I. Waldman, C. King, Holly E. Poore, Justin M Luningham, Richard M. Zinbarg, R. Krueger, K. Markon, M. Bornovalova, M. Chmielewski, C. Conway, M. Dretsch, N. Eaton, M. Forbes, K. Forbush, K. Naragon-Gainey, A. Greene, J. Haltigan, M. Ivanova, Keanan J. Joyner, K. Keyes, K. King, R. Kotov, H. Levin-Aspenson, T. Olino, Jason A. Oliver, C. Patrick, D. Preece, L. Rutter, M. Sellbom, Susan C. South, N. Wagner, Ashley L. Watts, Sylia Wilson, A. Wright, D. Zald
{"title":"在精神病理学的不同结构模型中裁决的建议","authors":"I. Waldman, C. King, Holly E. Poore, Justin M Luningham, Richard M. Zinbarg, R. Krueger, K. Markon, M. Bornovalova, M. Chmielewski, C. Conway, M. Dretsch, N. Eaton, M. Forbes, K. Forbush, K. Naragon-Gainey, A. Greene, J. Haltigan, M. Ivanova, Keanan J. Joyner, K. Keyes, K. King, R. Kotov, H. Levin-Aspenson, T. Olino, Jason A. Oliver, C. Patrick, D. Preece, L. Rutter, M. Sellbom, Susan C. South, N. Wagner, Ashley L. Watts, Sylia Wilson, A. Wright, D. Zald","doi":"10.1177/21677026221144256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":54234,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychological Science","volume":"19 1","pages":"616 - 640"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recommendations for Adjudicating Among Alternative Structural Models of Psychopathology\",\"authors\":\"I. Waldman, C. King, Holly E. Poore, Justin M Luningham, Richard M. Zinbarg, R. Krueger, K. Markon, M. Bornovalova, M. Chmielewski, C. Conway, M. Dretsch, N. Eaton, M. Forbes, K. Forbush, K. Naragon-Gainey, A. Greene, J. Haltigan, M. Ivanova, Keanan J. Joyner, K. Keyes, K. King, R. Kotov, H. Levin-Aspenson, T. Olino, Jason A. Oliver, C. Patrick, D. Preece, L. Rutter, M. Sellbom, Susan C. South, N. Wagner, Ashley L. Watts, Sylia Wilson, A. Wright, D. Zald\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21677026221144256\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Psychological Science\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"616 - 640\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Psychological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026221144256\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026221144256","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Recommendations for Adjudicating Among Alternative Structural Models of Psychopathology
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.
期刊介绍:
The Association for Psychological Science’s journal, Clinical Psychological Science, emerges from this confluence to provide readers with the best, most innovative research in clinical psychological science, giving researchers of all stripes a home for their work and a place in which to communicate with a broad audience of both clinical and other scientists.