in question is a very common source of misunderstandings about the causes of someone's behaviour" - You are forgetting that are many people diagnosed with SPD who recognize themselves in the diagnosis (like LB, apparently); and, if you read the passages of the article about "overt" and "covert" symptoms, they clearly are about the internal processes of "schizoid mind" (how Akhtar could have written about the covert symptoms of SPD without talking with their patients about what is inside their minds?). More - one of the symptoms in the diagnostic criteria is "Preoccupation with fantasy and introspection"; how can this symptom be observed without asking the patients about what they feel/think? Even more - if there is a diagnosis criteria that it is almost totally based in external behavior is, exactly, Asperger's Syndrome (I already read many articles written by people with AS complaining exactly of this - that the diagnostic criteria was based in what AS seems to "neurotipicals" instead of focusing in the internal experience of the person with AS); then, how you can say that "schizoids" are "aspies" who are misdiagnosed because the diagnosis for SPD ignores their thoughts and emotion, when the diagnostic criteria for AS also (perhaps even more than for SPD) does not take thoughs and emotions in account???


 * And, like I said above, all of this discussion is "original research", but, if you find some articles about the relation between SPD and AS, you could put them in the article


 * Of course, attending that both diagnosis (SPD and AS) will be removed from the DSM, perhaps it is this discussion that sooner will become outdated?--79.169.165.113 (talk) 00:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed changes to the DSM V
It is my understanding that Schizoid personality disorder may be removed or reformulated in the DSM V but I see no mention of it. Having been diagnosed, I wonder why and where things may be going and what has changed. Thestranger.djp (talk) 20:01, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

You know - after changing health care system in USA, goverment want to find savings in budget. There are more safe place on the world now for "unprofitable patients", than Soviet union of America:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.5.175.254 (talk) 12:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It won't be removed they're just gonna reclarify some of its diagnostic criteria so it's less broad and provide some social disincentives for idiot parents who rush to get their solitary WoW-addicted children labeled and collect benefits for their parental failures.--96.51.38.246 (talk) 23:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

There is research and debate suggesting schizoid personality disorder as a diagnostic construct has poor validity. See these articles: 1) Hummelen, B., Pedersen, G., Wilberg, T., Karterud, S. (2015) "Poor Validity of the DSM-IV Schizoid Personality Disorder Construct as a Diagnostic Category"; J Pers Disord https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25248009/ - Overholser, J. (1989). 2) "Differentiation between schizoid and avoidant personalities: an empirical test." Can J Psychiatry. 1989 Nov;34(8):785-90. doi: 10.1177/070674378903400808. link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2819642/ - 3) Mullins-Sweatt, S., Bernstein, D., Widiger, T. "Retention or deletion of personality disorder diagnoses for DSM-5: an expert consensus approach." Comparative Study J Pers Disord . 2012 Oct;26(5):689-703. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2012.26.5.689. liink: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23013338/ Bol1966 (talk) 18:26, 5 December 2020 (UTC) Bol1966 (talk) 17:19, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Treatment
I propose the removal of this section:

- Many parts seems medical advice - Many parts are very complex and difficult to understand by laymen (who are the "natural public" of wikipedia)

--194.65.151.101 (talk) 15:35, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

The part about atypical antipsychotics not being effective for personality disorder, is not really supported by the study it refrences here what the study says

```Personality DisordersAll trials  from  the  2006  CER  reported  efficacy  of  olanzapine  and  of  aripiprazole  for  BPD. More recently,  PCTs  of  atypicals  for  treatment  of  BPD  have  had  heterogeneous  outcomes,  and  meta-analysis could not be performed.```  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.180.223.26 (talk) 05:30, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

"According to Gunderson,[4] people with SPD...
In the section "Signs and symptoms", appears "According to Gunderson,[4] people with SPD “feel lost” without the people they are normally around because they need a sense of security and stability", using "" as source.

