The teaching methodology of the subject is designed so that the student can identify the psychological problems that we call as personality disorders, as well as the causative factors, the way of evaluating them and the fundamental principles of their treatment.  For this purpose in this subject, the conceptual integration of previous learning will be greatly impelled. A very active and participatory attitude will be promoted in the classroom, mimicking the processes of discussion of cases in the clinical world.

The teaching methodology of this subject can be divided into three blocks:

Block 1. Targeted teaching. It is structured in two obligatory assistance activities:

1. The first consists of a series of master classes with support of multimedia technologies carried out in large groups. It is intended that the student be able to achieve the main theoretical concepts and offer an analysis of the diverse (and often competitive) visions about personality disorders. It will also be addressed how the gender bias affects this matter. The duration of this activity will be two hours for all students in a module.
2. The second activity consists of clinical seminars that will be carried out in small groups under the principle of learning based on problems. In these practices, clinical cases will be analyzed where the problem identification process will be worked, b) the diagnostic discussion and c) the case formulation, similar to what would be done in clinical sessions of the professional world. In this way, the student can proactively use the theoretical concepts that have been dealt with in the master classes. How the gender bias afects the assessment and diagnose of personality disorder will also be addressed. The duration of this activity will be of two hours distributed with the quarter of students of a module.

Bloc 2. Supervised activity. This optionalactivity aims to consolidate the theoretical and practical contents of the course and can be creatively designed between teachers and students so that individual concerns can be stimulated. Generically, it proposes approaching reality to the subject by encouraging experiential learning. It is about 'digging' into one's biography in search of an example illustrating any of the problems addressed in the subject, either experienced in one’s own skin or in close others (familiar, friend, acquaintance). Ideally the case should be very well-known to being able to give details, always preserving anonymity and disguising real identity. Alternatively, the student can work on other types of psychobiographic materials in order to elaborate this case (e.g., a clinical case of the subject of External Practice, an interview made to a distant acquaintance, a literary or cinematographic character...). The task is to create a case with which other colleagues can practice the identification of symptoms, differential diagnosis, the elaboration of etiological hypotheses, case formulation, the design of the psychological assessment procedure and the therapeutic design. Models will be offered for how to elaborate these cases and their solution. The task consists of creating a case with which the rest of the classmates can practice symptom identification, diagnostic analysis, development of etiological hypotheses, case formulation, assessment approach and therapeutic design. This task crystallizes in the material used in the activity that constitutes evidence 2.

Bloc 3. Autonomous activity. Study activities of the student include, in addition to the study and bibliographical search, the reading of materials of specialized contents or complementary of special interest for the acquisition of the own competences of the subject.

Note: 15 minutes of a class are reserved, within the calendar established by the center/degree, for the completion by the students of the surveys of evaluationof the performance of the teaching staff and of the evaluation of the subject/module.

Feedback from evidences for continued learning:EV1: Type of feedback: In the classroom / S9EV2: Type of feedback: Oral feedback will be given in the classroom at the same time as the groups present the clinical casesEV3: Type of feedback: Tutoring, in the space dedicated to exam review for those who want to receive feedback, S22

The evaluation guidelines for the 2025-26 course of the Faculty of Psychology can be found in the following link: PautesAvaluacioPsicologia_2026

General Philosophy

The evaluation of the subject consists of three evidences of learning that consist of: two face-to-face written tests, individual multiple choice tests (evidence 1 and 3, with a weight of 40% and 50% respectively) and a group-based preparation of a clinical practical case that will be presented to the rest of the group to work certain aspects and led by the team preparing the case (evidence 2, with a weight of 10% on the final grade).

This subject does not consider single assessment.

Description of the Evidences of Learning

The evidences are oriented to show the student's ability to apply the concepts and theories worked in the directed teaching and the autonomous study of compulsory readings, as well as the competences worked in the clinical seminars:

- Evidence 1 (EV1): Individual, face-to-face multiple-choice written test. It will evaluate the subject matter included in Topics 1 to 4 (including the readings corresponding to these topics in the bibliography, not only the content strictly exposed in class). Totalgrade value: 40%. Score from 0 to 10. It will take place on the first assessment period.

