Evaluating the criterion validity of hierarchical psychopathology dimensions across models: Familial aggregation and associations with research domain criteria (sub)constructs.
Evaluating the criterion validity of hierarchical psychopathology dimensions across models: Familial aggregation and associations with research domain criteria (sub)constructs.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/abn0000687
复制
发表时间：
2021-08
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
Shankman SA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Funkhouser CJ;Correa KA;Letkiewicz AM;Cozza EM;Estabrook R;Shankman SA
HiTOP（Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology）认为精神病理学是一个由相关维度组成的层次。许多研究已经使用双因素模型检查了这些维度的有效性，其中每种疾病都加载到一般和特定因素（例如，内化，外化）。虽然双因子模型往往比其他模型拟合得更好，但人们对双因子模型的选择、因子可靠性和可解释性提出了担忧。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维度的可靠性和有效性，使用家族聚集和研究领域标准（RDoC）（子）结构作为验证器。终身精神病理学进行了评估，在一个社区样本（N=504）使用尺寸障碍严重程度量表计算半结构化访谈数据。一系列的一维，相关的因素，和双因素模型进行了拟合几个HiTOP尺寸的模型。一个双因素模型与两个特定的因素（内化和去抑制外化）和相关的双因素模型提供了最佳的拟合数据。HiTOP维度在相关因素模型中具有足够的可靠性，但在双因素模型中的可靠性不佳。在两个模型中，去抑制的外化维度高度相关，并且是家族性的，但在两个模型中与RDoC（子）结构基本无关。相关因素模型中的内化维度和双因素模型中的一般因素高度相关，并且具有相似的效度模式，这表明相关因素模型中的一般因素与内化维度在很大程度上是冗余的。这些发现支持双因素模型中精神病理学维度的可解释性。研究跨诊断精神病理学维度的有效性主要使用双因素模型，这可能具有不足的可靠性和可解释性。本研究比较了双因素模型的有效性，相关因素模型使用家族聚集和协会与RDoC（子）结构，这被认为是参与病理生理学，作为验证。结果支持以前表示关注的可靠性，有效性和精神病理因素的可解释性时，估计使用双因素模型。
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 semi-structured 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. Research examining the validity of transdiagnostic psychopathology dimensions has predominantly used the bifactor model, which may have inadequate reliability and interpretability. The present study compared the validity of the bifactor model to the correlated factor model using familial aggregation and associations with RDoC (sub)constructs, which are thought to be involved in pathophysiology, as validators. Results supported previously expressed concerns about the reliability, validity, and interpretability of psychopathology factors when estimated using a bifactor model.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1080/10705519909540118
发表时间：
1999-01-01
影响因子：
6
作者：
Hu, Li-tze;Bentler, Peter M.
通讯作者：
Bentler, Peter M.
影响因子：
12.6
作者：
Conway, Christopher C.;Forbes, Miriam K.;Eaton, Nicholas R.
通讯作者：
Eaton, Nicholas R.
影响因子：
4.8
作者：
Brandes, Cassandra M.;Herzhoff, Kathrin;Tackett, Jennifer L.
通讯作者：
Tackett, Jennifer L.
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
Greene, Ashley L.;Eaton, Nicholas R.;Kotov, Roman
通讯作者：
Kotov, Roman
影响因子：
3
作者：
Funkhouser, Carter J.;Correa, Kelly A.;Shankman, Stewart A.
通讯作者：
Shankman, Stewart A.