However, in that chapter of the book (pages 141-157), I found nothing saying this. It could be in the other 2 articles about BPD, but, in this case, are not from Gunderson. Or, of course, it is possible that I had not look carefully--79.169.165.78 (talk) 22:18, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

In Guntrip (not in Gunderson), there is really a reference to "feel lost"; perhaps it is a confusion between Guntrip and Gunderson?--194.65.151.101 (talk) 08:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Akhtar's phenomenological profile
It was removed without any explanation on October 3rd 2011. If anyone feels it doesn't belong, please post your reasons here instead of just removing it at your own leisure. Personally I find that table easier to read than the miles of text (and the content is very much the same). 95.34.252.174 (talk) 04:20, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

"Fantasy world" and sources
Some weeks ago, the article said "Schizoid personality disorder (SPD) is a personality disorder characterized by a lack of interest in social relationships, a tendency towards a solitary lifestyle, secretiveness, emotional coldness, and sometimes (sexual) apathy, with a simultaneous rich, elaborate, and exclusively internal fantasy world.[1]"; now, it says "Schizoid personality disorder (SPD) is a personality disorder characterized by a lack of interest in social relationships, a tendency towards a solitary lifestyle, secretiveness, emotional coldness, and sometimes (sexual) apathy. They may also demonstrate a simultaneous rich, elaborate, and exclusively internal fantasy world, although this is often more suggestive of schizotypal personality disorder.[1]".

The source in [1] remains the same - "Authur S. Reber- Dictionary of Psychology, Penguin p.690 (1995)"; however, changing the phrase changes the meaning of the reference; if, in the first version, the [1] was been given as a reference for the "simultaneous rich, elaborate, and exclusively internal fantasy world", in the second version [1] is been given as a source for a fantasy life being more typical of schizotypal personality disorder (changing totally the meaning of the reference). Someone really has the "Dictionary of Psychology" of Arthur Reber to see what really is said in it?

Btw, although the change in the wording was justified as "per diagnostic criteria", the diagnostic criteria for schizoid PD states "Excessive preoccupation with fantasy and introspection" as a symptom--81.84.110.164 (talk) 00:42, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Brief psychotic episodes
I remember this page had a "Citation?" note for a sentence since been removed, mentioning potential for brief psychotic episodes. It's page 695 of the DSM IV-TR. "Particularly in response to stress, individuals with this disorder may experience very brief psychotic episodes (lasting minutes to hours)". If anyone wants to reinstate that, there's the citation. 68.149.10.39 (talk) 05:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

"Maladaptive daydreaming"
I put again "Maladaptive daydreaming" in the "see also"; after all, at least according to the ICD-10, one of the traits of SPD is "preoccupation with fantasy and introspection" (and many - most? - works about SPD refer the propensity to daydream/fantasize/think as very typical of the condition) making it similar to "maladaptive daydreaming" (and not least relevant than "Counterphobic attitude" or "Narcissistic defences", for example).

Could be argued that this is "original research", but I think that the choice of articles to put in the "See also" section does not need to be so dependent of solid sources as the article itself--81.84.110.161 (talk) 22:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

"Secret Schizoid", overt/covert
I made some changes in the words used in the "The Secret Schizoid" section, because, in the way that it was written could create some confusion between the Klein's concept of "secret schizoid" and the Akhtar's concept of "overt/covert" (an unrelated issue)--81.84.191.36 (talk) 00:18, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

See
I fail to see how lacking an interest in social relationships is a personality disorder. Sounds more like someone who is simply introverted. Any feedback? Pass a Method talk  22:30, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * A short and rather dusty answer I am afraid. This talk page is for discussing the article, not for discussing the diagnosis. DSM-IV says: "A pervasive pattern of detachment from social relationships and a restricted range of expression of emotions in interpersonal settings" - so that is what is summarized in "lacking an interest in social relationships". The article is accurate. However, if you are not the only one with this criticism, and there are discussions published in reliable sources, you could create a section called Criticism or Controversy in which you summarize these discussions. With friendly regards,  Lova Falk   talk  13:28, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That may be an oversimplification. The above response is excellent, though: if you do enough research to come up with a Criticism or Controversy section, not only will you have a better understanding of the subject, but it will improve this article. Refer to WP:POV for how to name such a section, as IIRC naming a section "Criticism" is considered to imply the lack of a balanced viewpoint. Dementia13 (talk) 17:23, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I made a userbox to reflect my thoughts

