The structure of personality in Parkinson’s Disease and the effects of age, years since diagnosis, and impulsivity


Abstract

Background. Parkinson’s Disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder primarily characterized by motor and cognitive symptoms. However, emerging evidence suggests that personality alterations may also be present, potentially affecting patients’ quality of life and clinical outcomes. Prior studies have identified patterns such as lower Openness and Extraversion and higher Neuroticism in PD patients, although findings have been inconsistent. This study aimed to investigate the structural organization of personality in PD using a network-based approach and to examine the influence of age, gender, disease duration, and impulsive-compulsive symptoms on personality traits.

Methods. A total of 237 PD patients (aged 45–86) completed the HEXACO Adjective Scale (HAS), assessing six personality traits: Honesty-Humility (H), Emotionality (E), Extraversion (X), Agreeableness (A), Conscientiousness (C), and Openness (O). Impulsive-compulsive behaviors were assessed using the Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson’s Disease–Rating Scale (QUIP-RS). Personality structure was analyzed via Exploratory Graph Analysis (EGA), a network model that identifies item clusters based on conditional dependencies. Multivariate multiple linear regression was used to test the effects of demographic and clinical variables on trait expression.

Results. EGA identified seven item-level communities. Traits E, X, and C formed coherent and distinct clusters, while items from A and H tended to cluster based on item polarity (positive vs. negative wording) rather than theoretical trait boundaries. Openness items are split into two distinct communities, one composed of the items from the Unconventionality facet, and the other encompassing the remaining O items. At the trait level, HEXACO dimensions are grouped into two higher-order clusters: a Cooperativity–Integrity community (H, A, C) and an Engagement community (E, X, O). Regression analyses showed that higher ICD symptoms predicted lower levels of H, A, and C; longer disease duration was associated with lower C; and gender showed significant differences in E.

Conclusions. These findings reveal subtle but systematic alterations in the structural organization of personality traits in PD. Specifically, we observed a polarity-based overlap between Honesty-Humility and Agreeableness, possibly reflecting age-related convergence of the two traits—consistent with a recent study reporting similar effects in healthy aging—and a bifurcation within Openness centered on the Unconventionality facet, a trait often considered idiopathic in PD, even in its prodromal stages. These personality signatures may contribute to a refined clinical profiling of PD patients and support the value of incorporating personality assessment into personalized care approaches.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].