What the general factor of psychological problems is-And is not.

IF 3.1 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Tyler M Moore, Brooks Applegate, Benjamin B Lahey
{"title":"What the general factor of psychological problems is-And is not.","authors":"Tyler M Moore, Brooks Applegate, Benjamin B Lahey","doi":"10.1037/abn0000978","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article discusses the general factor of psychological problems. Hundreds of published studies have advanced understanding of the general factor of psychological problems, but confusion still surrounds the hypothesis. This partly results from critics conflating the hypotheses with those of other authors, but they have created confusion ourselves by stating two hypotheses involving the general factor, which they better differentiate here. In the psychometric general factor hypothesis, the general factor is simply the term in bifactor models that quantifies the variance shared by all measured psychological problems, whereas two or more specific factors are defined by orthogonal pools of variance shared only by items loading on each specific factor. Although the psychometric bifactor model is sometimes viewed as an alternative to taxonomic models based on correlated factor models, it is not. Those models properly describe the overlapping dimensions of psychological problems experienced in everyday life. Because bifactor and correlated factors models serve different purposes, there is no need to compare their fits. The separate hierarchical causal hypothesis is that correlations among all problems that define the general factor result from some of their causes and mechanisms being directly or indirectly shared, whereas the specific factors are the result of other causes being shared by subsets of problems. There is growing evidence that some genetic and environmental causes-and their attendant psychobiological mechanisms-are shared to varying degrees with essentially all psychological problems. Other independent causes and mechanisms influence only subgroups of psychological problems (e.g., internalizing problems), and still others are problem-specific. At this point, the evidence is informative but only correlational. Nonetheless, there is evidence that some measured variables of potential causal and mechanistic significance are empirically correlated with the general factor term in bifactor models, whereas other risk factors are correlated with the terms for the specific factors of psychological problems. Other studies have shown that the general factor of psychological problems is robustly correlated with important psychological constructs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":73914,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000978","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article discusses the general factor of psychological problems. Hundreds of published studies have advanced understanding of the general factor of psychological problems, but confusion still surrounds the hypothesis. This partly results from critics conflating the hypotheses with those of other authors, but they have created confusion ourselves by stating two hypotheses involving the general factor, which they better differentiate here. In the psychometric general factor hypothesis, the general factor is simply the term in bifactor models that quantifies the variance shared by all measured psychological problems, whereas two or more specific factors are defined by orthogonal pools of variance shared only by items loading on each specific factor. Although the psychometric bifactor model is sometimes viewed as an alternative to taxonomic models based on correlated factor models, it is not. Those models properly describe the overlapping dimensions of psychological problems experienced in everyday life. Because bifactor and correlated factors models serve different purposes, there is no need to compare their fits. The separate hierarchical causal hypothesis is that correlations among all problems that define the general factor result from some of their causes and mechanisms being directly or indirectly shared, whereas the specific factors are the result of other causes being shared by subsets of problems. There is growing evidence that some genetic and environmental causes-and their attendant psychobiological mechanisms-are shared to varying degrees with essentially all psychological problems. Other independent causes and mechanisms influence only subgroups of psychological problems (e.g., internalizing problems), and still others are problem-specific. At this point, the evidence is informative but only correlational. Nonetheless, there is evidence that some measured variables of potential causal and mechanistic significance are empirically correlated with the general factor term in bifactor models, whereas other risk factors are correlated with the terms for the specific factors of psychological problems. Other studies have shown that the general factor of psychological problems is robustly correlated with important psychological constructs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信