--Earlypsychosis (talk) 17:55, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * PLease do not just put your box on top of the article, creating a big job for everybody else to work on this. Please, find reliable sources that discuss this issue and summarize their content instead. It might be though, that you won't find these sources, because there is no ongoing discussion about this, and this is just your personal point of view. Once more with friendly regards, Lova Falk   talk  18:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I wasn't suggesting that you use this, but surprised by your suggestion that this is a personal opinion and that there is no ongoing discussion. It is currently a major topic of discussing with the pending DSM5. Even with the traditional condition of psychosis(my interest), there is lots written of the serious problems of diagnosis.  Try anything written by Mary Boyle (university of east london), Bentall (UK psychologist), or the NZ psychologist John Read.  A quick google search found this [].  cheers Earlypsychosis (talk) 06:53, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * We were discussing different things. You were discussing the use of psychiatric diagnoses per se, whereas I was discussing if the article is correct or not. This is not the place for discussing psychiatric diagnoses. Lova Falk   talk  12:25, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * E-p, if you have all those sources at hand and you had the time to make a smartalecky userbox, why couldn't you have used that time to work that information into the article? Do the work if you have the resources, don't just expect others to do the work and then nag at them for not doing it the way you wanted them to. Dementia13 (talk) 16:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I know the above was from a few years ago, but this topic is a good point. Some research has suggested there is poor validity of schizoid personality disorder as a diagnostic construct, and there is some research suggesting little differentiation between schizoid and avoidant. I'm not saying I agree, but I think this information needs to be put in the first paragraph of this article. - Hummelen, B., Pedersen, G., Wilberg, T., Karterud, S. (2015) "Poor Validity of the DSM-IV Schizoid Personality Disorder Construct as a Diagnostic Category"; J Pers Disord https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25248009/ - Overholser, J. (1989). "Differentiation between schizoid and avoidant personalities: an empirical test." Can J Psychiatry . 1989 Nov;34(8):785-90. doi: 10.1177/070674378903400808. link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2819642/ - Mullins-Sweatt, S., Bernstein, D., Widiger, T. "Retention or deletion of personality disorder diagnoses for DSM-5: an expert consensus approach." Comparative Study J Pers Disord . 2012 Oct;26(5):689-703. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2012.26.5.689. liink: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23013338/ Bol1966 (talk) 18:26, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Copy edit
Some general issues with the article that are beyond the scope of the copy edit:
 * Section Dynamic diagnostic criteria: Two paragraphs, and the only thing cited is Klein's quote in the first paragraph. There needs to be a citation in the second paragraph, and whatever it was that Klein published in 1995 needs to be clarified. If this subject is significant enough to stand alone as a section, then there must be some sources cited other than Klein's own work. What is the medical community's response to his idea? How has it affected current psychological practice? Have his ideas been explored through further research? These points apply to all such sections. Dementia13 (talk) 17:23, 9 November 2012 (UTC)


 * There is a pervasive problem with citations on this page. Many sentences start like "According to Gunderson, (citation)," followed by what Gunderson said. This provides a reference for the fact that Gunderson said something, but doesn't provide one for what he said. That's backwards. The citation is supposed to go after the material, not before it. That kind of name-dropping is redundant anyway, because the name's already in the citation. If you're going to name the source of the quote, at least explain who the person is. Don't distract the reader by introducing irrelevant names of whom the reader has never heard and that don't enhance understanding of the topic. In that case, I removed the name-drop and moved the reference back a sentence. Don't be surprised if a citation winds up in the wrong place or gets lost.


