Applying the Bifactor S-1 Model to Ratings of ADHD/ODD Symptoms: A Commentary on Burns et al. (2019) and a Re-Analysis.

Michaela Junghänel, Klaas Rodenacker, Christina Dose, Manfred Döpfner
{"title":"Applying the Bifactor S-1 Model to Ratings of ADHD/ODD Symptoms: A Commentary on Burns et al. (2019) and a Re-Analysis.","authors":"Michaela Junghänel, Klaas Rodenacker, Christina Dose, Manfred Döpfner","doi":"10.1007/s10802-020-00637-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To examine the construct validity of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), the bifactor S-1 approach has been applied as an alternative to the fully symmetrical bifactor models in order to eliminate anomalous results and to allow for an unambiguous interpretation of g- and s-factors. We compared and contrasted our results with those of Burns et al. (2019) and extended their analyses by taking into account a two- vs. a three-factor structure of ADHD. Data from our previous research were reanalyzed and reinterpreted in accordance with the bifactor S-1 approach, constructing different models with hyperactivity (HY), impulsivity (IM) or hyperactivity/impulsivity (HI) as the general factor. No anomalous results were observed. All factor loadings were significant. Our results were comparable to those reported by Burns et al. (2019), although items from the specific subscales inattention (IN) and ODD accounted for more variance in our sample. Model fit for our HI model was comparable to that in Burns et al. (2019). In our sample, model fit was best when solely HY or IM was chosen as a general reference factor. However, in these cases, the remaining specific factor IM or HY was weakly defined. Overall, we were able to replicate the results found by Burns et al. 2019), although our factor loadings on the g-factor were slightly lower and our specificity regarding IN and ODD was slightly higher. Our results support a two-factor structure of ADHD/ODD in a clinical population.</p>","PeriodicalId":14810,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10802-020-00637-4","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-020-00637-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

To examine the construct validity of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), the bifactor S-1 approach has been applied as an alternative to the fully symmetrical bifactor models in order to eliminate anomalous results and to allow for an unambiguous interpretation of g- and s-factors. We compared and contrasted our results with those of Burns et al. (2019) and extended their analyses by taking into account a two- vs. a three-factor structure of ADHD. Data from our previous research were reanalyzed and reinterpreted in accordance with the bifactor S-1 approach, constructing different models with hyperactivity (HY), impulsivity (IM) or hyperactivity/impulsivity (HI) as the general factor. No anomalous results were observed. All factor loadings were significant. Our results were comparable to those reported by Burns et al. (2019), although items from the specific subscales inattention (IN) and ODD accounted for more variance in our sample. Model fit for our HI model was comparable to that in Burns et al. (2019). In our sample, model fit was best when solely HY or IM was chosen as a general reference factor. However, in these cases, the remaining specific factor IM or HY was weakly defined. Overall, we were able to replicate the results found by Burns et al. 2019), although our factor loadings on the g-factor were slightly lower and our specificity regarding IN and ODD was slightly higher. Our results support a two-factor structure of ADHD/ODD in a clinical population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将双因素S-1模型应用于ADHD/ODD症状评级:对伯恩斯等人(2019)的评论和重新分析》。
为了研究注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)和对立违抗障碍(ODD)的建构效度,我们采用了双因子S-1方法来替代完全对称的双因子模型,以消除异常结果,并对g因子和s因子做出明确解释。我们将自己的研究结果与 Burns 等人(2019 年)的研究结果进行了比较和对比,并通过考虑 ADHD 的双因素与三因素结构对他们的分析进行了扩展。我们根据双因素 S-1 方法重新分析和解释了之前研究的数据,构建了以多动(HY)、冲动(IM)或多动/冲动(HI)为一般因素的不同模型。没有发现异常结果。所有因子载荷均有意义。我们的结果与 Burns 等人(2019 年)所报告的结果相当,尽管在我们的样本中,注意力不集中(IN)和注意力缺失(ODD)这两个特定子量表的项目占了更多的变异。我们的 HI 模型与 Burns 等人(2019 年)的模型拟合度相当。在我们的样本中,当仅选择 HY 或 IM 作为一般参考因子时,模型拟合效果最好。然而,在这些情况下,其余的特定因子 IM 或 HY 的定义很弱。总体而言,我们能够复制 Burns 等人的研究结果(2019 年),尽管我们在 g 因子上的因子负荷略低,在 IN 和 ODD 上的特异性略高。我们的结果支持临床人群中的 ADHD/ODD 双因子结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology brings together the latest innovative research that advances knowledge of psychopathology from infancy through adolescence. The journal publishes studies that have a strong theoretical framework and use a diversity of methods, with an emphasis on empirical studies of the major forms of psychopathology found in childhood disorders (e.g., disruptive behavior disorders, depression, anxiety, and autism spectrum disorder). Studies focus on the epidemiology, etiology, assessment, treatment, prognosis, and developmental course of these forms of psychopathology. Studies highlighting risk and protective factors; the ecology and correlates of children''s emotional, social, and behavior problems; and advances in prevention and treatment are featured. Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology is the official journal of the International Society for Research in Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (ISRCAP), a multidisciplinary scientific society.
期刊最新文献
Reactivity to Peer Rejection Moderates the Effect of Victimization on Adolescent Girls’ Depressive Symptoms: A Prospective Study Temperamental Shyness, Peer Competence, and Loneliness in Middle Childhood: The Role of Positive Emotion Here Comes Revenge: Peer Victimization Relates to Neural and Behavioral Responses to Social Exclusion Impulsive Decision-Making, Affective Experiences, and Parental History of Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors within Parent-Adolescent Dyads Bibliometric Trends and Thematic Areas in Research on Cognitive Disengagement Syndrome in Children: A Comprehensive Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1