**2. Is there a different personality profile in psoriasis?**

To test this hypothesis a study including 36 psoriasis patients attending the Reina Sofía University Hospital (Murcia, Spain) was conducted. The inclusion criterion was the presence of psoriasis as diagnosed by a dermatologist who agreed to participate in the study. Patients were recruited between October 2005 and June 2009.

The exclusion criteria were as follows: severe psychological disorders such as psychosis, factitious or simulation disorders, neurological disorders, etc. Given that the Million Index of Personality Styles (MIPS) is designed to evaluate the personality of individuals more than 18 years old, younger patients were excluded.

Regarding comorbidity, high levels of depression and anxiety are often observed in populations with skin disease (Konuk, 2007); however, the study participants did not have a

Personality in Patients with Psoriasis 215

1. (1A) - Pleasure-Enhancing 57.67 62.05 -1.155 .256 2. (1B) - Pain-Avoiding 43.75 39.86 0.981 .333 3. (2A) - Actively Modifying 44.56 50.52 -1.371 .179 4. (2B) - Passively Accommodating 55.89 51.63 0.980 .334 5. (3A) - Self-Indulging\* 41.72 52.14 -2.390 .022 6. (3B) - Other-Nurturing 60.19 51.64 1.916 .064 7. (4A) - Externally Focused 46.41 48.59 -0.482 .633 8. (4B) - Internally Focused 48.67 51.45 -0.570 .572 9. (5A) - Realistic/Sensing 61.42 58.39 0.859 .396 10. (5B) - Imaginative/Intuiting\* 35.22 42.82 -2.529 .016 11. (6A) - Thought-Guided 44.25 49.46 -1.251 .219 12. (6B) - Feeling-Guided 57.83 51.36 1.486 .146 13. (7A) - Conservation-Seeking 49.67 50.30 -0.155 .878 14. (7B) - Innovation-Seeking\* 33.22 42.67 -2.396 .022 15. (8A) - Asocial/Withdrawing 55.83 50.60 1.379 .177 16. (8B) - Gregarious/Outgoing 44.36 51.04 -1.680 .102 17. (9A) - Anxious/Hesitating 49.47 46.32 0.672 .506 18. (9B) - Confident/Asserting 44.44 50.89 -1.554 .129 19. (10A) - Unconventional/Dissenting\* 36.97 43.62 -2.170 .037 20. (10B) - Dutiful/Conforming 59.31 51.93 1.739 .091 21. (11A) - Submissive/Yielding 45.92 45.33 0.162 .872 22. (11B) - Dominant/Controlling\* 34.47 44.65 -2.436 .020 23. (12A) - Dissatisfied/Complaining 39.50 44.62 -1.06 .296 24. (12B) - Cooperative/Agreeing\*\*\* 77.58 59.18 5.269 .000 Clinical Index\*\* 43.13 50.69 3.111 .004

Mean Student t-test *<sup>P</sup>*

Personality trait Psoriasis Mean Healthy

Table 2. Differences Between Psoriasis Patients and the Healthy Sample.

**3. And if so, how do they differ from the normal population?** 

Individuals with psoriasis have a tendency towards complying with the wishes of other individuals as a motivating style. This tendency is reinforced by the fact that their self-

Regarding thinking styles, psoriasis patients had lower scores on the intuition scale than the healthy population, suggesting that they are more oriented toward practical thinking rather than abstract thinking. In addition, they had a tendency not to employ innovative or creative

In relation to behaving styles, psoriasis patients are more conventional than the reference group. They were less dominating and more acquiescent. Overall, they tend to seek cooperation and agreement and avoid disagreement as a way of bonding with others. They may be dependent, submissive, and lack initiative or their own opinion. In general, the results indicate a personality profile which is not well adjusted, and this has been associated

\*p> .05; \*\* p>.01; \*\*\*p>.000.

motivation or self-drive is low.

ways of thinking.

clinical diagnosis of depression or anxiety. They had never been admitted to a psychiatric unit due to either of these disorders, and therefore the results obtained are unlikely to be attributable to psychiatric syndromes.