 * This article is over-dependent on quotations anyway: it appears that the sources are brilliant psychiatrists who think that they are also clever and brilliant writers, but they're not. Paraphrases would work better in most, if not all, cases. Dementia13 (talk) 17:23, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Causes
I propose the addition of a few sentences to the "Causes" section, to elaborate more on the previous mention of cases in relatives. Jtauszik (talk) 18:43, 19 April 2014 (UTC)jtauszik
 * Hi Jtauszik! Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for adding your sentences. Could you also provide the page numbers in the citation? Lova Falk   talk  10:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Creativity (references)
In the passage «Affected individuals may demonstrate significant creativity, particularly in the areas of fiction writing [2] and visual arts.[3] [4][5]», the reference [2] is the article Creativity and mental illness, from Edward Hare; with the exception of a small footnote, this article does not seem to make any reference to SPD; yes, it is written that "But genius may occur in appreciably introverted persons-Newton, for instance'7-and Einstein, Bertrand Russell, and James Joyce are all said to have had near relatives with schizophrenia. One controlled study found an excess of schizothymic traits in the group of able people represented by research scientists.", who is consistent with SPD, but this is a kind of original research/synthesis.--MiguelMadeira (talk) 12:48, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

SPD doesn't cause depression
I saw that you reverted the link to Mr. Anestis' article twice (http://www.psychotherapybrownbag.com/psychotherapy_brown_bag_a/schizoid-personality-disorder/). The article claims that there are no studies that link SPD to increased rates of depression, anxiety or suicide.

The problem is this: suppose, that a patient with these 'schizoid' traits and with depression (or anxiety) comes to therapy. The therapist evaluates the patient, he notices the depression and the schizoid personality traits, and now the therapist comes to a conclusion that the schizoid personality disorder caused the depression (this conclusion is completely wrong - schizoid people have the same depression rate as general population). The patient will believe that his depression is caused by SPD, he will search internet for information on SPD, he finds that "personality disorders cause significant distress" and that SPD is incurable. And the patient starts believing that he is incurably ill.

In my opinion it is grossly unethical to present false claims to the patient that make the patient believe that his condition is incurable. Unfortunatelly, many psychtherapists do not rely on proper scientific evidence and they will "see" such imaginary causations (SPD causes depression or anxiety) and present them to the patients.

I think that Wikipedia should provide proper information - that SPD doesn't cause depression or anxiety - so that people will find it. Please say how would you like to integrate the reference to Mr. Anestis' article, so that it adheres to wikipedia rules.--78.80.28.91 (talk) 15:17, 21 March 2016 (UTC)


 * The problem is not as much with the statement, but with the source. First of all, a blog (because as far as I can tell, is nothing more than that) is not a reliable source. Secondly, the author saying "a quick search shows that bla bla bla" is no prove at all. He didn't even have to effort to put in a link to his search.


 * If there are reliable sources that support the statement, such as books or scientific articles, please add them and it would be hard to argue for removal in that case.


 * Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 15:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Science doesn't have to prove that something doesn't exist.


 * If there is no scientific evidence to support the claim and no scientific evidence to refute the claim, we should not make the claim.


 * Wikipedia claims that "personality disorders ... are associated with significant distress or disability" (this is from personality disorders page). If we don't have scientific evidence that "schizoid personality disorder is associated with significant distress or disability", we shouldn't claim that.


 * 78.80.28.91 (talk) 16:27, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

The Mayo Clinic has this to say

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/schizoid-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20354414

you guys decide if this is enough of a decent source. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:3D88:C2ED:A71F:4D19 (talk) 07:09, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Some psychologists have argued that the definition of SPD is flawed due to cultural bias.
This has no reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Technomagesty (talk • contribs) 17:11, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Condensing the "Shorter-term treatment" and "Longer-term therapy" subsections
The content under these sections exclusively reference one work, which take on a psychoanalytic (specifically, the work of James F. Masterson) perspective to understanding and treating SPD. While there is little understanding of the psychopathology of SPD and psychoanalytic and psychodynamic therapies are sometimes used in its treatment, the article should nonetheless reflect a generally accepted medical standpoint to the conceptualization and treatment of SPD. Devoting a massive block of the Treatment section to discussing the psychoanalytic perspective of a single work is excessive in my opinion. --Ireadandcheck (talk) 10:46, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Reference No 34 No longer available
The links from Reference No 34 are broken.

Even when searching the Journal site itself the relevant article seems to have been deleted.

