TY - JOUR
T1 - Recommendations for Adjudicating Among Alternative Structural Models of Psychopathology
AU - Waldman, Irwin D.
AU - King, Christopher D.
AU - Poore, Holly E.
AU - Luningham, Justin M.
AU - Zinbarg, Richard M.
AU - Krueger, Robert F.
AU - Markon, Kristian E.
AU - Bornovalova, Marina
AU - Chmielewski, Michael
AU - Conway, Christopher
AU - Dretsch, Michael
AU - Eaton, Nicholas R.
AU - Forbes, Miriam K.
AU - Forbush, Kelsie
AU - Naragon-Gainey, Kristin
AU - Greene, Ashley Lauren
AU - Haltigan, J. D.
AU - Ivanova, Masha
AU - Joyner, Keanan
AU - Keyes, Katherine M.
AU - King, Kevin M.
AU - Kotov, Roman
AU - Levin-Aspenson, Holly
AU - Olino, Thomas
AU - Oliver, Jason A.
AU - Patrick, Christopher J.
AU - Preece, David
AU - Rutter, Lauren A.
AU - Sellbom, Martin
AU - South, Susan
AU - Wagner, Nicholas J.
AU - Watts, Ashley L.
AU - Wilson, Sylia
AU - Wright, Aidan G.C.
AU - Zald, David
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2023.
PY - 2023/7
Y1 - 2023/7
N2 - Historically, researchers have proposed higher-order factors to explicate the structure of psychopathology, including Externalizing, Internalizing, Fear, Distress, Thought Disorder, and a general factor. Despite extensive research in this domain, the underlying structure of psychopathology remains unresolved. Here, we examine several issues in adjudicating among structural models of psychopathology. Using simulations and analyses of the extant literature, we contrast the model-based reliability of alternative structural models of psychopathology and highlight shortcomings of conventional model-fit indices for such adjudication. We propose alternative criteria for evaluating and contrasting competing structural models, including various model characteristics (e.g., the magnitude and consistency of factor loadings and their precision), the consistency and sensitivity of factors to their constituent indicators, and the variance explained in and patterns of associations with relevant variables. Using these criteria as adjuncts to conventional fit indices should become standard practice and will greatly facilitate adjudication among alternative structural models of psychopathology.
AB - Historically, researchers have proposed higher-order factors to explicate the structure of psychopathology, including Externalizing, Internalizing, Fear, Distress, Thought Disorder, and a general factor. Despite extensive research in this domain, the underlying structure of psychopathology remains unresolved. Here, we examine several issues in adjudicating among structural models of psychopathology. Using simulations and analyses of the extant literature, we contrast the model-based reliability of alternative structural models of psychopathology and highlight shortcomings of conventional model-fit indices for such adjudication. We propose alternative criteria for evaluating and contrasting competing structural models, including various model characteristics (e.g., the magnitude and consistency of factor loadings and their precision), the consistency and sensitivity of factors to their constituent indicators, and the variance explained in and patterns of associations with relevant variables. Using these criteria as adjuncts to conventional fit indices should become standard practice and will greatly facilitate adjudication among alternative structural models of psychopathology.
KW - classification
KW - comorbidity
KW - dimensional vs categorical
KW - psychopathology
KW - statistical analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85162980675&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85162980675&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/21677026221144256
DO - 10.1177/21677026221144256
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85162980675
SN - 2167-7026
VL - 11
SP - 616
EP - 640
JO - Clinical Psychological Science
JF - Clinical Psychological Science
IS - 4
ER -