The Spanish version of the MIPS was used to evaluate the participants' personality styles (Millon, 2001). This index measures the healthy personality and analyzes 24 personality dimensions, including a clinical index that measures an individual's level of adaptation to their environment. This instrument has been previously used with dermatological patients and has demonstrated sensitivity to differences with a non-dermatological sample (Martín-Brufau, Corbalán Berná, Ramirez Aandreo, Brufau Redondo, & Limiñana Gras, 2010). The instrument consists of different bipolar scales divided into three dimensions: motivating, thinking, and behaving styles.

For details of the participants and the selection procedure, see above. The questionnaires were given to the participants by the dermatologist who explained the purpose of the research, the requirements for participation and any consequences for the patients. The dermatologist obtained prior consent from the participants.

The Spanish version of the MIPS was validated using a normative sample of 1184 individuals (643 women and 541 men) who were used as the control group. The test showed good psychometric properties.

The control group did not present chronic, severe or disfiguring skin disease. It was assumed that the sociocultural characteristics of both populations were similar. This methodology has been previously used to evaluate personality styles in patients with other disorders (Limiñana Gras, Corbalán Berná, & Sánchez López, 2009) and skin diseases (Martín-Brufau et al., 2010).

The Student t-test was used to analyse mean differences between groups and each personality scale was compared individually. Those items that did not fulfil the reliability index or that the participants did not fill in properly were excluded for the analysis. Mean t values were obtained for the 24 personality scales of the MIPS. The SPSS version 17.0 software package for Mac was used for data analysis.

The social and demographic data for both groups are shown in Table 1.


Table 1. Sociodemographic Data.

Differences in personality were found between the two groups in the following variables: Self-indulging, Other-nurturing, Intuition, Innovation-seeking, Dissenting, Dominating, and Acquiescent. The results are shown in Table 2.

clinical diagnosis of depression or anxiety. They had never been admitted to a psychiatric unit due to either of these disorders, and therefore the results obtained are unlikely to be

The Spanish version of the MIPS was used to evaluate the participants' personality styles (Millon, 2001). This index measures the healthy personality and analyzes 24 personality dimensions, including a clinical index that measures an individual's level of adaptation to their environment. This instrument has been previously used with dermatological patients and has demonstrated sensitivity to differences with a non-dermatological sample (Martín-Brufau, Corbalán Berná, Ramirez Aandreo, Brufau Redondo, & Limiñana Gras, 2010). The instrument consists of different bipolar scales divided into three dimensions: motivating,

For details of the participants and the selection procedure, see above. The questionnaires were given to the participants by the dermatologist who explained the purpose of the research, the requirements for participation and any consequences for the patients. The

The Spanish version of the MIPS was validated using a normative sample of 1184 individuals (643 women and 541 men) who were used as the control group. The test showed

The control group did not present chronic, severe or disfiguring skin disease. It was assumed that the sociocultural characteristics of both populations were similar. This methodology has been previously used to evaluate personality styles in patients with other disorders (Limiñana Gras, Corbalán Berná, & Sánchez López, 2009) and skin diseases

The Student t-test was used to analyse mean differences between groups and each personality scale was compared individually. Those items that did not fulfil the reliability index or that the participants did not fill in properly were excluded for the analysis. Mean t values were obtained for the 24 personality scales of the MIPS. The SPSS version 17.0

Differences in personality were found between the two groups in the following variables: Self-indulging, Other-nurturing, Intuition, Innovation-seeking, Dissenting, Dominating, and

**Mean/percentage healthy group** 

**N=1184** 

attributable to psychiatric syndromes.

thinking, and behaving styles.

good psychometric properties.

(Martín-Brufau et al., 2010).

Table 1. Sociodemographic Data.

Acquiescent. The results are shown in Table 2.

dermatologist obtained prior consent from the participants.

software package for Mac was used for data analysis.

**Characteristics Mean/percentage psoriasis N=36** 

The social and demographic data for both groups are shown in Table 1.

Female gender, n (%) 22 (59.5%) 634 (54.31%)

Mean age/range (y) 42.59/(24-86) 37.60/(18-65)


\*p> .05; \*\* p>.01; \*\*\*p>.000.

Table 2. Differences Between Psoriasis Patients and the Healthy Sample.