"Narcissistic personality disorder" section of Differential diagnosis
What does this have to do with differentiating SPD and NPD? It talks about how having a narcissistic sibling could cause or exacerbate symptoms in a schizoid child, but nothing about how one condition could be mistaken for the other, or about how a clinician might tell them apart. --203.57.211.237 (talk) 09:32, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The issue is thinking with boxed profiles while everything is variable. Every "personality disorder" diagnosis is, in fact, a caricature by itself and it can be severely off, which Akhtar confirms when comparing to DSM/ICD: only this grid exposes truth (hyper-emotivity while both others claim there is a low emotional capability, for example), but still in a biased form as any profile would now fit. Now, we still have to consider these "disorders" are really a deviation from what our society seeks for, which is actually a psychopathic profile with various levels of intelligence depending on the role. For example, difficulty following a goal when the said goal is irrelevant is not a disorder, although it can be perceived as one because of the observer inability to understand the vacuity of the goal itself (which means the personality trait is the exact opposite of withdrawal from the world). I think most "SPD" diagnosis actually fail to consider a pretty simple childhood trauma overcoming with some side impairments still present (most notably the "sexuality" aspect, which has close to 100% chances to be the consequence of a teenager inability to overcome the trauma with the consecutive inexperience then causing anxiety. --2A01:CB11:13:D700:D8CB:B5EE:6131:F091 (talk) 19:15, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

"Schizophrenia Spectrum" sentence removal
Going to preface this saying I'm new to this & wiki markup so please bear with me.

There was a sentence stating Schizoid is part of the schizophrenia spectrum. The statement was unsourced doesn't match up with how the term "schizophrenia spectrum" is used in the DSM-5; schizophrenia spectrum refers primarily to schizophrenia as a whole now that the subtypes from the DSM-IV have been merged (similar to Autism Spectrum Disorder). ""Schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders include schizophrenia, other psychotic disorders, and schizotypal (personality) disorder.""

The section runs pages 87 to 122 and doesn't include schizoid personality disorder. It's simply not a psychotic disorder, although it shares some similarities (including genetic ones) with schizophrenia. I wasn't sure if I should add something about how it can be premorbid or not to replace the statement, which might have been along the lines of the statement's original intent?

I'm not familiar with the ICD but some quick searches make it seem aligned with the DSM-5 on this topic too.

I'm going to do the same thing for Spectrum disorder as it's also listed under the psychotic spectrum section there too. Iridi (talk) 07:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I suspect that StPD is listed in the schizophrenia spectrum section in the DSM-5 because the ICD-10 doesn't consider it a personality disorder, but a condition with a PD-like course that's better viewed as an attentuated form of schizophrenia. Schizoid is much more ambiguously related to schizophrenia, although the DSM does mention that there can be a familial link.


 * As for it not belonging on the spectrum because it's not a psychotic disorder, it's probably best not to conflate schizophrenia with psychosis. Schizophrenia is more than just psychotic symptoms, and according to the view of schizoid PD as a Sz-spectrum disorder, it's a more-or-less pure expression of the negative symptom/deficit syndrome dimension, without the psychotic aspects. 203.173.34.38 (talk) 13:57, 3 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Use of "psychotic disorder" in the same manner as "mood disorder" or "neurodevelopmental disorder", as an overarching category, not that it's the only symptom.
 * If you have sources for schizoid PD being sz-spectrum, please re-include the sentence with citations, or maybe include a new section if it's a debated thing in the academic community? Because all I know is the DSM-5 only uses "schizophrenia spectrum" to mean certain psychotic disorders. Iridi (talk) 05:05, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not an expert but I think the term "schizophrenia-like personality disorder" fits better than "sz-spectrum disorder". I found a source which uses both expressions: Charney 2005, p.240. Trantüte (Trantüte) 14:00, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Trantüte (talk) 11:40, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Interpersonal Difficulty
I'd like to suggest that the wording in the Signs and Symptoms section "...which causes interpersonal difficulty..." be amended to "...which frequently contributes to interpersonal difficulty..."

Rationale: It may not be said for certain that schizoid symptoms are necessarily the cause for interpersonal difficulty. For instance, the problems arising in schizoids interaction with others may potentially be consequent of natural issues we would expect to arise in interaction(s) between conventional and non-conventional orientations.

In a sense, to claim that non-conventional orientations are necessarily the cause of the interrelational issues is an argumentum ad populum fallacy, and to claim that conventional orientations are either preferable, correct, or right is a naturalistic fallacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfunk3780 (talk • contribs) 07:59, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Move to "Schizoidia" name
Many sources indicates schizoidia doesn't imply it's a disorder necessarily.

