Regulatory Focus and the p Factor: Evidence for Self-Regulatory Dysfunction as a Transdiagnostic Feature of General Psychopathology

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrienne L. Romer ◽  
Ahmad R. Hariri ◽  
Timothy J. Strauman
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
P Factor ◽  
Regulatory Dysfunction

scholarly journals Pubertal Timing as a Transdiagnostic Risk for Psychopathology in Youth

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 411-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elissa J. Hamlat ◽  
Hannah R. Snyder ◽  
Jami F. Young ◽  
Benjamin L. Hankin
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factor ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Pubertal Timing ◽  
Organizational Models ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
Early Pubertal Timing ◽  
Specific Factors ◽  
P Factor ◽  
Internalizing And Externalizing ◽  
Different Levels

Evidence suggests that early pubertal timing may operate as a transdiagnostic risk factor (i.e., shared across syndromes of psychopathology) for both genders. The current study examined associations between pubertal timing and dimensional psychopathology, structured across different levels of three organizational models: (a) DSM-based syndrome model, (b) traditional model of internalizing and externalizing factors, and (c) bifactor (p factor) model, which includes a general psychopathology factor as well as internalizing- and externalizing-specific factors. For study analyses, 567 youth-parent pairs completed psychopathology measures when youths (55.5% female) were 13.58 years old ( SD = 2.37, range = 9–17 years). Findings across all models revealed that early pubertal timing served as a transdiagnostic risk factor and also displayed some syndrome-specific associations. Gender did not moderate any relationships between pubertal timing and psychopathology. Study findings reinforce the importance of examining risk across different levels of psychopathology conceptualization and analysis.

scholarly journals The P Factor in Children: Relationships with Executive Functions and Effortful Control

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison Shields ◽  
Kathleen Wade Reardon ◽  
Cassandra M Brandes ◽  
Jennifer L Tackett
Keyword(s):  
Executive Functions ◽  
Effortful Control ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Psychological Disorders ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
Large N ◽  
P Factor ◽  
Regulatory Functions ◽  
Correlated Factors

Lower levels of self-regulation have been implicated in multiple psychological disorders. Despite conceptual overlap (broadly reflecting self-regulatory functions), executive functions (EF) and effortful control (EC) are rarely jointly studied in relation to broadband psychopathology. The present study investigated associations of correlated factors (internalizing-externalizing) and bifactor psychopathology models with EF and EC in a large (N=895) childhood community sample (Mage = 11.54, SDage = 2.25). Associations between both self-regulation constructs (EF and EC) with psychopathology were largely accounted for via a general psychopathology factor. However, EC evidenced stronger associations, questioning the utility of task-based EF measures to inform self-regulatory psychopathology.

scholarly journals The p Factor and the n Factor: Associations Between the General Factors of Psychopathology and Neuroticism in Children

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassandra M Brandes ◽  
Kathrin Herzhoff ◽  
Avante J Smack ◽  
Jennifer L Tackett
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Negative Emotionality ◽  
General Factor ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
Bifactor Models ◽  
Specific Factors ◽  
Latent Dimension ◽  
P Factor ◽  
Internalizing And Externalizing

Research across age groups has consistently indicated that psychopathology has a general factor structure, such that there is a broad latent dimension (or p factor) capturing variance common to all mental disorders, as well as specific internalizing and externalizing factors. This research has found that the p factor overlaps substantially with trait negative emotionality (or neuroticism). However, less is known about the psychological substance of the specific factors of the general psychopathology model, or how lower-order facets of neuroticism may relate to each psychopathology factor. We investigated the structure of neuroticism and psychopathology, as well as associations between these domains in a sample of 695 pre-adolescent children using multi-method assessments. We found that both psychopathology and neuroticism may be well-characterized by bifactor models, and that there was substantial overlap between psychopathology (p) and neuroticism (n) general factors, as well as between specific factors (Internalizing with Fear, Externalizing with Irritability).

scholarly journals Common cause vs dynamic mutualism: an empirical comparison of two theories of psychopathology in two large longitudinal cohorts

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Aristodemou ◽  
Rogier Kievit ◽  
Aja Louise Murray ◽  
Manuel Eisner ◽  
Denis Ribeaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Models ◽  
Disease Burden ◽  
Empirical Comparison ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
Common Cause ◽  
Effective Manner ◽  
The Common ◽  
P Factor ◽  
Global Disease Burden

