{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03016970458830924, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01005656819610308, 'mean_word_length': 5.551440329218107, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Ego identity and personality disorders.

Although “identity disturbance” is part of the DSM-IVR defining criteria for one of the personality disorders, borderline, the relationship between identity and the personality disorders is not immediately obvious. The personality disorder (PD) categories are based upon clinicians’ observations of clusters of behaviors, usually without regard to etiology or developmental course (Heim & Westen, 2005). The general approach is atheoretical. Identity, as it is most frequently understood in the developmental psychology literature, is an empirically validated theoretical construct. It is assumed to have its earliest origins in infancy, reaching its crucial period at late adolescence, and continuing to develop throughout the life cycle (Erikson, 1963, 1968; Marcia, 1998). The purpose of the DSM PD categories is to diagnose patients for dispositional, medico-legal, and therapeutic purposes. The central scientific concern is the reliability of categorization. Less attention is paid to the construct validity of the labels. In contrast, identity is a construct within a psychodynamic, developmental model of personality. The main purpose of such a construct, and the theory in which it is embedded, is to furnish a coherent picture of human personality development. Issues of developmental history, current status, and developmental course are paramount. The central scientific concern is with the construct validity of concepts (such as identity) within the theory. Reliability is important with respect to measures of the theoretical concepts,