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Schizoidia-in-schizophrenia-spectrum-and-disorders%3A-Modestin-Hermann/0034f6a8a2fcaab0d19e8bea877eaa42f228a1f0 https://revistas.ufpr.br/psicologia/article/view/28751 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17570534 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28699102 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbonetti (talk • contribs) 17:20, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Frequency
In the infobox, it is stated that the frequency is between 3.1% e 4.9%; but in the body of the article, in the section "Epidemiology", it says "It is rare compared with other personality disorders, with a prevalence estimated at less than one percent of the general population".--MiguelMadeira (talk) 16:23, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I fixed this contradiction. Also, the Russian wiki addresses it quite well, providing a table of varying reported frequencies from 0–5%, most around 1%. SUM1 (talk) 00:36, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Akthar's profile
removed the section/table with the Akthar's profile, arguing that is "one individual's anecdotal perception of the disorder which didn't seem based on hard data"; attending that this is a passage referenced, and Salman Akthar can be considered an expert in the issue, I think that the section/table should be restored, even if saying that this is his opinion (and have the "bonus" of explainig what is supposed to mean the expression "covert schizoid", avoiding the frequent confusion with "secret schizoid").--MiguelMadeira (talk) 14:40, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

sexuality
Under the sexuality section it lists sexual fantasies that schizoids tend to have. Initially homosexuality was listed there (not by me,) but someone seemed to take issue with it and removed it because it's not a paraphilia or unconventional sexual tendency however the citation specifically mentions homosexuality:

''In the schizoid, perverse fantasy, including themes involving fetishism, voyeurism, bestiality, homosexuality, transvestism, and exhibitionism tend to increase as the severity of pathology increases, though these themes are rarely enacted within relationships. '' I added it back in a couple of times. Trying to find a way to word it so it separates it from the others, though I feel like this is more of a political quibble than factual...

I also noticed recently that someone removed the entire section (though someone later added it back in,) which might also be preferable as I think this is the only personality disorder on wikipedia that has a page that goes into sexuality in the first place.

For what it's worth, I agree with what was stated above. It seems inappropriate to talk about what are "normal" or "amoral" sexual preferences for an entire personality disorder on a public-service site like Wikipedia. Bol1966 (talk) 05:50, 17 November 2020 (UTC)


 * pretty shocked that there is not a
 * ddx: gender dysphoria here tbh 58.105.58.254 (talk) 10:26, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * like ... this is what untreated gender dysphoria in AMAB people often looks like except where they fantasise about being a girl which they won't tell you about because that's private 58.105.58.254 (talk) 10:32, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Symptoms list is from DSM-II??
Hey folks, I'm not gonna stick around to discuss, but someone's gotta update the symptoms list; it's sourced from the DSM-II, which is from 1968?

(Also I'm just gonna say, asexuality isn't a "symptom." There's gotta be a better way to express that asexuality occurs more frequently in this population.)

Remove sexual description
I would like to propose that listing sexual activity on this page is misleading and should be removed.

Reasons: a) the vast majority of modern scientific literature on this topic does not link sexual activity as a defining characteristic of this disorder (with the exception of lack of interest in sex) b) none of the other disorders listed on Wikipedia list sexual activity as a defining trait of their respective disorders c) the DSM (neither IV nor V versions) does not list any mentioned sexual activity as linked to this disorder

It appears this article has given undue credence to fringe theories which is against Wikipedia rules, which are as follows: "Because Wikipedia aims to summarize significant opinions with representation in proportion to their prominence, a Wikipedia article should not make a fringe theory appear more notable or more widely accepted than it is. Statements about the truth of a theory must be based upon independent reliable sources. If discussed in an article about a mainstream idea, a theory that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight,[1] and reliable sources must be cited that affirm the relationship of the marginal idea to the mainstream idea in a serious and substantial manner." [1]

This section cites a few examples from researchers almost all whom practiced in the early 1930s or 40s like Ronald Fairbairn (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Fairbairn), Harry Guntrip (1960s - 1970s), or Salman Akhtar (1980s). Linking sexual activity to disorders was more common when Freudian-style therapy was popular and case-studies were used to identify symptoms. Today we use data-backed evidence rather than case studies to identify symptoms. I don't see data-backed evidence here and in fact I see no research here from the last 40 years. Yet this article seems to suggest that everyone with this disorder has these symptoms, which seems like a stretch (?).

