Whitney R. Ringwald, Amitai Abramovitch, Joost A. Agelink van Rentergem, Roman Kotov
{"title":"Do Cognitive Functions Belong in the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology Model? A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Whitney R. Ringwald, Amitai Abramovitch, Joost A. Agelink van Rentergem, Roman Kotov","doi":"10.1177/17456916251347926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cognitive dysfunction is essential to conceptualizing, defining, and assessing much of psychopathology. Despite this prominence, cognitive abilities are not included in the prevailing empirically based classification system: the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP). This gap exists because the factor-analytic literature the HiTOP is based on has solely used reporter measures rather than neuropsychological tests needed to measure cognitive ability. Given HiTOP’s influence on research and clinical practice, the omission of cognitive functions from the model is consequential. This study aimed to determine how cognitive abilities fit into the empirical structure of psychopathology with a meta-analytic joint factor analysis. We pooled data from three published meta-analyses into a single correlation matrix of eight disorders from the <jats:italic>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</jats:italic> and seven cognitive functions. We then fit a series of models to the meta-analytic correlation matrix using exploratory factor analysis and correlated factors across levels to estimate the hierarchical structure. The highest level of the model included a general factor with strong loadings of all disorders and cognitive functions (median λ = |.51|, range = |.30| to |.64|). At the lowest level were three superspectra: psychosis and cognitive dysfunction, externalizing, and emotional dysfunction. Our results show cognitive abilities can be integrated into the HiTOP model and point to actionable next steps in research to accomplish this goal.","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251347926","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Cognitive dysfunction is essential to conceptualizing, defining, and assessing much of psychopathology. Despite this prominence, cognitive abilities are not included in the prevailing empirically based classification system: the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP). This gap exists because the factor-analytic literature the HiTOP is based on has solely used reporter measures rather than neuropsychological tests needed to measure cognitive ability. Given HiTOP’s influence on research and clinical practice, the omission of cognitive functions from the model is consequential. This study aimed to determine how cognitive abilities fit into the empirical structure of psychopathology with a meta-analytic joint factor analysis. We pooled data from three published meta-analyses into a single correlation matrix of eight disorders from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and seven cognitive functions. We then fit a series of models to the meta-analytic correlation matrix using exploratory factor analysis and correlated factors across levels to estimate the hierarchical structure. The highest level of the model included a general factor with strong loadings of all disorders and cognitive functions (median λ = |.51|, range = |.30| to |.64|). At the lowest level were three superspectra: psychosis and cognitive dysfunction, externalizing, and emotional dysfunction. Our results show cognitive abilities can be integrated into the HiTOP model and point to actionable next steps in research to accomplish this goal.
期刊介绍:
Perspectives on Psychological Science is a journal that publishes a diverse range of articles and reports in the field of psychology. The journal includes broad integrative reviews, overviews of research programs, meta-analyses, theoretical statements, book reviews, and articles on various topics such as the philosophy of science and opinion pieces about major issues in the field. It also features autobiographical reflections of senior members of the field, occasional humorous essays and sketches, and even has a section for invited and submitted articles.
The impact of the journal can be seen through the reverberation of a 2009 article on correlative analyses commonly used in neuroimaging studies, which still influences the field. Additionally, a recent special issue of Perspectives, featuring prominent researchers discussing the "Next Big Questions in Psychology," is shaping the future trajectory of the discipline.
Perspectives on Psychological Science provides metrics that showcase the performance of the journal. However, the Association for Psychological Science, of which the journal is a signatory of DORA, recommends against using journal-based metrics for assessing individual scientist contributions, such as for hiring, promotion, or funding decisions. Therefore, the metrics provided by Perspectives on Psychological Science should only be used by those interested in evaluating the journal itself.