Mental disorders are highly prevalent, and among the leading causes of global disease burden. To respond in a timely and effective manner, a strong understanding of the structure of psychopathology and its development is critical. We compared the ability of two competing frameworks, the dynamic mutualism theory and the common cause theory, to explain the development of individual differences in psychopathology. We formalized these theories into statistical models, and applied them to two domains of psychopathology, at two different developmental periods, using two large developmental cohorts: the p factor (i.e. general psychopathology) from early to late adolescence (N = 1,482), and major depressive disorder in middle adulthood and old age (N = 6,443). The development of the p factor was better explained by a mutualistic account. In contrast, the evidence for the development of major depression was more ambiguous. Our results support a multicausal approach to understanding psychopathology and showcase the value of translating theories into testable statistical models for understanding developmental processes in clinical sciences.

scholarly journals Toward a Functional View of the p Factor in Psychopathology

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 880-889 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles S. Carver ◽  
Sheri L. Johnson ◽  
Kiara R. Timpano
Keyword(s):  
Process Variable ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Thought Disorder ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Functional Interpretation ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
Underlying Process ◽  
Deliberative System ◽  
P Factor ◽  
Internalizing And Externalizing

Evidence indicates the existence of a superordinate factor of general psychopathology, which has been termed p. Among the issues raised by this discovery is whether this factor has substantive meaning or not. This article suggests a functional interpretation of the p factor, based in part on a family of dual process models, in which an associative system and a deliberative system compete for influence over action. The associative system is frequently said to be impulsively responsive to emotions. We hypothesize that this impulsive responsivity to emotion underlies the p factor. One benefit of this view is to use the same underlying process variable to account for both internalizing and externalizing vulnerabilities as well as aspects of thought disorder. Evidence is reviewed linking impulsive reactivity to emotion to the p factor and (separately) to internalizing, externalizing, and thought-disorder symptoms. Alternative interpretations are considered.

scholarly journals The p Factor and the n Factor: Associations Between the General Factors of Psychopathology and Neuroticism in Children

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 1266-1284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassandra M. Brandes ◽  
Kathrin Herzhoff ◽  
Avanté J. Smack ◽  
Jennifer L. Tackett
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Negative Emotionality ◽  
General Factor ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
Bifactor Models ◽  
Specific Factors ◽  
Latent Dimension ◽  
P Factor ◽  
Internalizing And Externalizing

Research across age groups has consistently indicated that psychopathology has a general factor structure such that a broad latent dimension (or p factor) captures variance common to all mental disorders as well as specific internalizing and externalizing factors. This research has found that the p factor overlaps substantially with trait negative emotionality (or neuroticism). However, less is known about the psychological substance of the specific factors of the general psychopathology model or how lower-order facets of neuroticism may relate to each psychopathology factor. We investigated the structure of neuroticism and psychopathology as well as associations between these domains using multimethod assessments in a sample of 695 preadolescent children. We found that both psychopathology and neuroticism may be well characterized by bifactor models and that there was substantial overlap between psychopathology (p) and neuroticism (n) general factors as well as between specific factors (Internalizing with Fear, Externalizing with Irritability).

scholarly journals Appropriate use of bifactor analysis in psychopathology research: appreciating benefits and limitations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Bornovalova ◽  
Alexandria M. Choate ◽  
Haya Fatimah ◽  
Karl J. Petersen ◽  
Brenton M. Wiernik
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Approach ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Past ◽  
Fit Statistics ◽  
Bifactor Models ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
P Factor

Co-occurrence of psychiatric disorders is well-documented. Recent quantitative efforts have moved toward an understanding of this phenomenon, with the ‘general psychopathology’ or p-factor model emerging as the most prominent characterization. Over the past decade, bifactor model analysis has become increasingly popular as a statistical approach to describe common/shared and unique elements in psychopathology. However, recent work has highlighted potential problems with common approaches to evaluating and interpreting bifactor models. Here, we argue that, when properly applied and interpreted, bifactor models can be useful for answering some important questions in psychology and psychiatry research. We review problems with evaluating bifactor models based on global model fit statistics. We then describe more valid approaches to evaluating bifactor models and highlight three types of research questions for which bifactor models are well-suited to answer. We also discuss the utility and limits of bifactor applications in genetic and neurobiological research. We close by comparing advantages and disadvantages of bifactor models to other analytic approaches and noting that no statistical model is a panacea to rectify limitations of the research design used to gather data.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document