Is there any reason why some people here want this section on? Is there something I'm missing about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bol1966 (talk • contribs) 07:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I've looked at this section, and I agree that it's very substandard. Most of the sources used are very out of date (Nannarello, Guntrip, Horney) or just simply not reliable (Zachary Wheeler's dissertation). In its current state, there's just no guarantee anything in this section is even true, and it's very likely giving very disproportionate weight to disputed or fringe views on the topic. It'd be best to replace this with a summary of current views on the sexual aspects of schizoid personality disorder, but the article would be better by far having nothing at all than what's currently there. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 04:39, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * There seems to be a consensus for removing the section on sexual behavior linked to schizoid PD. The sources quoted in this section are outdated (Nannarello, Laing, Guntrip, Horney, etc) or not reliable (Zachary Wheeler's dissertation). The psychoanalytical observations provided by Akhtar may be interesting but it’s a stretch to suggest this one man’s views represent stable characteristics for an entire disorder (see fringe theory rules listed above). If there is additional peer-reviewed data and analysis that has been collected showing a link between love / sex and schizoid PD, please provide it. Please note this topic has already gone through Wikipedia arbitration and the section's removal is the resulting conclusion (.  Bol1966 (talk) 02:26, 8 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I've reinserted the "Love and sexuality" material to the table discussing Akhtar's profile. If the profile is worth including in the article, then it should all be included, not altered piecemeal so it no longer reflects the theory being discussed. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 02:54, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

"lack of close friends" doesn't technically seem like it's a symptom of a disorder so I removed this"
What kind of edit summary is that? It's not up to you to decide whether it "seems" like a symptom. And that begs a question, doesn't it? What other content have you removed from this article because you don't think it "seems" like it's correct? And to reinforce my edit summary: please don't remove content and mark your change as minor. You literally violated the meaning of minor edits: minor edits are ones that are not controversial. Obviously, this one was. Dawnseeker2000 02:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

→ Many apologies, this has nothing to do with my views, I was only trying to update this page with more scientific-backed evidence. The field of psychology has changed over the years, and the way psychologists gathered evidence and made conclusions in the 50s, 60s, and 70s in many cases would be deemed inappropriate or inconclusive today. Just because a historical theory seems interesting doesn’t mean it should be posted as fact. On this one, it seems I should have checked with you first, so again, I apologize. Bol1966 (talk) 17:32, 15 December 2020 (UTC)


 * If you want to update the article, I think the best way forward is to identify some recent, high-quality sources, and then summarize their findings. I've got some abnormal psychology textbooks, if I can ever dig them up, so I might be able to help with more general information. But I think the preferred sources for articles like this would be recent peer-reviewed meta-studies and literature reviews published in respected psychology journals. As for the specific issue of the "lack of close friends", that symptom is supported by the source used for that section: Neither desires, nor has, any close friends or confiding relationships (or only one). . When it comes to listing symptoms, I think the ICD-10 is a top-tier source, since it's a current and widely-used standard. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 20:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Dude, you're removing aspects that are the essentials of the personality disorder. "Lack of close friends" is written verbatim in the DSM V, which was published in 2013. The sexuality part is also there. Please do not remove content from this article again. I really don't trust what you've done so far and fear that you may just be a troll. Dawnseeker2000  23:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree with Bol1966 when it comes to the sexuality section. Please see the section above. Red Rock Canyon (talk) 02:35, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

SzPD as per the DSM-5 vs SzPD as per the PDM-2
These are so different to each other that they are practically different disorders, which is unfortunate. It is therefore of no surprise to me that this article seems to conflate the two. How do we address this? In an ideal world we would have a separate article for each, but I don't really see how that would work either. Any ideas? Anditres (talk) 00:03, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

"prefer to make relationships on their own terms and not in terms of the impulses of other people."