- Evidence 2(EV2): Students will be allocated by the teaching team to different groups. The groups must design 1) a clinical case and 2) an exercise to be led by the team with the rest of the group to practice diagnostic skills or clinical formulation or therapeutic design in the practical classroom. In order to present the work, the written and/or audiovisual material that will be used in the classroommust be submitted in advance. The score is not only based on the preparation of the material, but also on: the presentation of the case, the supervision of the work conducted by peers on diagnostic procedures and/or clinical case formulation and/or therapeutic design that each work team will facilitate among their colleagues in the classroom, showing mastery of the material (content and procedures) worked on through the presentation, guidance, supervision and leadership of a practical exercise that allows the rest of the students in the practical classroom to learn about and/or practice that aspect of the syllabus that is intended to be worked on. The practical exercise can consist of working on a real clinical case or one designed by the team, and which is worked on in class with the rest through role-playing (a diagnostic interview or a therapy session..). The point is that the prepared material a) allows the students in the classroom to practice diagnosis, clinical case formulation or treatment design, and b) is the basis of a dynamic guided by the work team that is being evaluated and that allows the teaching staff to appreciate the mastery that the team has over that specific aspect or disorder of the syllabus.

- Evidence 3 (EV3): Individual, face-to-face, individual, multiple-choice written test. It will evaluate predominantly the subject matter of Topics 5 to 6 (including the readings corresponding to these topics in the bibliography, not only the content strictly exposed in class). Since it is a continuous assessment, and therefore the learning is cumulative, it can also integrate questions related to the internal topics (1 to 4, for example, to be able to make a differential diagnosis of the problems covered in topics 5 to 6 itwill be necessary to have assimilatedthe psychological problems already dealt in topics 1 to 4). Total grade value: 50%. Score from 0 to 10. It will take place on the second assessment period.

Evaluation System

The calculation of the grade will result from the following formula:

EV1 EV2 EV3 Total

Grade 40% 10% 50% 100%

Definition of evaluable student:

According to the evaluation guidelines of the Faculty of Psychology, the student who provides evidences of learning 1, 2 and/or 3 with a weight equal to or greater than 40% is considered evaluable.

Definition of passing the subject:

Having obtained a weighted total of at least 5 points in the continuous assessment and a score of 4.0 points or higher in each of the in-person assessment tests that contribute 20% or more to the continuous assessment grade—specifically, evidence items Ev1 and Ev3. Failure to meet these requirements will result in a maximum grade of 4.5 points being recorded in the academic transcript.

Reevaluation system:

Students may sit for the final retake exam if they have not met the criteria to pass the course, have completed assessment tasks accounting for at least two-thirds of the total grade (i.e., having completed at least EV2 and EV3, or EV1 and EV3), and have obtained an average score of between 3.5 and less than 5 across the three assessment tasks (EVs).

It will be held on the re-examination period. It is individual and face-to-face. The re-evaluation test consists of a single written test that integrates all the material worked on a continuous basis. The grade derived from the re-evaluation test will have a maximum of 6.5; In other words, for any mark of the re-evaluation exam that is equal to or greater than 6.5, a 6.5 will be recorded as the final mark for the course, since this is the maximum mark that can be obtained in the subject through the recovery system.

No unique final synthesis test for students who enrole for the second time or more is anticipated.

Single assessment: This subject does not include a single assessment.

Use of AI technologies: Their use is not allowed for the creation of the EV2 (Clinical Case) since its objective is the combination of personal introspection, analysis of cases that each person can know in their environment and active creation based on one's own intellect. Thus, any work that includes fragments generated with AI will be considered a lack of academic honesty and may lead to a partial or total penalty in the grade of the activity, or greater sanctions in serious cases.

Exam translation: The translation of the assessment tests will be delivered if the requirements established in article 263 are met and the request is made electronically in week 4 (e-form) (more information on the Faculty website).

Content of Evidences of Learning

Please see below the bibliography that must be studied to prepare EV 1 and 2 (see full references in the Bibliography section):