Carter J Funkhouser, Kelly A Correa, Allison M Letkiewicz, Eugene M Cozza, Ryne Estabrook, Stewart A Shankman
{"title":"评估跨模型的层次精神病理学维度的标准效度:家族聚集和与研究领域标准(子)结构的关联。","authors":"Carter J Funkhouser, Kelly A Correa, Allison M Letkiewicz, Eugene M Cozza, Ryne Estabrook, Stewart A Shankman","doi":"10.1037/abn0000687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) posits that psychopathology is a hierarchy of correlated dimensions. Numerous studies have examined the validity of these dimensions using bifactor models, in which each disorder loads onto both a general and specific factor (e.g., internalizing, externalizing). Although bifactor models tend to fit better than alternative models, concerns have been raised about bifactor model selection, factor reliability, and interpretability. Therefore, we compared the reliability and validity of several higher-order HiTOP dimensions between bifactor and correlated factor models using familial aggregation and associations with Research Domain Criteria (RDoC; sub)constructs as validators. Lifetime psychopathology was assessed in a community sample (N = 504) using dimensional disorder severity scales calculated from semistructured interview data. A series of unidimensional, correlated factor, and bifactor models were fit to model several HiTOP dimensions. A bifactor model with two specific factors (internalizing and disinhibited externalizing) and a correlated two-factor model provided the best fit to the data. HiTOP dimensions had adequate reliability in the correlated factor model, but suboptimal reliability in the bifactor model. The disinhibited externalizing dimension was highly correlated across the two models and was familial, yet largely unrelated to RDoC (sub)constructs in both models. The internalizing dimension in the correlated factor model and the general factor in the bifactor model were highly correlated and had similar validity patterns, suggesting the general factor was largely redundant with the internalizing dimension in the correlated factor model. These findings support concerns about the interpretability of psychopathology dimensions in bifactor models. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":14793,"journal":{"name":"Journal of abnormal psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8480429/pdf/nihms-1715482.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the criterion validity of hierarchical psychopathology dimensions across models: Familial aggregation and associations with research domain criteria (sub)constructs.\",\"authors\":\"Carter J Funkhouser, Kelly A Correa, Allison M Letkiewicz, Eugene M Cozza, Ryne Estabrook, Stewart A Shankman\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/abn0000687\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) posits that psychopathology is a hierarchy of correlated dimensions. Numerous studies have examined the validity of these dimensions using bifactor models, in which each disorder loads onto both a general and specific factor (e.g., internalizing, externalizing). Although bifactor models tend to fit better than alternative models, concerns have been raised about bifactor model selection, factor reliability, and interpretability. Therefore, we compared the reliability and validity of several higher-order HiTOP dimensions between bifactor and correlated factor models using familial aggregation and associations with Research Domain Criteria (RDoC; sub)constructs as validators. Lifetime psychopathology was assessed in a community sample (N = 504) using dimensional disorder severity scales calculated from semistructured interview data. A series of unidimensional, correlated factor, and bifactor models were fit to model several HiTOP dimensions. A bifactor model with two specific factors (internalizing and disinhibited externalizing) and a correlated two-factor model provided the best fit to the data. HiTOP dimensions had adequate reliability in the correlated factor model, but suboptimal reliability in the bifactor model. The disinhibited externalizing dimension was highly correlated across the two models and was familial, yet largely unrelated to RDoC (sub)constructs in both models. The internalizing dimension in the correlated factor model and the general factor in the bifactor model were highly correlated and had similar validity patterns, suggesting the general factor was largely redundant with the internalizing dimension in the correlated factor model. These findings support concerns about the interpretability of psychopathology dimensions in bifactor models. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14793,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of abnormal psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8480429/pdf/nihms-1715482.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of abnormal psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000687\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of abnormal psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000687","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
摘要
精神病理学的层次分类法(HiTOP)认为精神病理学是一个相关维度的层次。许多研究使用双因素模型检验了这些维度的有效性,其中每种障碍都有一个一般和特定的因素(例如,内化,外化)。虽然双因素模型往往比其他模型更适合,但对双因素模型选择、因素可靠性和可解释性的关注已经提出。因此,我们比较了双因素和相关因素模型之间的几个高阶HiTOP维度的信度和效度,使用家族聚集和与研究领域标准(RDoC;子)结构作为验证器。使用半结构化访谈数据计算的维度障碍严重程度量表对社区样本(N = 504)进行终身精神病理评估。拟合了一系列一维、相关因子和双因子模型来模拟HiTOP的多个维度。一个包含两个特定因素(内化和去抑制外化)的双因素模型和一个相关的双因素模型提供了最好的拟合数据。HiTOP维度在相关因子模型中具有足够的信度,而在双因子模型中具有次优的信度。在两个模型中,去抑制外化维度高度相关,并且是家族性的,但在很大程度上与两个模型中的RDoC(子)结构无关。相关因子模型中的内化维度与双因子模型中的一般因子高度相关且具有相似的效度模式,说明一般因子与相关因子模型中的内化维度存在较大的冗余。这些发现支持了对双因素模型中精神病理维度可解释性的关注。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA,版权所有)。
Evaluating the criterion validity of hierarchical psychopathology dimensions across models: Familial aggregation and associations with research domain criteria (sub)constructs.
The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) posits that psychopathology is a hierarchy of correlated dimensions. Numerous studies have examined the validity of these dimensions using bifactor models, in which each disorder loads onto both a general and specific factor (e.g., internalizing, externalizing). Although bifactor models tend to fit better than alternative models, concerns have been raised about bifactor model selection, factor reliability, and interpretability. Therefore, we compared the reliability and validity of several higher-order HiTOP dimensions between bifactor and correlated factor models using familial aggregation and associations with Research Domain Criteria (RDoC; sub)constructs as validators. Lifetime psychopathology was assessed in a community sample (N = 504) using dimensional disorder severity scales calculated from semistructured interview data. A series of unidimensional, correlated factor, and bifactor models were fit to model several HiTOP dimensions. A bifactor model with two specific factors (internalizing and disinhibited externalizing) and a correlated two-factor model provided the best fit to the data. HiTOP dimensions had adequate reliability in the correlated factor model, but suboptimal reliability in the bifactor model. The disinhibited externalizing dimension was highly correlated across the two models and was familial, yet largely unrelated to RDoC (sub)constructs in both models. The internalizing dimension in the correlated factor model and the general factor in the bifactor model were highly correlated and had similar validity patterns, suggesting the general factor was largely redundant with the internalizing dimension in the correlated factor model. These findings support concerns about the interpretability of psychopathology dimensions in bifactor models. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Abnormal Psychology® publishes articles on basic research and theory in the broad field of abnormal behavior, its determinants, and its correlates. The following general topics fall within its area of major focus: - psychopathology—its etiology, development, symptomatology, and course; - normal processes in abnormal individuals; - pathological or atypical features of the behavior of normal persons; - experimental studies, with human or animal subjects, relating to disordered emotional behavior or pathology; - sociocultural effects on pathological processes, including the influence of gender and ethnicity; and - tests of hypotheses from psychological theories that relate to abnormal behavior.