It is a bit odd to express this in terms of preference when the latter option is not open, simply because the affected individual lacks the ability to discern and interpret correctly the impulses of other people. I do not "prefer" to come last in a steeple-chase simply because that is the best my body can do! On a minor point, making relationship entirely on terms of the other person would also be considered psychopathological. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:3D88:C2ED:A71F:4D19 (talk) 07:00, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

"He identified four subtypes of SPD. Any individual schizoid may exhibit none or one of the following"
If you are a schizoid, then presumably you would either pertain to one subtype, or exhibit a mix of symptoms taken from two or more. But if you have nothing in common with any of the subtypes of something, then you cannot belong to the overal category of that something. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:3D88:C2ED:A71F:4D19 (talk) 07:26, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Over-reliance on Akhtar
The citation found here: https://www.proquest.com/openview/10cb591b9eb8147e5881ffc5bb279e66/ mentioning asexuality also relies on Akhtar, but Akhtar has had gotten several heavy criticisms from APA about how he views sexuality found here: https://www.apadivisions.org/division-39/publications/reviews/ganges

I will quote:


 * The chapter on homosexuality and bisexuality is quite complex, as is the subject itself, according to the author. Both Hinduism and psychoanalysis, the author states, “uphold the fundamentally bisexual nature of human beings” but they differ “in the degree to which the two can accommodate ideological relativism” (p. 235). Each psychoanalytic school makes “exclusive claims” to have “true,” psychic understanding and no attempt has been made to accommodate one another. This is in striking contrast to Hinduism which is “guided by plural, but complementary beliefs and perspectives” (p. 235-236). Thus, in regard to sexuality, rather than isolated, categorical identities (gay, straight, bisexual), a case can be made by following Hindu belief that everyone has a heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, asexual “part.” The author offers a complementary interpretation of what he calls plural oedipal dynamics; he makes use of the Hindu perspective of plurality, at the same time as he sustains a “conceptual anchor” in psychoanalysis. In Indian culture the phrase “men who have sex with men” describes a range of behaviors that do not necessarily make a person feel exclusively “gay.” In contrast, in the West, sexual contact with men presumes the existence of “gayness.” Because it does not exist in India, “gayness” seems to be a culture bound concept, the author tells us (p. 265). There are two cases presented in this chapter, each of which is presumably an example of plurality as it originated and was then contended with in a man of Indian background. But, in fact, although there were pressures from Indian–born parents reported, the young men presented, both of whom were living in America, seemed to be dealing with recognizable conflicts vis-à-vis sexual orientation here. One even ends up declaring, “I will stick to my gayness” (p. 255). I wish the cases had been more illustrative of men who were really comfortably bisexual.

Given this, is there a study independent of Akhtar that could be cited to support his theory, or are all roads leading to him? Shouldn't the article balance some of the assumption that asexuality==lack of orientation from own voices--say by using Julie Decker and also mitigate the idea that asexuality is auto-linked to a disorder from a psychologist that does not seem that invested into understanding sexuality that well and has been criticized for it? --KimYunmi (talk) 19:36, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Not a disorder
It is a personality trait, not a disorder. There is nothing disorderly about it. It is rightful to be skeptical of professionals due to their financial interest in creating disorders out of harmless traits. Acyclic (talk) 20:52, 12 July 2023 (UTC)


 * The view that it is not a disorder is covered in the "controversy" section of this article with a citation from Nancy McWilliams. If you have material to add to that section, by all means do so! BlakeALee (talk) 21:04, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

DSM-5 and ICD-10 criteria lost in past edit among other information
The DSM-5 and ICD-10 criteria appear to have been mistakenly deleted in the edit from 15:19, January 16, 2023. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Schizoid_personality_disorder&diff=next&oldid=1133926438 This was a very large edit labeled simply as "Expanded the article" which also moved a bunch of stuff around so there may or may not be other information that went missing. The other major section I can see at a glance is the entire comorbidity section. I suspect there is a lot more that was lost that needs to be recovered. Because the edit was so long ago, however, it's not possible to simply revert the edit I think. I've never edited anything on the wiki before, so I'm not sure of protocol or proper documentation or anything. I'm just a user that uses this page semi-regularly that noticed a bunch of information seemed to recently be missing from the page.--96.49.213.18 (talk) 04:31, 31 August 2023 (UTC)